There is no way that I can believe anyone whose actually seen this movie could give it more than 2 stars. I have a strong feeling that the filmmaker and his buddies really, really inflated the score here. I saw this with 300 sci-fi fans and not a single person liked it at all. People were screaming at the projectionist to stop the film. Honestly the worst movie I've seen in a decade.
shareNo. Actually you're wrong. Look at all of the positive reviews this film got through the mainstream press and movie reviewers. Are they all friends of the filmmaker as well? If so, he's a very popular guy!
You saw it as part of an all-night sci-fi marathon which is probably not the best venue for this film. I don't know what it went up against but I'm sure any unknown film would be harshly judged by the mob rule of three hundred, irritable, over-tired nerds.
I loved 'Automatons'. It's not for everyone - it's odd and experimental - but if you're a fan of Guy Maddin or early David Lynch, this film is for you.
I need to see it! Does anyone know where I could purchase a copy of it?
))< >((
Speaking as one of those over-tired nerds at the Columbus marathon, I must concur with the first poster.
This was just a bad, bad film. Guy Maddin has humor and imagination. This film does not. It was a crap-budget movie with little story or character; it was repetitious and boring.
I should note that there was another 'artistic' indie film about robots shown right after this at around 4/5 am that was very well received. Why? Cuz it was well-plotted, suspenseful, and had a great cast (all of two people), rather than endless shots of model robots crawling across the floor.
Sorry to be harsh, but "Automatons" has nothing to recommend it, and I'd feel the same way if I saw at noon rather than 3 in the morning.
I haven't seen the movie but half the voters gave the movie a 10. This is not Casablanca. Even if it is a good movie who would give it a 10 unless it was to try to get someone else to see it. Hopefully the more people see it the closer we'll come to a REAL score.
shareYeah, they are passing laws within the EU banning anyone involved with retail products from voting on sites like this to illegally inflate their own material. Although not sure if it involves sites that sell the voted material, have links to purchase said material or are separate entities. Be nice if the US could do the same too and let the real reader/viewer reviews tell the truth!
shareI am in no way associated with the filmmkaer (James Felix McKenney) and I gave the film a 10.
I thought it was really original, enjoyable and well-made dystopian robo-movie. It was great.
))< >((
F you, statist. I'd rather have worthless IMDB reviews that another ridiculous law on the books.
Get over yourself.
I should note that there was another 'artistic' indie film about robots shown right after this at around 4/5 am that was very well received. Why? Cuz it was well-plotted, suspenseful, and had a great cast (all of two people), rather than endless shots of model robots crawling across the floor.
That's weird... that's almost exactly what this *cough* OTHER USER wrote...
An Twilight Zone 50's feel with sinister robots is fun., 18 June 2007
Author: oscar-35 from Movieland
It's not for everyone - it's odd and experimental - but if you're a fan of Guy Maddin or early David Lynch, this film is for you. It's B & W. I loved 'Automatons'.
I saw it as part of an all-night sci-fi marathon which is probably not the best venue for this film. I know that any unknown film would be harshly judged by the mob rule of three hundred, irritable, over-tired nerds. They probably hated it.
Look at all of the positive reviews this film got through the mainstream press and movie reviewers. They are NOT all friends of the filmmaker. It had an enjoyable Twilight Zone 50's feel. Thanks Monsterpants DOT com.
I have to agree those "10"s are very suspicious.
shareI just finished watching the movie courtesy of Netflix & gave it a 10 as well. For the record, I wouldn't know the director or anyone else involved with the movie if they walked in my front door.
shareI just seed it and Anton Ray Fladeboe told me I'd love it. It tasted great -- all salty and weird.
Nothing is more beautiful than nothing.
I saw this movie at a special showing in the fall of 2006 at a little art theatre in New York City. The director, some of the cast and crew, and their friends were all in the audience. So the audience was pre-disposed to like it. The response was very enthusiastic, naturally. By the way, I just happened to see a poster for the showing; I have no connection with the cast or crew.
My impressions of the film: It was obvious that they had a lot of fun while making the movie, and that counts for a lot. The effects were cheesy. The acting was hammy. The story was thin. It was not Citizen Kane, that's for sure! But it was fun to watch.
If you want to learn more, such as where to buy a copy, here is their Web site:
http://www.deathtotheautomatons.com/
Disagree. Saw it a couple nights ago and really liked it. If you insist on treating it as a traditional, commercial film, then sure, it's probably a dog. But if you're willing to meet it halfway and take it for what it is (an ultra, ULTRA cheap exercise in garage filmmaking done purely for the love of it), it's pretty charming.
Main problems for me were the lead actress (almost impossibly wooden) and the padding. First hour of the film could have been easily cut in half. Didn't need four or five "control" attacks -- 3 or even 2 would have been fine. Didn't need more than 5 minutes each of Angus Scrimm and the wind-up robots walking/fighting. Really could cut down everything leading up to the final assault/climax to about 30 minutes without seriously harming the film.
Still, I pretty much loved it. Loved the spirit, inventiveness, and look of the thing. Great gore, great/hilarious "robot action", wonderful textures, use of obvious toys for the exterior shots was genius. My kind of movie.
This movie was so bad, that I acutally had to laugh watching it.
Only the ending is interesting as it shows some gore effects.
Things you can learn from this movie:
1.) You can survive watching blinking spots on the screen for more than 5 minutes without getting an epileptic seizure.
2.) In the future robots look like trash bins with legs and arms.
3.) In the future robots can read your mind. You just have to say "Help me!" and they know what to do.
4.) Future robots will make strange beeping noises while moving.
5.) You can actually shoot a 1.5 minute long screne in which someone is tying her shoelace, without it being cut out by the editor of the movie.
6.) You can actually hire a great actor (Angus Scrimm) to play in total crap movie.
This movie is so bad, that it is almost worse than the king of worst movies "Manos: The Hand's Of Fate".
(Grissom): -Are you a terrorist?
(suspect): -Depends, are you terrified?