Stargate

Stargate is a blast from the past in many ways, but it imaginatively employs the latest special effects technology to give audiences new thrills. [24 Oct 1994]

It works not because ridiculousness is concealed, but because ridiculousness on this scale becomes something else. Don't let anyone tell you that Stargate, lifeless script and all, isn't clunky fun, proudly trembling on the brink of classic camp. [28 Oct 1994, p.48]

Magic it ain't, but competent isn't far off the mark. Neither is hum-drum. [28 Oct 1994]

The film has flashes of psychedelic visual energy, but its story is limp.

Stargate is peppered with numerous minor faults, some of which - although not all - are easily forgiven. It's the bigger plot problems and lackluster climax which are more difficult to excuse.

Stargate is a time-warped implosion of baffling space mysticism, a costume budget gone mad, and too much sand for any movie short of Lawrence of Arabia. It's pretty, vacant and pointless; an interactive computer game with which we just don't feel like getting involved. [28 Oct 1994, p.10C]

What this juvenile adventure has in spades is special effects and picturesque locations. What it lacks is an emotional link to make the Saturday afternoon he-man posturing palatable, or at least bearable.

This movie is so FRICKIN MIND-BLOWING since Star Trek: The Motion Picture!!!!!!!!!!!

The rare Roland Emmerich film that isn't brainless, effects-over-story mayhem. Well, not completely, anyway. Stargate does carry a lot of the director's favorite themes, from the tortured genius who only needs a chance to prove himself to the war-hungry soldier on a suicide mission, the overbearing government suits and the eccentric, ignored true believers. Those over-simplifications are glaring, of course, but at least there's an effort put in to expand certain characters beyond their stereotype (Kurt Russell's lingering resentment of guns, for example) and the plot itself is rich and interesting enough to paper over most of the holes. I carry twin affinities for science fiction and Egyptian history, so any merger of the two was bound to hit a sweet spot for me, and in this case the marriage works very well. There's a certain other-worldliness about the pyramids, and that particular culture's system of beliefs, which lends itself well to such genre-driven filmmaking. The practical special effects play extremely well - hovering space pyramids and robotic Anubis-helmed enforcers - but it was still a bit early to rely on CG for this type of work and the few instances where they tried don't hold up very well. Despite a phoned-in leading performance by James Spader, Stargate remains a quirky, unexpectedly engaging ride. Still fresh, unique and interesting today, on the eve of its twenty-fifth anniversary.

The film had an interesting mystery to start with. Then the underwhelming part was when they actually arrived through the Stargate. A mid sci-fi movie with questionable wardrobe design. That went on to spawn upto eights seasons of simplistic, but still fun sci-fi.

This film is based on a crazy, but real, theory about the visit of extraterrestrial beings to our ancient civilizations, namely ancient Egypt. The script is based on the discovery of a portal during excavations in Egypt. Dr. Daniel Jackson, an unorthodox egyptologist, is called in by the military to investigate the finding and finds that the portal links two worlds together and can be rebuilt and opened. He then embarks on an expedition that crosses the portal and finds himself in another desert world, where people live under the slavery of strange, extraterrestrial beings, very similar to the Egyptian gods. Personally, this movie has only interested me recently. Unlike the two TV series it gave rise to, it seems to me to have some quality... but, after all, is not very good. There are a lot of problems, starting with the lack of logic that arises when we analyze the details: for example, how can those people, used to using primitive tools, instantly handle and fire modern machine guns? The most logical thing would be they don't even know how to grab them! And how did Dr. Jackson manage, within a day, to discover the real usefulness of a portal that has puzzled academics for decades? There are a lot of problems like these ... little details that, when clearly analyzed, make no sense and undermine the credibility of the plot. As for the cast, I believe everyone did the best they could, but there are some obvious casting errors. James Spader is good as a strange scholar, but slips when he has to do action scenes. Kurt Russel is more suited to pure and hard action, but all attempts to make his character denser and give him a heroic accent are too cliché. Jaye Davidson was very unlucky with his character: a weak villain, effeminate to the point of being almost feminine, who doesn't scare and seems almost dependent on the tough guys who protect him. There is also a poor attempt to do romance between Spader and Mili Avital's character, but it always seems unnecessary and predictable to the point that we immediately know how it will end. The film is poor, has an uninspired script, a very amateurish direction (assured by Roland Emmerich), actors who can do little to help make things better, predictable action scenes, and dated visual and sound effects. I won't say it's a movie that can't entertain us... it entertains the audience, but it's perfectly forgettable.

İlk defa izleyecekler için zaman kaybı bir yapım. Hiç bulaşmamanızı tavsiye ederim...