Magellan (2017) User Reviews (130)

great concept, lousy ending

[toddg-473-289818 · 5/10 · 4 December 2018]

MAGELLAN tells the story of an astronaut sent into deep space to try and find three sources of signals being sent to to Earth. Most of it focuses on the experiences of the lone astronaut, which suggests a loose comparison to 2009's MOON, which was a much better movie.

The cinematography here is good, and the movie reels in the audience as the astronaut finds each of the sources of the signals. However without spoiling the ending, it leaves the audience with no answers, only more questions, and an unsatisfactory feeling of being invested in the story.

Captain Who Makes Poor Choices

[phenomynouss · 6/10 · 4 February 2018]

This could've been, or probably would've been a spellbinding sci-fi movie amongst the likes of 2001 A Space Odyssey or Interstellar, and even has a lot of aspects of both those films in the visual designs and musical cues.

At some point in the near future, NASA detects three separate transmissions coming from the solar system which clearly indicate intelligent life. They send Captain Roger Nelson, aka Prince, aka Captain Makes-Poor-Choices to go to all three sources of the signals and find out what's making them and study them and analyze them and such. Why they choose just one man to go to 3 wildly distant locations (Eris, Triton, and Neptune) instead of mounting 3 parallel missions is utterly beyond me, especially as the threat of a rival Chinese mission lingers over them to the point of rushing the mission ahead on a 2.5 year timetable rather than an 8 year timetable.

This sort of thing doesn't bother me much or seem to affect the story much, but they end up coming back and making a significant, severe impact on the story because of Captain Makes-Poor-Choices living up to his name and making poor choices.

Straight off, either because this is a movie cliché or Captain Makes-Poor-Choices makes poor choices, once he finds the source of the first transmission, some manner of glass-or-metal-like sphere, he touches it and it affects him in some odd way. His only excuse for this monumentally stupid action is "I felt drawn to it". This whole fetish of his of touching the spheres becomes a major conflict point in the messages with NASA which he, frustratingly, just keeps doing.

Throughout much of the middle of the movie, we keep being slipped hints of plot points that end up either going nowhere or suddenly removed, as if a big chunk of the film were edited out of the final cut. Initially, the control guy Becker in a recorded transmission warns Prince that his wife tried to record a message to him, then deleted it, and that there was something wrong with her. I thought immediately that she had ended up losing her mind or committed suicide or was maybe hearing his thoughts via some alien technology. He tells Prince this moments before his first expedition, then says don't actually watch the transmission until after he's done.

After that, this "concerning" transmission is never mentioned again, and Prince's wife Abigail is back to normal, sending him normal loving transmissions every so often.

Additionally, the guy keeps touching the spheres and apparently seeing things or dreaming while in stasis, which is supposed to be impossible. It's unclear what the content of these dreams are, as we keep getting shots of space, and potentially flashbacks of him and his wife talking, and shots of what may be some manner of alien tree branch or just a fuzzy earth tree branch.

These dream things too end up amounting to absolutely nothing. A complete red herring.

There's a bit of needless drama at one point, with him slipping and falling on Triton and coming within a minute of missing the time window to escape, which serves no purpose, while the best chunks of the film involve him actually scouring the surfaces of the moons/planet, and analyzing the contents of the spheres and reporting them back to NASA.

At some point, it's revealed the Chinese parallel mission failed and all the Chinese astronauts were killed. At that point, for no apparent reason, the Chinese apparently attempt to hack the Magellan's AI system, Ferdinand, in an attempt to get Prince killed for no clear reason. They even make Ferdinand start speaking Chinese out of nowhere to really drive home how blatantly obvious the hack attempt is.

This too goes nowhere and is rather easily, if not entirely, resolved.

Finally, we reach the climax of the film, as the true intent and function of the spheres is apparently revealed as Captain Makes-Poor-Choices touches all three of them at once. There's a big expo-dump dialogue between him and Ferdinand which, despite being an expo-dump, is monumental and utterly exciting, with mindblowing implications beyond "we found life outside of earth in the form of amino acids and proto-dna". Think the United Federation of Planets.

Then, suddenly a fourth signal appears, emanating from the Oort Cloud, about 38 years away from the Magellan. Captain Makes-Poor-Choices, fully living up to his wholly deserved name and title, sends some last transmissions to NASA then takes all three spheres and orders Ferdinand to prepare the ship to go to the Oort Cloud.

Which means he will be in stasis for 38 years. Which means NASA and all of Earth, which has just discovered from him that there is life on other planets, is essentially told to get effed and left behind with nothing as Captain Makes-Poor-Choices decides he knows better than everyone else and he deserves to potentially make first contact or discover whatever else on his own, despite being the complete idiot who thought it was a good idea to touch a completely alien artifact that might've given him Space Cancer or turned him into a The Thing.

