User Reviews (37)

Add a Review

  • Warning: Spoilers
    So it's a space movie. But it's low budget. You ask, "what about the effects?" The effects are at times good, and at times really, really bad. I mean bad. And notice I started with the effects.

    There's a story here, but it's told in what I think is the wrong order. I don't mean a Tarantino style wrong order. I mean, it's told in a completely nonsensical arrangement. Most of it's about a mother (in the future, because you know, it's sci-fi) as told by her daughter, which is mostly exposition done in narrative from the daughter's perspective. Only once you're through the first hour and hear Paul Darrow's voice as a computer do you realize how much more tolerable the constant narrative would have been if he'd read it. This narrative is so constant and inclusive, that the actors on screen hardly say a word for the first hour.

    There's also a lesson here for you up and coming filmmakers: if you're not doing 2001 and want to have some action (this one does), then PLEASE hire a good fight choreographer. Otherwise, your fights will look like, well, what's in BATTLESPACE. And notice the title has the word "battle" in it. Ugh.

    I think this might be the classic scenario of trying to make a movie based on nothing more than a concept. And some effects. My biggest surprise is seeing the IMDb listing this film as costing $1.8 million. When you compare it to something like PRIMER, which did better with a budget of a few thousand, you realize in low budget film-making, it's all about the story. I wasn't expecting much - but I was STILL disappointed. Two out of ten stars.
  • I am willing to tolerate almost anything in a Sci-Fi movie, but this was almost intolerable. While a few of the special effects are very cool (landscapes) this is no 'battlespace' rather a disjointed weird mother/daughter relationship with sci-fi concepts thrown in. The acting (wooden), framing and shooting (kindergarten film school) and with "hand-to-hand" combat scenes funnier than any Hong Kong chopsocky movie, this film bores. The plot line is convoluted and the devices used to move the plot along (narrator), unexplained scene jumps and plenty of deus ex machina reinforce the idea that writer cum director is not a good idea. Save your love of Sci-Fi for something else instead of losing a bit of it here.
  • Beyond boring. 80% of this movie, shot on dirt cheap miniDV and 'film-looked' in post, shows a lone heroine traversing a desert. THAT'S IT. Scenes that could've been done in 45 seconds, are stretched out to 45 minutes.

    The costumes are cheap looking. Acting is non-existent. These were favors (or blackmail) by the cast, and nothing more.

    The CGI visual are horrendously bad, even by amateur standards. This smacks more of an 8th grader's attempt at video game cutscenes than a low-budget feature.

    This thing is so bad, even the nerd-run series 'Hidden Frontier' looks and plays better.

    The look of the movie is horrible. Acting is nil. Visuals are shockingly bad. The only saving grace is the clear audio.

    Spare yourself 90 minutes of agony. AVOID.
  • Most criticisms posted about Battlespace center on poor special effects, low budget,lack of forceful acting, you know, the usual. I don't think great special effects helped AVATAR that much. I don't think the Star Trek movies were well acted, and high budget financing didn't rescue Waterworld. So let's tell you what I liked about Battlespace.

    This film has a lot of positives. I viewed the acting as subtle - facial expressions and good camera-work went a long way to create mood and emotion. Effective. 6 out of 10.

    Special effects weren't bad at all, but they were of mixed styles so somewhat inconsistent to the viewer. Some of the painted planet sequences were as good as I've ever seen. Best of all, the special effects conveyed understanding - they weren't simply eye candy, but useful for plot delineation. 7.5 out of 10

    The story, pacing and characterizations were the weaknesses of Battlespace. Just another story of a vulnerable lady out to save the universe, after being unable to manage her own life and affairs. Our heroine, actress Eve Connelly, who was attractive and had expressive facials, was supposed to be a superhero, a genetically enhanced Valkerie, but she still threw a rock like a 10th grade schoolgirl. She simply didn't have the nastiness and physical presence necessary for her role. That being said, in spite of rather slow pacing, I was always wondering what was going to happen next, and at no time did I wish the main protagonist dead, as I often do in sci-fi or horror film. She worked on a human level, so okay here. For story, characterizations and pacing, a solid 3 of 10.

