All the other reviews I've read have called this a stinker, but Mr K comes at it from a completely different direction. This is why I like and respect Mr K's opinion. Got me thinking that it might be worth watching seeing as it was done with such a small budget.



Shame you didn't get the mainstream film review gig on BBC TV...

This dosen't look like it'll make me forget how much I'm looking forward to the forth coming Monsters....

From the directors of AVP Requiem... It echoes, riffs and rips off other films you've already seen... It's a MAJORLY flawed film... It's confusing and all over the place. It's a strange odd mix of a movie. It falls apart in the end. It's not wholly satisfying. BUT.... BUT (and this is important)... it was cheaply made (for less than 15 million dollars)... AND it's still way better and more interesting than AVP Requiem.



So you're recommending this?



I think I'll pass on this one, Mark. It sounds like you're just being contrarian because most of the other critics hated this.... And collecting navel lint is more interesting than AVPR, BTW.

I saw it on Saturday. Wow, what a stinker. Yes it looks pretty impressive and for fifteen million dollars, it actually looks really impressive. But they spent 10 cents on the script and 20 cents on the actors. It's really poor. Worst sci-fi film I've seen at the cinema in years. I was in a crowd of fellow sci-fi buffs and boy was there a collective feeling of disgruntlement at spending ten quid to see it.

It made no sense. Really none at all. And the end scene was just terrible. It would have been a marginally better film if they'd just cut it at 90 minutes not 93. Either come up with a reason for alien invasion that makes some sense, or leave it mysterious. Really, we don't need to know.

Only silver lining is that I immediately bought a copy of Let the Right One in to cheer myself up, so I have that to look forward to.

Still looking forward to Monsters and Iron Sky though.

I rarely disagree with Dr K but this time I do. Skyline is a real stinker, an atrocious, rubbish waste of time. I don't care less what an achievement the effects are for the money, this movie amounts to nothing more than an over-long videogame intro scene (think of the way it ends, and imagine holding a PS3 controller). The Strause Brothers need to be kept well awat from movie cameras in future.

I'll be going to see this based Dr K's coments/review - but was slightly put off by the mention of Cloverfield (one of the worst films I have ever seen, not at all original (Blair Witch anyone?) and the most annoying characters ever to grace the screen (I cheered when the main character carrying the camera died!)). I'm going to give it a go because of the achievement of putting on a film of this scale on such a small budget. It may well stink (for all of the reasons shown above), but I want to give it a fair go anyway.



On another subject; please, please, please Dr K, will you speak to the BBC about replacing Claudia Winkleman on Film 2010..?! She is useless in the role, isn't a critic, and adds nothing to the programme. I feel sorry for Danny Leigh! We deserve more from a critical arts programme, and Dr K is the one to do it!!



Rant over.

I generally rather enjoyed it as a passable Friday afternoon at the cinema; the effects are terrific and it's not too long. No masterpiece but it's okay.



My spoiler-laden review: https://streetrw.blogspot.com/2010/11/skyline.html

Just back in from seeing it tonight. I'm with Dr K (and Kim Newman) - it's hardly a masterpiece, but it's a fun sci-fi thriller piece. Probably could have done with a few less "Oh he's dead!" "No he's safe!" "No he's dead!" scenes though.

I would have to agree with the other posts Mark. Skyline is simply not a good film. It doesn't even fit under the "no brain sci-fi romp fest" genre, since it's not even enjoyable while in the theater.



The only brightspot of Skyline is the ending... I liked the abrupt ending because I was thinking I would have to sit there for another 30 minutes for the story to resolve itself.

Regarding another film-making team of brothers... was the good Doctor thinking of The Brothers Quay?



I just wondered.



Regarding 'Skyline'... I found some enjoyment in the Brother's Strauss' AVPR film, but feel a bit shy of this film due to all the negative reviews. I'm encouraged that it is said to be an improvement on their previous effort, although I appreciate that isn't necessarilly saying much, so I'll probably catch it when released to DVD.

You mean the Brothers Quay Dr. K! :)

I've been to one of their exhibitions; incredible talent!

The Brothers Spierig are who you are attempting to think of, I believe.

Excuse me Dr. K, but I seem to remember a post on this blog in which you argued along the lines that a films budget should not come into the considerations of the critic. A pants film on a small budget is still pants.



This post pains me so much because it forces me to reveal myself as the true anorak that I am.

It seemed to me like the prologue went on too long. Such that the real body of work only had the 3 seconds previously mentioned!

I am a sucker for this sort of garbage normally but not this time...no not this time Dr. K

Primer was made for what? $7000 and that made more sense and had better values.

tongue firmly in cheek no doubt

this film is a great example of the position of film-making at the moment. The standard of special effects is so high and the standard of the script or characters or plot so low (in terms of creativity, originality, provocation) that it is just maddening for sci fi fans at the moment.

This film tested my patience for an hour to the extent i felt almost insulted by its laziness and the apparent suggestion the audience was supposed to feel anything besdies resentment for the characters.

But this is not my opinion of the closing sequences which are unpredictable, almost orignial and ultimately quite disturbing.

From the Wittertainment podcast on Skyline from Mark's mouth: "It's not terrible."

I hope they put that blurb on the DVD/Blue Ray packaging...

Am I the only one who's unimpressed with the CG in Monsters?



That scene with the fighter jet in the lake they showed on Film 2010 is all wrong, the camera bobbing isn't synced up to the CG component at all so it looks *really* phoney. And that's not even a hard thing to get right - there are plenty of UFO fakes on youtube, for example, that do it perfectly.

I like Mark's review, because it finds some positive aspects about "Skyline". When I saw the trailer I expected a film like "Matrix" or "A Space Oddyssey", thought provoking and philosophical as well as laden with special effects. I remember hearing some reference to Stephen Hawking's ideas during the trailer. However, it soon became clear that "Skyline" is not a film for intellectuals. It has a simple plot and nothing important to say, however it does have brilliant effects. I felt that the effects held my interest, whereas at first, I felt that I may get bored very quickly! If there was a message in "Skyline", I felt it was the force of human survival and the continuation of our species, perhaps the sub plot about the leading, female character's pegnancy points to this. I agree with Mark that the effects really do deliver, and create an intriguing and entertaining diversion from big-budget sci-fi ad sci-fi horror films. The moment when an alien monsters foot stamped on a get-away car was a real suprise!

feel like I'm missing a trick. I haven't seen Skyline or Monsters yet. I quite like the idea of human stories within movies populated by insane looking monsters and aliens.

What would the child do not teshilos, just not pregnant. Here we are Russian! Unfortunately I did not have big problems with English.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

PANTS AND EVEN MORE PANTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!