A lot of other reviewers seem to be complaining about the ending, how it just ends at this point, without going further. In my opinion, that isn't the main problem, as I've already said, as Captain Makes-Poor-Choices leaves the in-movie humanity with probably the greatest single legacy of any explorer: Never send just a single expedition, and never send them alone.

Low Buget Interstellar

[ksdouglas-23618 · 6/10 · 27 January 2018]

If you liked Interstellar, you'll like this movie. It's a B grade film but the budget is well spent on the right things. The acting isn't half bad as some reviewers have claimed. It's an above average B-Movie, a whole lot better than 90% B movies out there.

If you're looking for some big story with intricate characters and whatnot, you won't see it here, but it's something to kill a bored night with.

A squandered opportunity

[tadam-51245 · 3/10 · 30 October 2017]

I really wanted to like this movie, but I just couldn't. Forget the bargain-barrel sets and special effects; the story-line and plot devices just didn't hang together, and were derivative of half a dozen other -- much better -- science fiction movies (Contact, 2001, etc.). Neither NASA, nor any other nation's space agency, would send a lone astronaut on a multi-year deep space mission; there would be a crew of several people. The protocols he follows for taking samples are on par with a junior high school field trip to the beach. And that the lead character would so easily leave his wife behind while he was away on a 10-year mission is just not believable.

This movie could have been so much better than it was. But it wasn't.

What no one else mentioned...

[dreams888 · 1/10 · 2 January 2018]

Yes, I actually watched the whole thing...yes, it was slow in spots...but I had faith...which was completely misplaced.

No spoilers, here--there was no ending...why did they end the movie just as it was about to give us all an answer?! I took the time to write this review because I was so angry that I wasted my time watching this.

I'm tired of these "artsy" movies...if you are going to tell a story--don't stop in the dead middle of it!! Leave the "artsy" stuff for those who want to watch Sundance films.

I wish there were spoilers to give you

[StevesSeenThat · 1/10 · 7 February 2018]

Maybe if this were a half hour Twilight Zone episode then we could excuse the lack of an ending. This movie literally ends just as it is about to get interesting. None of the plot lines were resolved. After an hour and 45 minutes, that is inexcusable. I am not putting this movie down for having a low budget. I just wish they had resolved a few things by the end.

imaginitive and creative

[rickswami · 7/10 · 23 January 2018]

The first thing about this film that every viewer needs to realize is that it was done with an extremely low budget. No flash and glamour in this one. However, this is a thought provoking film. The screenplay was well written and Brandon Ray Olive gave a great performance as Commander Roger Nelson. I was so entranced as the story unfolded, that I did not care about the low budget props. Even though, i thought the set scenery for Mars was well done. This movie was able to thread many real scientific theories and suppositions, and tickled your imagination for the possibility of life beyond earth. An expedition that was curiosity driven, but yet demonstrated the very human element of a relationship being fractured by the extended voyage of a married astronaut who is struggling with the anguish of being separated from his spouse for an extended period of time. The voices of A.I., Ferdinand and Neil, were both well done. This movie will appeal to those who prefer a well written script over spectacular special effects. I'm sure if this movie had a 20 million dollar budget, it could compete with the Sci Fi movies produced by Hollywood. This movie is an example of metaphoric saying, "having nothing but lemons and making lemonade."

Commander Roger Nelson had no feelings..

[dochito · 3/10 · 18 September 2019]

...He didn't know how to be happy or sad, he had same face all along the movie....how come year after year he had such a nice haircut? what about waking up from stasis with a bit of beard? Who ironed his clothing? what did he eat? why did he touch the balls he wasn't supposed to? how come he climbed that crater in 3 minutes? how is possible that he had to carry that small dumb box to carry the ball? Didn't he think that he needed both hands to climb mountains? Did he ever hear about a backpack? he could had placed the ball inside and help himself while on the planet.... So many questions, I have zero answers to them. Best part is the end. Good bye Roger!

Frankly, I enjoyed it

[shelsie · 7/10 · 28 January 2018]

I am an actor and this is actually my first review on ImdB. I chose to write this review to encourage movies like this to continue to be produced. It was a great effort on a shoestring (~$80K) budget, and a great sci fi plot similar to Mission to Mars (one of my top 10) mixed with Contact and 2001. It held my attention and was entertaining.

Yes, there were some unanswered questions in the storyline, there were one or two plot holes, and the ending was perhaps setting itself up for a sequel, but that would be okay in my book. I found it interesting, well acted overall, and worth the time spent. Also, the cinematography was spectacular!

