Constructive Criticism for the Director

After watching the movie, I felt the movie delivered the introduction on the back of the movie box, but not much more. With any director, I think it's important to reach your target audience, while creating a masterpiece. I think you lacked in the masterpiece department. While I'm surprised you have a fan-base for this film, I think a larger audience is also a goal for any film director, which is where my criticism is applicable. I have kept in mine that it's an amateur film, so I pass judgment on visuals and audio.


My Criticism:

1. Your movie title is misleading:

I picked up your movie after reading the title because I was in the mood for sci-fi and was intrigued by the title. If the title "War of the Planets" was some sort of a tactic to incite interest in a person, then you have succeeded. However, while you may have trapped the viewer through title, you fail to live up to the title in the film. I can hardly consider the small exchange in the movie a 'war', especially when it is between a couple of armed people representing a 'planet' versus an alien group of another 'planet.' There is an expectation in the viewer that is not satisfied when the film fails to deliver it's title, which turns off viewers. 'War' has developed an image of bloodshed between factions or nations and 'planet' gives the notion that it is on the large-scale. Your title of "Terrarium" on imdb should've permanently labelled all the movies.


2. There are no conveyed themes, messages or symbols that make this story rich:

This is not a requirement of movies, but it gives a work personality and beauty. Besides common themes, messages or symbols that are naturally assigned in any setting, you didn't build upon any of them. Aliens are mysterious and foreign to the human race. It was clear that they were the aggressors in your film with at least some aptitude for intelligence. But nothing was built on them, since they were deemed 'evil' and destroyed in the end. So what's left are the astronauts. You started delving into peoples' past, but played little with it in how it influenced plot. I mean it was a big deal to be frozen 15 years, leaving your past life behind you. They abandoned their sad lives for a chance at a new one... you should've emphasized that more and create messages about life. As for symbols: none.

3. Dialogue poorly executed/ Poor characterization:

You can be reading the most fascinating thing, but fail miserably in its delivery. This can be due to the whole B-movie thing, however it must be addressed. Dialogue is key in character interaction. Your leading character Capt. Carl was very monotone. Monotone promotes dis-interest. Delivery was poor in many characters who I felt were not interested in their character. As well having too many characters limits character development due to less on-air time. I felt you had too many characters, delving into the past of only a select few. Everyone was also static in character, and cold, never really opening up with the exception of the 2 female survivors who were mediocre.

4. Creativity?

Don't you find the idea of people getting killed by monstors, aliens, and what not creatures rehashed. You felt the need to rehash this idea in a B-movie format? You brought nothing to the table. You didn't explain the aliens. Infact the context of your movie (other than your outline of how and where they crashed) is non-existent. I'd like to think of B-movies lacking in visuals and audio, not creativity.

5. Boring Plot:

I was as intrigued as a person shooting rats. You had little perks when the alien first came into the cryogenic chamber room several times. However these perks gradually decline in their magnitude. The alien is ugly and hungry, the audience gets it. That's the basis for many alien, monster-film but those are cinematically intriguing, which yours wasn't. The suspense is short-lived because soon the unarmed alien is shot. The aliens then start making their rounds, taking turns dying while periodically stealing another human. You know your movie is short on substance when the back of the box describes the first hour of your movie, and when there's only 20 more minutes left. Fighting for survival in a hostile environment was your plot. And the direction was predictable and simple as stated by the actors. Dig a hole, and blow up the ship. The whole sympathy thing factors in again, because we can barely connect to these closed people. This is dependent on creativity and the dialogue, which was simple and unstimulatiing.

6. Cliffhanger Ending:

An ending is important in wrapping a story together. You gave a positive feeling when you ended it with them finding water and it's daylight. But where are the aliens? Are they all gone? What will they do now? I guess if you want people to think about these things after the movie, you succeeded. I did notice other boards asking you about the ending. But sure people can think about these very thought-provoking questions to drown their distaste after watching your creativity flourish. But there is very little material to work with. Their ships are gone. So my conclusion is that they're screwed technology-wise, and stuck on the planet until the day they die. A very bleak ending to a very mundane plot.


All in all, I really think you lack the creative element or even vision that a director desperately needs. However many film-makers tread similar paths, so these things don't seem to matter these days, but the people can still voice their opinion as I have done... I apologize if the end of my critique was less constructive, but I really want my 80 min back...