    Best of all, though, was the music. Just excellent. A symphonic score composed and conducted by Aussie superstar Owen Arnold, who is the equal of Brian May and as good as anything Hollywood has to offer. I say this as a professional violinist, composer and conductor myself. This guy is good, and worth watching the movie for. 8.5 out of 10 here, and I simply won't give out 9's or 10's to anything but Le Nozze De Figaro or Parsifal.

    Check the flick out. You'll have seen lots worse.
  • Regardless of how "bored" some (probably adolescent) viewers may become (forced to maintain their attention span over vast minutes of time on something other than sex, car chases and dripping blood), this is obviously a great movie. At least for the rest of us.

    The depth of this film comes apparent upon the second and third viewing of this film. It is rich in historical allegory and establishes a developed and complex universe, normally reserved for bigger budget classic films.

    The downside of this is of course the budget. It was made on a shoestring, and this shows in places, but the quality of the production is still reasonable, regardless. The other downside is the way this film is presented. In full-screen? Why on Earth would you release such a thing in full-screen format. What stupidity. It was shot in widescreen, so why release a sub- standard format.

    The film tackles the unique issue of memory downloads and the intrinsic problems on how this will affect future society. The issues on human modifications may seem trite in today's society, but one day, these will become serious issues. The film touches on something that may one day become commonplace.

    Battlespace (not the best descriptive name for the film) is not suitable for those expecting the latest summer popcorn film, but if you have a true interest in future science, this may be stimulating.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Today I had a real craving for a sci-fi movie and so I decided to check out Battlespace. Sadly, that was one of my biggest mistakes this year.

    I see that the director, Neil Johnson, has directed over 500 music videos, and I suggest he goes back to that. Music videos are a perfectly good form of entertainment, and not everybody can cut it making movies.

    The worst part of this movie is probably the voice over. And that says a lot since the special effects are appalling at times. Voice over didn't work in Blade Runner, and it doesn't work here. The first hour or so is spent watching the main character walk through the desert, while her daughter tells the story. I think the story could have made a great movie, but not like this.

    The second worst part are the effects. They are simply bad and they don't blend into the rest of the picture at all, so you simply don't believe in them. And absolutely all the frames in the movie has been filtered, and not in a good way. Filtering used as an effect is good. 90 minutes of it, bad.

    And what is it with all the gadgets talking all the time, and not shutting up!?!? If I had used technology like that I would have gone mad. I was just waiting for the guns to blurt out with: "I am awfully sorry, but I seem to have run out of ammunition." No, stay away. This movie is just not worth the time.
  • I would normally give this 8 stars, but I am giving it a ten to counteract the strange reviews this film is getting. Honestly, I got a lot from this film. The depth of universe created here rivals much bigger films. The film is very low on dialogue, and that's the whole point. A story is told without words, but shown with great complexity through the lead character's, Mara's actions. When you watch the film, you walk the journey she walks. You feel pain when she feels pain, you cry when she cries. As a woman who served briefly in the military, I strongly connected with Mara's plight, and the loneliness of being away from your loved ones. I feel Battlespace will survive the test of time and lone day become a B-movie classic. A lot of people hated 2001 for similar reasons, but now it is remembered. Please Hollywood, make more movies like this
  • OK, I think we've had enough of 1/10 ratings and "Worst movie ever!" reviews (and believe me guys, I know about bad movies! I've seen stuff so bad they make Troma look like festival art). I just watched this one, and I'm giving it 10 NOT BECAUSE IT DESERVES 10/10, but because it's better than 2.6/10. Objectively I'd say it's somewhere between 3.5 and 4.3 There are plenty of movies with flashy and fancy looking posters, which seem to be cutting edge film-making and turn out to be unwatchable uber cheese boredom. So when I saw the "Battlespace" cover this smelled like one of those, but anyway, I decided to give it a shot. I enjoy sci-fi flicks and if your expectations are not too high you might find yourself enjoying some B-movie with a nice twist.

