I loved everything about this movie. The writing, acting and directing were all fantastic. I laughed out loud through most of the film - so many brilliantly awkward and bizarre moments - It was so incredibly original. At the same time, I found it incredibly moving. Wistful and sweet and sort of lilting. I HIGHLY recommend this film. So much heart, so much craft, so much meaning. Amazingly refined, skilled filmmaking on every level.
share[deleted]
I saw SS76 at Outfest in LA and just ordered the DVD on Amazon. DVD release is tomorrow, 9/30. The movie pokes fun at the 70's, right down to the glass top coffee tables people ran their shins into. This is how a space station drama storyline would be conceived if written back then.
Matt Bomer is really on his game. Good performance. This is a well done movie with many good elements to it.
Knowing this is not a big studio budget kind of movie, I think people might be less snarky and critical about it. Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing SS76 again at home and expect it will remain popular for years to come. OH, and I am not a studio plant as that other user discussed.
Knowing this is not a big studio budget kind of movie, I think people might be less snarky and critical about it.
I do not grade on the curve.
Any idea when this will be released to the public? I'm a huge fan of Matt and also like Patrick Wilson. Would have watched it regardless of its reviews but now that I'm hearing positive things about it I just can't wait!
shareI thought it was just okay, personally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8ffpy8qD9s
Matt was great in it, and has a significant role, so I don't think you'll be disappointed. He also has some very nice chemistry with Liv Tyler.
shareI thought it was not funny,kinda sad. Good soundtrack,other then that, POOP!
sharereally true
Yup. Wasted opportunity. Zero point about this being set in a kitsch 70s space station. It could have just been set in ANY workplace and would have made more sense. But BECAUSE it was set in a kitsch 70s space station I expected it to address some relevant tropes, which it did not. So I'm actually angrier watching it than I should be, because it let my own elevated expectations down so hard. I COULD blame myself for expecting more, but FTS.
Liv Tyler is still pretty hot though. She should concentrate on projects which stretch her acting muscles. We know she's capable of it. All she had to do here was act curious and confused. She'll come into her own as an actress when she gets challenged by better scripts.
The OP is a studio plant used to generate hype. Look at his/her history.
shareOP means original poster I suppose? If you mean the history on IMDB, he/she's been a member since 2006 and there's no visible history of posting reviews, ratings or messages. How would that make him or her a studio plant?
shareHe's been a member since 2006, and *this* turd in a punch bowl is the first movie he comments on, proclaiming it better than anything, ever, that's ever been made? I'm not buying him as a legitimate poster. It's easy to sign up for accounts, and then sit on them until you need to use them.
shareLiv Tyler is still pretty hot though. She should concentrate on projects which stretch her acting muscles. We know she's capable of it. All she had to do here was act curious and confused. She'll come into her own as an actress when she gets challenged by better scripts.
Terrible movie, very hard to sit through. Zero actual story. Lots of toe-cringingly bad situations. Okay production values, but how they convinced name actors to be in this travesty is an unsolvable enigma. Anybody who understands and appreciates QUALITY should stay the hell away from this movie.
shareIf you critic this movie based on story line or visual effects then yes, I agree this is a really bad movie. But I find this movie extremely enjoyable because it clicked with me on so many levels. The social awkwardness, loneliness, being forced to work with people you didn't like, materialism, depression, drug abuse, dysfunctional family, infidelity, death and lots of other themes explored. Perhaps, only people with issues will be able to identify with what the characters are going through.
shareI'm a big science fiction fan, and one of the many things I have against this movie is that there was no need for it to be science fiction. It could as well have been a contemporary stage drama. Still wouldn't have had any story. Still wouldn't be successful comedy - except for those few whose "issues" it apparently and amateurishly spoke to.
shareOf course it had a story. In fact, it had multiple stories. Each character was a sub-plot within the larger confines of the over-arching plot (New officer arrives on a backwater space station and finds herself embroiled in the local drama.)
It was a character drama with comedic elements. I think the issue is the trailer; people watching the trailer are going to expect a comedy, this was not a comedy, nor was it a hard sci-fi movie.
It was a character drama in space built on the concepts and attitudes that would have been present in the 70's. Having to hide ones homosexuality in a career. The rise of "new age" therapy. Drug abuse.