Meaningless.

[nightmoose · 1/10 · 11 February 2018]

This is one of the most boring and empty plotted movies that I have ever seen. No, I don't care that weren't explosions, CGI, or a massive budget. No, I don't care if there is supposed to be a sequel. This movie was painfully slow and without purpose, suspense, satisfaction, or emotion.

Story: A single astronaut flies to three parts of our solar system to land and pick up a small sphere at each. He touches them. He sees images (water, trees, his wife, a chess board). When he gets all three spheres together there's a burst of information. It's some form of communication. He's given directions to another part of the solar system. He heads off in that direction. End.

That's it. That's the entire 1hr and 45min.

The acting was uninspiring and the connection to the characters weak. All the "science" could have been written on a single cue card. This movie wasn't the slightest bit entertaining, moving, or thought provoking. I wasn't drawn into the movie at all. Some are trying to make comparisons with Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" but Magellan has none of the suspense, imagery, imagination, or complexity found in 2001.

You want decent, non-flashy fiction? Try: Pi (1998); Primer (2004); Moon (2009); Europa Report (2013); or Coherence (2013).

I blame Jar Jar Abrams.

[AB-Crawford · 8/10 · 1 January 2018]

Not all science fiction movies are able to include massive sets, unlimited special effect budgets, and high paid actors.

I had the feeling that this movie was somebody's passion project. It is a compelling story that someone wanted to make into a great movie. I commend the idea and the effort. Having said that, sure, most of the sets just scream low budget and the acting is hit and miss. Still, I thought it was a very good movie that kept me interested throughout.

I recommend this movie if you are into real science fiction - the writers/director were obviously fans of Arthur Clarke and Carl Sagan. If you are more interested in bright flashy scenes with massive sets and space battles with exotic aliens that rely on blaring soundtracks rather than intelligent dialogue, check out Disney's recently acquired space drama instead.

Impressive results from a minimalist approach

[mlambert890-1 · 17 February 2018]

Don't be dissuaded by some of the deeply negative reviews. It seems many either lack attention span or weren't focused as the narrative is absolutely logically consistent. As an example, one reviewer complained about the bit where it has been indicated the wife was distressed being a plot hole, but this was absolutely explained in the movie. Everything laid out was realistic, including the behavior by China (which, frankly, is a direct match for *how China behaves today*), the astronaut himself, and by the bureaucrats at the DoD.

It's a small story with a small cast but a large concept. A hand picked senior astronaut accepts the most important mission in human history, one that necessitates leaving a chunk of his old life behind even assuming he survives, in exchange for the opportunity to make the greatest discovery imaginable.

What he finds is far more Contact, than 2001 (don't be fooled by those lazy comparisons that are based purely on the superficial look and the "AI buddy" with no other similarities to be found), and we are left with a cliff hanger.

I'm hoping they make enough to give us a sequel!

Where is everybody?

[nogodnomasters · 6/10 · 14 September 2017]

Roger Nelson (Brandon Ray Olive) is selected to go on a deep space mission to check out signals that indicate intelligent life, similar to "2001..." and there is a computer issue too, but that is where the similarity ends. Roger leaves behind his wife (Whitney Palmer) on a multi-year mission of which he spends time in "stasis." Must must visit a moon of Saturn, a moon of Neptune and a remote planetoid. Seems to be traveling at about 4 times faster than what we are capable of doing now. And there were time delays in transmissions.

Fifty years after "2001..." and they haven't been to improve on the special effects. The ship flying in space looks like Clutch Cargo animation. The light on the remote planets was way too much and even with far less gravity, Roger had trouble climbing. It never showed the lower gravity, less light, or extreme cold. If you watch the subtitles "delicate" is spelled "delectate." Clearly not a Stanly Kubrick production.

The production amounts to a one man play. In spite of the so-so planet effects, it held my interest and could have a sequel, hopefully with better funding and a green screen.

The back story was omitted. Roger is the grandson of Anthony Nelson who was named for his friend Roger Healey...okay just kidding.

There is no science in this science fiction.

[freddyj8882002 · 1/10 · 13 January 2018]

The first thing that I did not understand about this lousy movie is why would America (N,A.S.A) send only one man on a mission this important. The Chinese sent a least 3 and we still don't know what happened to them. The Chinese it seems were just being used as bad guy's to create some kind of plot tension. This movie was cheap and made very little sense to the science fiction community. The ending was abrupt and made no sense. Some reviewers keep saying it's about a sequel, I think they just ran out of story and didn't know how to end it. There will not be a sequel to this rubbish. Watch it only if you have absolutely nothing else to do or watch.

