MovieChat Forums > The Martian Chronicles (1980) Discussion > Loved it as a kid...

Loved it as a kid...

posted 18 years ago by chizzle3000
12 replies | jump to latest

And it's killing me to watch it as an adult.

Of course, when you're young you don't see stuff like production values. All you see is the spectacle and all the flash. But now... oooh boy...

The cheapness of it is astounding. Just overall weak. As much as I loved them both, it makes Dr. Who circa '77 look like The Matrix.

For instance, in the scene where the 3rd expedition is awaiting the return of Spender, you can distinctly hear surf and children laughing on the soundtrack. I isht you not. And this is the DVD I'm wathcing.

BErnie Casey as Spender, however, is still amazing. SO incredibly compelling. Makes Rock Hudson's performance look even worse than it actually is.

Don't get me too wrong. I do love this. It's jsut so little of what it could be. Bradbury was right in his own estimation of it. Booooooring!

This is so begging for a remake it's not funny. Please, Hollywood! You couldn't fark it up worse than it was the first time (of course they could!)

However, I will watch it til the end.

- CRT

[–] Bill-625 17 years ago

I completely agree. I don't remember seeing the series on TV before, but recently bought the DVD because I really like the premise and the story. What a huge disappointment! Lousy sets, horrible direction, acting that is either wooden or over the top - I was very surprised, especially given the decent IMDb rating. What could have been done with a few dollars spent on production value, and with competent direction/acting? Remake, anybody?

[–] RustyShackleworth 17 years ago

Same here. I haven't seen this in a long time but rented it recently and it looks TERRIBLE! The acting and dialogue leave a lot to be desired. And let's not even get started with the special effects. I think the original Star Trek series looked better and that's bad.

I haven't read the book. Is this series anything remotely faithful to it?

What evil drives the Car?...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFWea3Eu97E

[–] captainramius 17 years ago

I, too loved it as a kid, haven't seen it since the mid nighties on VHS. I remember the book being much better. It was written in the 40's so most of the space travel theroies are dated for the time. Also it goes more into the Matian's soceity point of view of the original landings then the Human's. I think you will enjoy the book.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice and I'll put you in the ground!"

[–] peterrichard30 17 years ago

Well I'm very happy to defend this mini-series, not that it really needs defending. It's not about special effects it's about IDEAS. The direction, acting and music are not that bad either. If they were how is it that people remember scenes and moments from it many years later?

As for remakes - they are only for the creatively impoverished. Just like The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy it would only be inferior. Those who insist on the special effects being in the modern style would like it but hardly anyone else would. I'd also like to say that I don't find CGI special effects that convincing anyway, it's just a different style of special effect - a fad, a fashion. In future years many people will look at CGI special effects and laugh at them and say how terrible they are. Why this insistence on making things exactly like reality anyway? They only fail and anyway fantasy (or sci-fi) is about mixing the fantastic with reality.

[–] Wicked_Genius 14 years ago

OK, I finally watched it after 30 years. I remember seeing the first episode and and having bad dreams about the martians and the no ears thing.

yeah, the effects are hokey, but now I can say I have finally watched it in it's entirety

[–] The_TJT 12 years ago

Totally agree with peterrichard. Effects were not at all important in this one. Saw it as a kid and now watched again, brilliant science fiction.

[–] scribe1270 13 years ago

I saw it as a kid too. Actually it was on TV twice that I know of when I was a kid and the DVD version is (IMO) much better since they have a good amount of stuff that was cut out for the TV showing put back in again. Roddy McDowell for example wasn't even on stage in the version I saw as a kid. And Fritz Weaver's part was a lot smaller. I don't know that remakes are that great in a lot of cases. And CGI has its limits. For example both the 1st Harry Potter movie and the 1st Lord of the Rings movie feature a Troll in one scene and if you compare how the CGI trolls in both scenes move you can tell they were probably run off the same computer program. They move pretty much exactly the same. The old special effects technology was no doubt harder to work and took longer but the characters (like King Kong in 1933)are more individualistic in their movements I think. When the modern CGI works it's great, but when it fails it really fails.

[–] erikriveros 12 years ago

couldn't agree with the OP more

it is better to have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have it

[–] orac101 9 years ago

Have to say that I loved this on the telly back in 1980 and have really enjoyed watching the entire series again recently. Of course it has dated - the same can be said of 99.9% of TV from that era. This production was actually ahead of its time back in 1980 (though no TV series on either side of the Atlantic could match the effects of Star Wars at the time). I still think the aliens are brilliantly realised with their bald heads and shiny gold eyes - still very conceptually alien which is a difficult thing to pull off on a TV budget. Special mention must also go to the location filming in Spain which was way ahead of most drama from that era not to mention the haunting electronic music and the sheer scale and imagination of the story. Some of the acting may be wooden but this is still a story that makes you think and there's not an awful lot of TV that does that these days let alone make you consider the reality of life beyond this little planet.

8/10 from me for sheer ambition on a tiny budget.

[–] kris-523-976233 8 years ago

Better to have a gun and not need it? really? you must be an American

[–] mam13143 9 years ago

Watched the DVDs again and each time I watch it I dislike it more and more. Actually fast forwarded through a few segments. Acting is abysmal, production values are really poor and overall, to quote Ray Bradbury, booooring!!

A real shame cause I want it to be good each time, but when it was made it was like American cars, cheap, no craftsmanship and sadly much dated now. Managed to get through it all but it was a struggle. Might sell my dvd on Amazon to someone who needs a nostalgia boost.

[–] mstanley-1 8 years ago

It was okay. Being a product of the time it was very straightforward. I hear there is a new one in development. No idea who is doing it, but I hope they capture the episodic and poetic nature of Bradbury's material. The book is a literary masterpiece and should contain the visuals - someone like Cameron or Scott could do it justice. Kubrick certainly could have.