    Now I don't know what's the "Battlespace" budget, but the last thing it lacks are special effects. It's not some ultra expensive Star Wars or Transformers style CGI action, but it's pretty descent most of the time. There are some great shots with special effects. You could say the movie looks like game cinematics with actors. The SFX are quite something for an unknown direct-to-DVD feature. I even find them superior to most of the Sci-Fi Channel crap that comes out lately. This is a low-budget SFX extravaganza! What brings this movie down (except that it's 4:3 and not 16:9, which reduces the "cinema coolness" effect and adds more "made-for-TV" feeling) is bad storytelling. And when I say bad I mean BAD. First of all, I did't quite get the story - the characters were doing stuff, going to places... What for - that is a mystery to me! During most of the movie the main character's daughter's voice tries to explain the things to you, as if she's sharing her memories. Damn, don't narrate the whole movie! Rule No.1 in script writing - if you can show something, show it, don't tell us about it! And let the stuff we need to know become clear through the dialog, not some narrator explaining "This is this and that is that. And my mother does so because once upon a time she had a problem with something and blah-blah-blah". That makes the movie boring and makes you feel sleepy...

    It could have been a great sci-fi feature, with all the neat (even not-so-expensive) special effects if the writing was decent and not a descent. I feel bad for all the wasted potential of this, cause it certainly looks quite good, but the bad script ruins it all. Anyway, you could give it a try - at least I enjoyed its look.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    In a world where humans can live forever you spend the entire movie wishing they would die. First off if you insist on watching this movie do two things first put it on mute, don't worry you miss a plot, hell they don't even talk for the first 70 min of an 87 min movie, after putting on mute you must now hit fast forward till the main chick dies don't worry even if your paying attention you won't know why or how she died. Once you get to the "good part" take it of mute. Oh, how will you know the good part, wait for an elevator scene with two morons in space suits with WWII weapons. These weapons won't seem like much till you realize that the first protagonist had a laser tag pistol and a bandoleer of CO2 cartridges. The only remnants of a plot take place between a glowing ball and a semi hot chick who looks like she was attacked by Wolverine. After listening to the "plot", you will wish they went back to not talking. Of the four people that are in this movie none of them can remotely act, not even a little bit, you will have better luck witnessing acting at a kindergarten theater.

    To comment on the special on the special effects, let me just say "Wow", no really you will spend the entire movie saying to your self "Where did this movie's 1.8 million dollar budget go!" Seriously it will leave you in aw of the magnitude of ineptness. The best "sets" are basically windows wallpaper backgrounds. The Ships are basically flying wrenches, Wait some are barges that kinda look like whales . I have never heard so many made up words in my whole life. They have buttons on their wrist(large pedometers) that can put them in "fight mode" and super runing mode (makes them super blurry). This will seriously drain their power reserves but they find bits of wires to chew on to regain their strength. The explosions were less impressive than my fourth of July, I only had sparklers.

    So the plot as far as I can figure goes something like this "mother" is a space ship captain and goes to the desert for a while rides a rocket dies. Then her daughter 6000 years in the future ( no I am not exaggerating) recalls her mother's memories through some sort of capsule. Anyways they jabber on for another 10 min and then the cause a big bang. Yes the Same "Big Bang" that started our solar system. It's explained how she goes back in time or something, it does not really matter it happened i guess. Roll Credits Seriously the whole script was mercifully on one sheet of paper, unless that actually detailed any of the dreadfully fight scenes.

    After watching the credits I have now laughed more than I did the entire movie, the jobs the created like catering supervisor "galactius sarcophagus" and then the special thanks to George Lucas was just the best.