Low budget and low scientific accuracy.

[judewallissingh · 5/10 · 11 August 2018]

Story line is good but everything you know about science is completely absent .

better than e-coli

[andymole-33993 · 2/10 · 6 July 2017]

I guess all the budget was spent on the model spaceship. A 10 year mission to discover possibly something that would change man kinds perception of his place in the universe forever...So they send one man in a spaceship with what looked like plasterboard walls and a main monitor from PC word screwed to the walls with Argos brackets. Oh and when he lands on a planet that looks like a quarry maybe the concrete rubble would give away that there is intelligent life there. I watched to the end because it was so bad it was good. I like the fact that someone reviewed it and hopes there is a sequel, Yes please do one maybe spend and extra £100 on props, I like the stool in the only room on the huge spacecraft, it looks like its from a hospital. And make sure matey who is in charge of the mission on earth is in it, his eyes wandering and twitching was one of the best bits. Did they have any food on the spacecraft this is bugging me, next time put a shelf in and a microwave. I gave it 2 out of 10 not 1 because it made me laugh, I have recommended it to others so they can enjoy a few hours of pointlessness. LIFE its out there somewhere, lets hope they try something a little more direct if they want a chat, glass balls may not be the way to go, maybe an email saying Hi I'm from space.

Yikes!

[GlenjaminX · 1/10 · 25 December 2017]

I love giving movies a chance. I'll be a little more discerning in the future.

This movie was plagued by something beyond a weak script, lifeless dialogue, poor acting, unrealistic scenes (that first meeting with the Secretary of Defense was silly), lousy camera work and minutes of tedium punctuated by seconds of boredom. That computer on the lander (Neil?) put me over the edge.

I was rooting for this movie and I feel like it turned around and kicked me in the groin. I'm hopeful that all involved will move on to their fallback careers.

Low budget but thoughtful.

[jdhb-768-61234 · 6/10 · 1 July 2017]

This is a low budget film with low budget sets and a low budget cast. There is little that many modern audiences would consider to be 'action' and very little in the way of special effects. However .......

A cross between 'Contact' and '2001' starts with mysterious messages from space. A lone astronaut, Commander Nelson, is dispatched to investigate, accompanied by a couple of talking computers, and the film is then devoted to Nelson's adventures and the relationship between him, his superiors and his wife who are all increasingly far away.

Nelson travels to the moons of Saturn, then those of Neptune and on to the dwarf planet, Eris. he makes earth shaking discoveries which test his obedience to his superiors. Separated by interplanetary distances and years, he and his wife struggle to keep their marriage alive.

Nelson is faced with making decisions about his mission and his marriage. Should he obey orders or take control of the mission himself ? What should he do about the wife who has stood by him through the years of separation ?

It's not a great film but it is an interesting one. Some thought-provoking issues are raised and, in the end, it leaves viewers to wonder what decisions they would make.

cheap and not scientific

[rshannon-58103 · 1/10 · 12 January 2020]

They could have painted the L brackets from home hardware, holding the the cheap computer displays on the walls black...i mean, come on...spend some pocket change! that aside, stcking a glove in liquid methane to get the "artifact" and then touching it once on board with his bare hand...did these people even try?

A diamond in the rough...

[ulisses_phoenix · 7/10 · 16 May 2020]

This screenplay has the makings of a great character-driven, straight science fiction story, however, the execution was distractingly below the story's potential. The audio and cinematography were cell-phone quality. There were some scenes early in the film that looked and sounded like they were taken on a camcorder using the built-in omni microphone -- every echo in the room came booming through! Other scenes were harshly lit with exposure and color balance issues. And the CGI -- it looked like a cartoon.

There were also problems with the characters. They didn't seem to behave as you'd expect they would based on how the characters were developed. Example: a stoic, disciplined astronaut with multiple arm tattoos? I guess that was foreshadowing for the poor decisions that character would make with life-long consequences. Also, there didn't seem to be any highly planned and structured protocols for the astronaut to follow as you would expect on an important space mission. In a fantasy/scifi you can get away with ad-hoc, goofy behaviors by the characters, but this film is a straight, reality-based science fiction story, so the characters need to act like real-life astronauts and scientists.

That aside, the plot was easy to follow without any gapping holes or inconsistencies. The acting performance by Brandon Ray Olive (who played the sole astronaut on the mission) was extraordinary. You don't expect this kind of quality acting in such a low-budget film. He got 90% of the screen time and held the project together.