Hell, most of the characters are cliches of characters you'd see in 70's productions. The stud. The busy body. The new age mother. etc.
Say you don't like the movie, but insulting it simply because it wasn't what you wanted to be is hardly sporting.
A story is the introduction of a CONFLICT which is dealt with and resolved towards the end. Dysfunctional character drama does not a story make. Sadly we live in an age that believe that character-driven stories are superior to idea-driven stories. That is just not the case. I want big ideas and big concepts. Realistic characters? Screw 'em. Especially in the fantastic genres, which are supposed to be high-concept. Science fiction should not primarily be character-driven. That is a heinous misconception, and one which most SF writers and publishers unfortunately subscribe to these days. I am a member of local organized SF fandom, and among us there is a clear desire for a return to the pulp era and the "Golden Age" of SF (the 1930s-'50s); a return to idea-driven stories. Wild science and other extreme speculation should be the main "characters". I am sure this sentiment will return in force in the near future, also in Hollywood. We're seeing it coming with the successful superhero movies.
shareNo, that's a build-up.
A story is the expansion of a premise written to contain a beginning, middle & end. A story does not need to contain a single conflict, but can be an amalgamation of a number of different conflicts within the scope of an over-arching premise.
Conflict can be person vs. person, as is the case in this movie.
See, the issue is you're trying to really connect this to Sci-Fi simply because it's set in space. It is not a Sci-Fi movie, it's a drama based within a Sci-Fi veneer.
And that shall be its undoing. 😁
shareIf there is no conflict, there is no story.
I agree with the above commenters, no need for the sci-fi backdrop. The trailer and description on Amazon was quite misleading. In fact, this whole thing seems like a failed art school film project (cast owed filmmaker favors) and they happened to luck into some vintage props and curved space station/futuristic ship flats that conjured Star Wars--I can imagine them rummaging around in a prop room, an then coming up with the "story" and setting.
I have no idea how they managed to get somebody to buy and distribute it. Perhaps on cast names alone?
I thought I would be getting Space 1999 with a great soundtrack. The only reason I can think Amazon metrics suggested that I would like this is for pre-ordering Guardians of the Galaxy (now they got 70's kitsch right)!
This is the worst film I have seen since Schlock The Monkey. At least Landis never intended it to be taken seriously: Due to the horrifying nature of this film, no one will be admitted to the theatre.
SS76, however, seems to want us to take it seriously. Honestly, it is worse than a community college version of Waiting For Godot, so unless you are into collective masochism, don't fall for it. Look down at your feet and remember you can walk away.
As to the scholastic definition above, please don't mistake confused and trite character arcs or snappy dialogue (I think folks were being generous with that description) being enough "conflict" to drive a non-existent story. The only redeeming value to this movie is the handful of Rudgren songs on the soundtrack, but even there, they weren't using the music very effectively--just sorta sprinkled it in there like the set shots to remind us it was the seventies and they are in space.
"My secret, Stark, is that I'm always angry."share
Don't mean to be critical. Just wanted to point out that you probably meant "hideous" when you wrote "heinous", LOL.
"Heinous" means exceedingly cruel and evil with intention to impart the utmost harm and pain, as in "a heinous crime"; whereas "hideous" means ugly, exceedingly disagreeable, egregious, possessing or exhibiting bad taste, style or expression, etc., as in "a hideous wardrobe" or "hideous demeanor/manner".
Agreed
shareWorst movie I've seen in years.
shareI thought it was great. Of course, some people are unwilling to remember or believe that art is subjective. If some people don't like something they cannot believe it has any value whatsoever or else their brains melt. Ha!
shareIt has nothing to do with melting brains. Sure, it's subjective: You see "great." I see a flatlined script, a few likable characters suffering at the whim of thoroughly nasty characters and situations (really: seeing a child lose a succession of pets-- and one sincere friend-- is funny? At all?), and a thoroughly squandered setting. It's like a case study in depression: the thread calling it "The Ice Storm in Space" is absolutely right. If nothing else, SS76 is a perfect example of why indie filmmakers don't deserve unquestioning love and support. What a sad, sorry, pathetic mess of a film.
share