    I really wasn't expecting that much for a movie I paid 99 cents for but seriously some body owes me for this. Most frequent comment heard after the movie "I want my life back". You have to admire that some but put time and effort in to this movie but seriously, why ?
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I would have liked to have seen more money spent on this film. Instead of going to ultra-edgy dark look that so many films fall prey to, Battlespace looks and feels like something fresh. The best thing is this film makes predictions about downloading your memories to a data chip that may soon become true. It deals with the long-term ramifications upon society and how bio- genetic enhancements will impact humanity as a whole. Watch this film if you want your mind expanded and challenged. Please Mr. Producer, spend more money next time. films like this should be in the mainstream. I would expect that many people won't get this film the first time around. I certainly enjoyed it on the second viewing. the question I have is WHY IS THE FILM FULL SCREEN? People who watch Sci-Fi usually have wide screen TVs. Full screen is for children under five. Loved the film, but please show me making-ofs, commentaries and wide screen images.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    You see a movie titled 'battlespace', what are you going to think? Space battles with cool as heck explosions and everyone shooting at each other. What do you get with this movie? Well, you do get SOME space battle goodness, but for a great majority of the time it's just stupid people wandering around doing almost nothing. NO ONE TALKS!!!! What is this nonsense?! We get a narrators, and a ton of British computers, but thats about it. The main protagonist must be the worst one I have ever seen, as she doesn't even have any dialog, and sleepwalks though scenes (literately!). Some of the things happening are just stupid, like they use a rocket (like to go to space) for basic transportation planet side, why not just use one of those nifty space ships? In any case, the music is almost non-existent, with a few boring dull lifeless samples, but the main thing you will notice is the Atari sound effects the ships have got to be kidding me. I can also tell that the budget was low, because everything looks fake, which is not what you would expect from a movie, especially what should be a super cool space battle movie. I seriously think the budget must have been in the double digits it is so bad, making you laugh more than you should at how plain bad it is. I am starting to think that they paid the actors based on how much dialog they had, because their is very little here (if you can't tell already that is my main gripe here, as I probably said that like 3 times already).
  • I made it through half of this, but was not enough of a masochist to see it all. The first half of the film had next to no dialog ! Almost everything was voice over commentary to carry the story. The scriptwriter forgot that sometimes less is more and tried to explain several millennium of detailed history in the voice over. At the same time he forgot to do any character development. Most science fiction fans don't require huge amounts of character development, but it would be nice to know why the two main characters who survived the destruction of the space fleet together ended up fighting each other.

    There are some good things going on in the film. The soundtrack was well done. Some of the computer generated graphics are very good, but others were just mediocre.
  • At last..... Forget the drivel that the Sci-fi Channel is churning out. This is real Sci-Fi. This is what should be shown on Sci-Fi. It is clear that the makers of this film were not trying to make another "creature of the week" or "murderer on the space station" film that dominates the low- budget arena these days. It shows a strongly developed universe and a depth that is currently uncommon. While not in the league of 2001, it puts to shame many of the standard blockbusters that we have been spoon-fed over the last few years. No, this is nothing like Primer, but it is original, thought provoking and very ambitious. I hope there are more films like this made.
  • I get the impression that either the director or producer has a few enemies.

    I love Sci-Fi films and I have been avoiding this film like the plague because of the reviews here. I was looking at you tube and found a remarkable "making of" documentary that chronicles the making of this film.

    This convinced me to finally rent this from Blockbuster. The film really isn't that bad. It is not the greatest film ever made, but it is made with care, attention and a real passion. If you see what goes into this film, then you may not hate it so much.

    I enjoyed it a lot, but feel is suffered from a lack of budget. I feel there criticisms here are perhaps too harsh... I mean there are some real crap films out there. This film is not in the worst categories.

    Please make more films like this, but please spend more money next time. The universe this film creates is vast and deep, and really begs the question about our place in the universe.