This film is a great sales demo for the screenplay. Maybe a major studio will pick it up and put a real budget behind it. Tweak it a little -- add a few more astronauts, hone the character development and dialogue, hire more science consultants -- and it could be another "Marian" or "Interstellar."

Triggers: strobe effects; text >200 wpm

Half of a Film At Best

[jaigurudavid · 3/10 · 24 April 2018]

The plot is pretty much a mashup of "2001: A Space Odyssey" and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" with a bit of "Silent Running" thrown in. Nothing original. Thankfully the cast is small because everyone but the actor playing the lead is awful.

Proper SciFi Movie

[simon_atterbury · 8/10 · 18 June 2017]

I write very few reviews for IMDb but this film deserves a positive one. Firstly it was broadcast on SciFi channel so was expecting the usual "Space Lobster v Mega Puffin" script, direction and acting. How wrong I was.

This is a proper SciFi film with an intriguing plot, great script, excellent acting, great direction, above average (for the low budget) and intelligently realised special effects and a proper well written score. I would love to have seen what the director would have done with an additional $250,000 costume and set building budget.

As one reviewer has already stated, let's hope there is a sequel but this time with a bigger budget so that the director Rob York has less to hold him back.

interesting take of we being alone

[preston-66817 · 6/10 · 3 January 2018]

Sets were a bit amateur and the plot keeps you watching, but the end is very unbelievable. Do not think it would just be one pilot and he would not have the ability to go where he did. I wish it would have given some explanation of what was found and how profoundly it would have affected us all. Nice to see a low budget film be so dominated by just plot and not special effects. Perhaps an answer, even if it is just like the Jodie Foster movie Contact. At lease make some stab at what is really going on there....like telling us to keep on keeping on or some encouragement toward a better reality.

If only this was a 1960's Twilight Zone Episode...

[sheepdater · 2/10 · 2 May 2023]

I enjoy bad movies. I am rarely compelled to journal my thoughts on them. I do not get a kick out roasting low budget movies, but I am so disappointed by Magellan that I can't resist sharing my thoughts. I think the problem lies with the fact that I wanted so much to like this movie.

As stated above, this would have made a classic episode of The Twilight Zone back in 1964. We would think of the Major Nelson episode as representing that series instead of Willam Shatner looking at a gremlin on the wing of an airplane. Sadly, this was a movie made in 2017 and not 30 minute black and white piece of nostalgia.

Not every film has big budget sets, but that's no excuse for how poorly executed this film was even given it's obviously minimal budget. A suspension of disbelief aside, even if we throw out a basic understanding of high school physics, it's a bit hard to swallow a story this lacking in even kindergarten science in the 21st century.

In the abandoned rental hall that served as the astronauts's home on Earth, they couldn't even bother to completely scratch off the "for rent" sign on the kitchen window. On a frozen moon, he had to siphon some gas with a hose. Its shocking they didn't complete the scenario by Nelson sucking on the tube with his mouth to get the flow started. At least opening his face mask would remove some of the condensation visible on his helmet. How much more would it have cost to have a suit that pretended to be air tight?

For a giant spaceship with two rooms, perhaps it would have made sense to draw the cartoon ship a bit smaller. A smaller ship might even explain the reason only a single man was sent to complete potentially the biggest discovery in the history of mankind.

If you are a fan of the American version of The Office, you can't help but think of the Dinner Party episode when Major Nelson tells his artificial copilot to put his messages up on the "big" screen. It was akin to Micheal Scott showing off his 13 inch plasma TV.

They worried about Chinese hackers when the only visible equipment was one tiny Korean television, a laptop, and a 1950s glove box. His insistence on touching the alien artifacts reminds one of the Ren & Stimpy episode where he was warned never to touch the big shiny red button. (Didn't that take place on a spaceship too?) Once all three objects were collected, it was of concern which intimate body part he was going to rub on the next once both hands were full.

The whole wife story was pretty much superfluous considering how little thought Major Nelson gives her in the end. It's unclear if we are supposed to like the astronaut character or not. If he is indeed the man who always follows orders and loves his wife we are shown in the first half of the movie, then the AI isn't the only one in this movie to have his firmware corrupted.

Calling this movie Magellan is a bit of a stretch, the name denotes an epic journey of discovery. Maybe calling it Hudson after explorer Henry Hudson might be more apropos. He went on an epic journey and against orders and better judgement got his ship and crew marooned and frozen to death.

A Poor Man's Version of 2001: A Space Odyssey

[HRPuckinfutz · 3/10 · 5 February 2018]

Laughable from start to finish. This movies sparse set, boring and uninspired script, and horrendous special effects result in a poor man's version of 2001: A Space Odyssey. A very poor man's version.