Cinemasochist Review: Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000

DVD_battlefield_earth_box.jpgI hate you all.

What’s more, Terl, Terran security chief of the Psychlos, also hates you. He hates all man-animals such as yourself. Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000, is the story of poor Terl and his fight against the upstart man-animals who dare to question righteous Psychlo rule. It is the tragic tale of a fall from greatness. You see, in the year 2000, the Psychlos appeared an conquered Earth in 18 minutes. 1,000 years later, mankind is an endangered species as Earth is mined for its most precious commodity — gold. One day, a man-animal (human) named Johnny Goodboy Tyler dares to rise above the raw animal nature of his existence, and fight the godlike Psychlos to reclaim the planet.

If that sounded like a promising movie to you, perhaps you have film production in your blood, as John Travolta does his. As co-producer of Battlefield Earth, he is largely to praise for bringing this L. Ron Hubbard masterpiece to the big screen. Travolta also has the main Psychlo role of Terl, the villain of our story. Johnny, meanwhile, is played by Barry Pepper, the sniper from Saving Private Ryan. Both artists, along with a superior supporting cast including Forest Whitaker from Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai.

Some interesting factoids about the future:

– there are no perpendicular or right angles. Everything is slanted. At least, every shot of this movie is shot at “dutch angles,” giving what the director calls a delightful “comic-book feel.”

– there is no such thing as dialogue in the future, absent exclamations such as “crap-lousy ceiling!” or “I’ll make you as happy as a baby Psychlo on a straight diet of kerbango.”

– man-animals can progress in knowledge from spears to flying harrier jets in a matter of days. Oh, and harriers are superior fighting machines to futuristic alien military ships.

– our Psychlo overlords look and behave suspiciously like incredibly stupid Klingons.

Sometimes a film is bad enough that you can make fun of it as it goes along and have a good time with it. This is not one of those movies. Battlefield Earth is just incredibly painful. Don’t believe me? Read the IMDB user comments, here. Pacing, dialogue, effects, cinematography — everything is just crappy enough to be like a splinter in your eye. Each minute is an agonizing wave of torment. By the end of the film your neck will be sore (from craning your head to follow each scene’s angles) and your brain will be sore (from draining it). Travolta’s acting is so bad you wonder how he ever had a comeback, and you will rewatch Pulp Fiction just to confirm to yourself that he did in fact act at some point. Barry Pepper will become an accursed name. You will cry for Ghost Dog.

It may seem odd to say, but I’m particularly glad to have watched this film on DVD. The reason? The director’s commentary. Rarely have I relished such self-absorption, as Roger Christian (Nostradamus, Underworld) carries on about how remarkable a success Battlefield Earth turned out to be. A hilariously pretentious Brit, he name-drops George Lucas and Ridley Scott as his admirers (“George was always asking me how we did this scene”), and shows an utter disconnect with reality (“audiences literally get up and cheer at this scene. They can’t help it”). Will you recoup the lost 119 minutes of your life by watching the film AGAIN, with the director’s commentary? No. No, at best you will become a shade of your former self. But you will look back on your viewing experience with nostalgia, even whimsy, much like a war veteran or earthquake survivor. By pushing the limits of human endurance, Battlefield Earth offers us something far greater than entertainment: it causes us to peer deeply into our souls and wonder if we haven’t just sold a little piece to the devil.

Posted on July 20, 2006, in Cinemasochist, DVD, Movies, To Avoid. Bookmark the permalink. 10 Comments.

  1. Arthur said brightly: “Actually I quite liked it.”

    Ford turned and gaped. Here was an approach that had quite simply not occurred to him.

    The Vogon raised a surprised eyebrow that effectively obscured his nose and was therefore no bad thing.

    “Oh good …” he whirred, in considerable astonishment.

    “Oh yes,” said Arthur, “I thought that some of the metaphysical imagery was really particularly effective.”

    Ford continued to stare at him, slowly organizing his thoughts around this totally new concept. Were they really going to be able to bareface their way out of this?

    “Yes, do continue …” invited the Vogon.

    “Oh … and er … interesting rhythmic devices too,” continued Arthur, “which seemed to counterpoint the … er … er …” He floundered.

    Ford leaped to his rescue, hazarding “counterpoint the surrealism of the underlying metaphor of the … er …” He floundered too, but Arthur was ready again.

    “… humanity of the …”

    “Vogonity,” Ford hissed at him.

    “Ah yes, Vogonity (sorry) of the poet’s compassionate soul,” Arthur felt he was on a home stretch now, “which contrives through the medium of the verse structure to sublimate this, transcend that, and come to terms with the fundamental dichotomies of the other,” (he was reaching a triumphant crescendo …) “and one is left with a profound and vivid insight into … into … er …” (… which suddenly gave out on him.) Ford leaped in with the coup de gr@ce:

    “Into whatever it was the poem was about!” he yelled. Out of the corner of his mouth: “Well done, Arthur, that was very good.”

    The Vogon perused them. For a moment his embittered racial soul had been touched, but he thought no – too little too late. His voice took on the quality of a cat snagging brushed nylon.

    “So what you’re saying is that I write poetry because underneath my mean callous heartless exterior I really just want to be loved,” he said. He paused. “Is that right?”

    Ford laughed a nervous laugh. “Well I mean yes,” he said, “don’t we all, deep down, you know … er …”

    The Vogon stood up.

    “No, well you’re completely wrong,” he said, “I just write poetry to throw my mean callous heartless exterior into sharp relief. I’m going to throw you off the ship anyway. Guard! Take the prisoners to number three airlock and throw them out!”

  2. It was really quite awful. Worst movie I’ve ever seen? No. But it’s the worst movie I’ve ever elected to see.

  3. That review was one of the funniest things I’ve read in a while!

  4. My husband liked this movie. We own it on DVD, I’m pretty sure.

  5. Steve,
    Does NetFlix give you suggestions on what you should watch, based on your previous choices? Because Cinemasochist is really going to screw with that–after a few rounds, I’d love to hear what NetFlix is recommending.

  6. Lol! That review ruled! Nice work SG.

  7. Sam, I’m careful to rate things accordingly. One star for BE, which sadly is the lowest rating they permit.

  8. I think it might have been cheating to watch it with director’s commentary. You better watch it again in its pristine glory.

  9. Dan, I watched it through without commentary before listening to the director prattle on. I think I’ve paid my dues.

  10. Yes, you must be careful with your ratings. I gave Malcolm X five stars and Netflix thought I was black. All I got was recommendations for Sanford and Son and Good Times.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.