    Ignore the bad reviews, viewers and decide for yourself. It is definitely better than the new Flash Gordon TV series that Sci-Fi channel has churned out.
  • What's with these school boys who keep saying 'worse move ever made"? I enjoyd this film. It is intellectually stimulating. Sure the budget is small, but why is the a point of complaint? At least the film was made, and more power to the producers for having the balls to getting it made without a big budget. Anyone with 20 million plus dollars can make a film look good and impressive, heck, even Michael Bay looks good at this level. If you want to be intellectually stimulated, watch this movie. If you want to watch cars blow up and people look cool with guns and bikes, watch something else. This film is for intellectuals only, and if you don't get it, don't slag it. You have clearly missed the point.
  • Flak_Magnet10 September 2009
    OK, please believe me when I say that this is a terrible, terrible, sci-fi movie. Its done so poorly that much of the film plays out as unintentional surrealism and its absolutely a 100% waste of time. Awful, but somehow also deeply unfunny. I watched this as a double feature with "Recon 2020: The Caprini Massacre" and although "Battlespace" WAS an incredibly superior film, that's not saying much. The plot of "Battlespace" is so completely convoluted that its impossible to follow. The narration is cryptic, often nonsensical, seemingly endless, and thoroughly exhausting. Literally half the film is duplicative scenes of the female lead, who looks like Brian Bosworth, walking through the desert. The movie actually starts out pretty cool, but then nosedives into pooptown and somehow continues to deteriorate, minute by minute. Absolutely horrible and truly an Absurdist Endurance Test. Zero stars. ---|--- Reviews by Flak Magnet
  • Just finished watching this movie and after seeing the severe lack of good reviews, felt compelled to chime in with my personal review. I generally ignore ANY negative reviews I find for a movie, preferring instead to read whatever positive things people have to say. There's always SOMEONE whining about something in a movie, but perhaps they were in a cranky mood or (as another reviewer theorized) they had a personal gripe with the director or a cast member. However, if someone actually takes the time to write a POSITIVE review, I can be pretty sure that they genuinely liked it. :)

    Anyway, about this film... no, it's not perfect. But it's definitely enjoyable, entertaining; a good solid diversion. HIGHLY reminiscent of TITAN AE, this flick had an extremely enjoyable mythology as a back-story that is immediately revealed at the start of the film. The animation however is both a step up and a step down from that of TITAN AE. This animation is done is a much more realistic style vaguely similar to FINAL FANTASY: THE SPIRITS WITHIN but even more realistic (or perhaps a half step below the animation in IMMORTAL (AD VITAM), which is one of my favorite animated sci-fi flicks of recent years. Strangely, it seems maybe they were hampered by budgetary constraints (or maybe they didn't notice it?) because even though the STATIC images were extremely well-designed, the battle sequences seemed a bit disjointed or a bit out-of-kilter.

    The story also wasn't perfect but I wasn't looking for perfection, just a nice flick to watch during a boring evening. On that count, it definitely satisfied. Story-wise, it also reminded me a bit of LOST IN SPACE, as well as having a touch of CONTACT and STARGATE mixed in. Yep, as I said, this isn't a perfect film, but it has a moderately satisfying story, solid voice acting, and fairly enjoyable animation. Perfection? NO... but definitely a solid flick.
  • When I started to think of some of the strongly negative comments I've read compared with the powerful positive comments, I've also found on this film, I've come to think that this film might be the one that most divides viewers into "Loved it" or "Hated it" mentalities. Some see it for its brilliant visuals, stunning audio-visual combinations, and unique story telling. Others find it burdensome, overtly boring, and nonsensical. I, for one, found it to be one of the most refreshing and brilliant films I've ever seen. I think it is one of the best Sci Fi Films ever made. Although some have had negative comments, I think it fares very well and is completely original.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Let me break down this film for you...

    The first fifteen minutes are a showcase for terrible special effects. I'm not one to nitpick about special effects, but what you've got to understand is that if you can't afford good special effects, you shouldn't anchor your film around special effects. Starships fire blobs of color at each other, flaring into stock explosions, and careening past moons with polygon counts low enough to count with your fingers. You will have no idea what is happening. It will not make sense.

    The second act involves a woman walking in the desert. At this point you will be treated to drab scenery, and illogical, boring fight scenes. Nobody speaks. Nothing interesting happens. The protagonist's goals are unclear, and are not very compelling. This goes on for about 45 minutes.

    Then in a five-minute montage, she sneaks into an enemy base, straps herself to a rocket, tries to destroy a doomsday weapon, fails, and dies.

    None of this has any bearing on the eventual direction of the film.

    In the last twenty minutes, basically the chick's memories get transferred to her daughter, who goes into stasis for a very large number of years, learning the secrets of mankind. After this, we see the first, and last five-minute segment of human interaction in the film, then the new heroine is forced to choose whether she wants to become part of the material that causes the big bang or not. You know. Because when the universe is collapsing, you get to decide if you want to be a part of it.

