Unlimitedia Sick Product of a Sick System

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

MusicChat It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

nrice-07604 I'll start with the positives: The CGI that the creatures are made from (as well as the robots and the rest of the backgrounds) is amazing and looks super close-to-life. The array of scientists who intervene every now and then and discuss the previous events that just took place are all very well credited, and all very believable and intelligent people.However, the positives sadly end there. Aside from the creatures, the documentary really has nothing to do with the book. It has very wonky plot structure, and I was quite confused with what was going on at some points. The pacing is also off, as sometimes each scene seems like an eternity. The creatures are next. The creatures' habits, size, etc are all highly warped around. Some examples: .the documentary gets the height wrong. The documentary insists that the Gyrosprinter is about the size of an antelope, whereas the book says it's much larger. While an accurate size estimate isn't included, the creature's tongue alone is around 2 meters long...that's as long as the documentary version's entire body! Meaning that the book gyrosprinter is nearly triple the documentary version's size. .Body shape and habit changes. The Eosapiens' changes really bugged me. In the book they look primitive and savage, yet intelligent and wise. They regard the spaceship before them with an intense curiosity, never once showing any hostility to any of the expedition members. Alien Planet's Eosapiens are the exact opposite-the tiniest intrusion causes them to enter a fit of rage and destroy everything. Also, the Griveback is mentioned to be a filter feeder, sucking up tiny floating creatures, whereas the alien planet version absorbs water through its body to feed trees growing on its back. Ironically, the book version doesn't do anything to support the trees on its back, and they die within a week. .the noises. Sure, they were all cool, but grossly inaccurate. Most of the Darwin IV inhabitants (with the exception of the Bladderhorn) communicate with sonar, inaudible to human or robot ears. Yet every single inhabitant in Alien Planet communicates with some loud, eerie shriek. It sounds cool no doubt, but it's inaccurate.My third problem is the overuse of CGI. Kinda like the star wars prequel trilogy, they didn't make any effort to ue practical effects or props in any way-everything was computer-generated. Don't get me wrong, it all looks very believable, but it just makes the production team seem lazy and not willing to do anything special-which i'm sure they're not. The final nail in the coffin of this documentary is that the narrators and guest scientists treat the events of the documentary like they could really happen, and try to make it believable. Wayne Barlowe's original book was meant to be science fiction, and science fiction only-he never tried to convince people something like that could actually exist. Steven Hawking and others' interventions are all very believable, and all supported by real scientific facts, but when you take those and compare them to the animal they're trying to get you to believe exists, you just laugh and pass it off as stupid. I had the same problem with the documentary of The Future Is Wild. But you know what? There's one thing that's important-they TRIED. They made a conscious effort to make an obscure piece of literature into something bigger. They tried to take something already existing and remake it for a more modern audience. But that just poorly reflects when you look at all the problems with it. There really wasn't a demand for a cinematic version of Expedition, then, and there really isn't one now. It was a fantastic book, but not one you'd expect to be remade into a movie like a bajillion times.So that's my honest review of Alien Planet, a solid five stars. I wish I could rate it higher-I really do. But inconsistencies in the plot, creatures, etc etc etc really weigh it down. Its creators tried-they really did-and it's a shame all their effort formed this.

s c It seemed very interesting to me upon first glance, previous "documentaries" shown on Discovery had some scientific background...but this one seem to be mostly fictional...The whole time I was watching, I was hoping "so is there actually something factual we discovered that led them to make these surreal creatures? like they found some sort of tracks, or remains, etc(kind of like the shows they did on raptors- they had more proof... or are these just figments of imagination?" I was hoping for a better conclusion than "ooo, there's more possibilities to life in other planets than we first thought"...Watching it was interesting, but the fact that it was based on wild guesses and creations of mind without any actual findings is simply a turn off ... I believe there's extraterrestrial life too, but I didn't need to waste 2 hours to see a "documentary" to convince me, I could've just gone renting a Sci-fi movie if I wanted to be intrigued... The delivery of the story was good, the graphics were fantastic, but the realism, un-realism rather, is a major negative blow to the show...

Slopmaster4001 This show ranks right up there with "The Future Is Wild" in that it presents some very intriguing ideas with very nice CGI. But unlike TFIW they are showing us a not to distant future, one that may be possible with my life time. I also thought the comments from various scientist was a nice touch since these are the best people to comment on a future mission to another planet. And on a final note, the planet depicted in the show, Darwin IV was a very alien place while yet being similar to earth but seeing what life is like on that planet makes me appreciate our own little blue marble even more. Also, speaking of the name Darwin IV, I would have preferred a name from popular science fiction, possible Hal IV.

Movie Nuttball This is a very good program that aired on the Discovery Channel on 05/14/05 and I think that this program was very interesting and informal one with theories and it is narrated very good by John C. McGinley. It shows many incredible and bizarre alien-like animals that vary in size from the size of small frog to the size of a large skyscraper building! The CGI is excellent! James Garvin, Stephen Hawking, Jack Horner, Michio Kaku, George Lucas, and J. Craig Venter give their insights to possible like of other planets! In My opinion are are probably similar like these creature featured here plus much more! If you can watch this on TV and like the subject and like to see theories of what could be out there and to know their possible origins then check out this amazing feature today or buy it on DVD! Strongly Recommended!