    She chooses yes. BUT THE MEMORIES OF MANKIND SURVIVE IN A CAPSULE. Maybe we won't make the same mistakes again, huh? If you like movies with characters, then this is not a good movie for you. The lead roles could have been fulfilled nicely by any old wind-up toy capable of staying right-side-up while walking through sand. All of the story is told through painfully dull narration.

    The film tries to seem deep by throwing together a whole bunch of undeveloped science-fiction ideas. There are enough concepts here to fuel a number of films, but as it stands, it's bloated with completely irrelevant details. Two-thirds of this film could have been reduced to a 45-second montage. Instead, the narrator fills in a novella's worth of backstory without ever giving us a reason to care what happens to the characters.

    There are good ideas in here, but nobody watches films to see ideas ineptly explained. People watched films to be entertained. This film does not entertain.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I have no idea what these people were thinking when they made this film. No plot, very limited action, and what is with the 3rd person commentary throughout the film???? Instead of running around the planet to shoot on all of these locations, they should have spent some money on script writing and actors. What acting there was, was lousy. This was 90 minutes of my life I will never be able to get back. I should bill the director for the cost of renting this film. To the director and the writers of this film....please quit now. This film should have a tag on the front of it saying beware of boredom. The only good thing I can say about this film, is the computer generation. It's OK as generation is. This movie should never have a sequel....ever.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The film begins with a 30 minute explanation about the war, the human cyborgs, battles, history, and then dumps 2 actors into a gravel pit. They run around this gravel pit/desert area for about an hour shooting at each other. That's it. Must have cost about £10.00 to make, with change. Avoid.

    Marks out of ten: Acting -9 Sets 1 Costumes -9 Direction -50 Production 1 Titled intro 4

    I think to improve this film would be to: Lose the commentary. (Let the watcher decide what's going on). Remove some of the awful CGI. Add some techno rave music to it. They might just rescue it.......
  • sexytail15 December 2008
    I'd never heard of zero budget "auteur" Neil Johnson before seeing "Battlespace" on DVD at Hollywood Video. A few minutes into the movie I realize this isn't a bad thing. Like many straight to video Sci-Fi movies, this is a film dominated largely by overused bad special effects and a constant parade of pretentious sci-fi concepts that fail to create a story.

    Viewers are tortured with a religious sounding text introduction, then a spoken introduction followed by a narration by the main character's daughter. To me this seemed like a smoke screen to mask a film with militantly ugly visuals and zero character emphasis. Some people on here seem all too ready to take this film seriously and swallowed it's seemingly new age messages hook line and sinker. These favorable reviews must come from the same kind of people who can delude themselves into thinking that things like "Battlefield Earth" was a brilliant movie, or that Shasta is just as good as Coke.

    Those who were lured in by the cheesy cover art can look forward to lousy acting (in small doses, spaced with long blocks of people not talking), rotten computer animated effects (in extra large doses), and irritating talking computers. What you won't get is excitement, emotional stimulation, memorable dialogue, or a good story.

    "Battlespace" is impenetrable bull and the constant irritant of the narration proves it. Real science fiction, hell, real film-making, is about characters and their dialogue, not special effects and dull predictions. This is right down there with similar direct to video sci-fi like "Cl.One" and "Recon 2022". If the boredom of "Strange Horizons" and "Alien Visitor" is something you seek out, by all means, watch the crap out of this. If you enjoy good storytelling and hate fake lens flares, you're better off with a real movie.
  • Despite this movie is made by another mockbusting company, compared to many of those abominations is competently made although it has also a confusing plot.

    A woman mercenary ends up stranded in an unhospital planet and tries to survive; in the meanwhile she discovers there a weapon of mass destruction and she has only 48 hours left for avoiding the explosion. Will she succedd? See the movie.

    The cinematography at times looks very cheap, and the editing from time to time looks very jumpy and shoddy. The acting is ok at best, with the actress that plays the colonel (Eve Connelly) that at least tries with the material given. And it has also good sets from beginning to end. This is the reason why I score it a 4 despite its flaws. I can't see myself giving a 1 to a movie with ok acting and nice sets. It deserves at least few other points just for these elements.
  • While I understand that directors, foley artists and sound editors want to make scifi and military communications between ships sound authentic, most of the communication was so garbled and laced with special effects that you couldn't understand what actors and crew members were saying to each other.

    I'm not talking about background chatter, etc. I'm talking about communication that we are clearly supposed to hear and understand as an audience. If you have to keep rewinding a movie to try and understand what the cast is saying, it's a failure.

    I also agree with others that the acting was wooden. The Narration by the daughter and line delivery of her mother almost put me to sleep.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    From the looks of it, there was a surprising amount of money spent on Battlespace. It's loaded with special effects and even though it all looks like it was pirated from the software used for Babylon 5's CGI, the extent of it is fairly impressive. If the credits are to be believed, this thing was filmed in 4 separate U.S. states and 4 foreign countries. The soundtrack even includes music from an honest-to-goodness orchestra. You can't do that by charging it to a bunch of credit cards. Of course, the credits also list writer/director Neil Johnson and co-star Blake Edgerton over 20 additional times between them for jobs ranging from wardrobe to fight choreography to location manager, so there were some corners cut. Still and all, somebody got some cash from somewhere and poured it into this production. Of course, given how much this film sucks, that somebody would have been better off piling the cash in neat rows on their front lawn and setting it on fire.

    This thing is epically bad. I mean, it's the kind of bad filmmaking where you find yourself unable to conceive of the person responsible for it. I cannot form an image in my mind of writer/director Johnson as a normal, functional human being. I can't imagine him communicating with other people or doing his taxes or just being able to walk and chew gum at the same time. The closest I get is this fuzzy picture of a mentally ill homeless guy who sleeps on a bed made from the torn pages of terrible sci-fi novels and wanders the streets, muttering gibberish and occasionally accosting people he thinks are out to get him.

    First of all, Battlespace has enough back story for at least 6 different motion pictures. There's space wars and addictive virtual reality and cybernetic religion and time travel and mysterious aliens and memory wipes after unhappy love triangles and…well, it was awfully hard to keep my attention fixed on this tedious debacle so I may have missed even more stupid exposition about this, that and the other. I'd say that 90% of it was useless except if you removed the voice over narration that explained all this crap, what you'd be left with is a virtually silent movie about people in laser tag outfits running around the desert. Writer/director Johnson's elaborate and involved fictional histories are both the spit and bailing wire holding Battlespace up. Take it away and the film would collapse in on itself like a cinematic singularity.

    Secondly, there are some laughably awful sequences thrown up here. From a slo-motion fight scene like something out of The Six Million Dollar Man, but without the coolness of Lee Majors or the "nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh" sound effects, to a character hiding from a passing space ship by burying herself under an inch of sand, to trying to pass off what appears to be a nose hair trimmer as a laser gun, I was often left asking "Are they serious or is this meant to be some kind of parody?"

    The first 3/4ths of the story is a woman in the future named Iva (Eve Connelly) who is frozen in stasis but still narrates the memories of her mother (Eve Connelly) as the mother futilely tries to prevent their homeworld from being blown to bits. The last 1/4th is about Iva meeting a couple of comic relief characters who look like they came straight from losing a Star Wars costume contest, then being told she has to sacrifice herself to jump start another Big Bang. If you're wondering what those two seemingly independent plot lines have to do with each other, stop. The people who made Battlespace didn't worry about it and neither should you.

    And just to top things off, while Eve Connelly is reasonably attractive and gets a producer credit for this thing, she disregards the Producer Self-Nudity rule and remains fully clothed at all times. I can't blame any discerning actress for refusing to take it all off for this kind of trash but if Connelly had any discernment to begin with, what the *bleep* is she doing here in the first place? She'd have been better off waiting tables and going to auditions. Hell, she'd have been better off taking a welding class at the closest community college.

    I will say that Battlespace isn't like the sub-amateurish dreck flooding the marketplace where the work of ambitious halfwits is fraudulently foisted onto the public. It's not some C- film school project or what some desperate wannabes cobbled together over a few weekends with their indulgent friends and family. This is a professionally made movie. It was just made by professionals who are really, really, really, really bad at their chosen profession.

    This is a "must avoid" motion picture. If you even think about watching it, stick a fork in your thigh or something equally painful until the notion goes away.
An error has occured. Please try again.