Reviews

If you enjoyed the Michael Crichton novel, then skip this movie. If you haven't read the novel, then read it -- it's excellent (unlike this movie). Simply put, this movie is in no way a substitute for what Michael Crichton wrote. Only reason to watch it is if you're totally bored and there are no other choices (including reading the novel), and so throwing away the time is the only available option! In that situation, you get what you deserve, a pure time killer with no redeeming attributes :(! (Alternatively, get hold of the Michael Crichton novel, it's excellent, an absolute page turner!)

The story setup is completely missing and so even though the main body contains some excitement (with marginal relationship to the Michael Crichton novel), the viewer is completely on the losing end of the stick. The characterization could be worse for a couple of the characters, but by and large, the original characterization (refer to the novel) is discarded. The largest miss being the film-manufactured "male love interest", Chris. The movie tries to create him as something special, but he actually isn't (read the excellent Michael Crichton novel)!

This movie is pure film-flam and deserves the virtually universal poor ratings it gets. However, the original story is excellent, read the Michael Crichton novel, it's a thoroughly enjoyable read!

I'm aware there are historical inaccuracies (not at all clear the spelling of the titular name is one of them - Boudicca and Boadicea are both recognized alternatives), but when did that become unusual for non-documentary? My impression is the purpose was to engage and entertain, and as far as I'm concerned, it accomplished that. Alex did a superb job with her character and the other Celtic characters also worked for me.

It's hard to know what to think regarding the Roman characterizations, but my impression from history is they may be reasonable, especially Claudius, the proconsul, and General Suetonius. Claudius probably wouldn't even have invaded Britain if he hadn't needed a feather in his cap to offset the negative impression due to his infirmities (installed by the military because they thought he'd be their puppet). Nero was a very dangerous megalomaniac. So, just how far off were the portrayals? Hard to judge, but given the limited screen time available to establish character, I'm not sure how much more could have been done.

If some find the magical elements unacceptable, that's a shame, but then, I'm an Excalibur fan! I don't think the film was trying to present true reality (as demonstrated by the opening and closing), but rather tell-a-story that delivers the essence -- a story that's exciting and at times heart rending, an adventure. I'd say it was largely Alex that pulled the rabbit out-of-the-hat with this, but the actors portraying the daughters, the druid, Dervalloc, and the other main characters all made worthy contributions.

In sum, a very engaging film that I'm adding to my collection. Already watched it several times since first seeing it a few weeks ago. Yes, I like and enjoy it -- led me to look more closely into the history and that's not a bad thing.

Note: Had trouble deciding between a score of 7 or 8, but went with 8 partially due to the excessive criticism I see in some of the reviews, partially in salute to the truly excellent job Alex did in bringing herself fully to her character, and partially because I find the film so unusually engaging -- again a nod to Alex. A definite keeper!

I picked up this DVD after reading a number of comments here. A lot of people really derided it, but there were a couple highly supportive positives, so I decided to check it out.

Yes, I suppose there are a couple reality question marks, but far fewer than the typical outrageous Hollywood film (and I happen to like Mission to Mars, Red Planet, Robinson Crusoe on Mars, Earth Vs The Flying Saucers, etc.). Stranded is a very good psychological study of a group of astronauts who crash land on Mars, have very limited resources, and no expectation of quick rescue.

The activity is driven by perfectly reasonable dialog (not sure if Hollywood remembers how to do this -- much harder than the typical action stuff). The acting is perfectly adequate to support the dialog and deliver the story. The strain associated with the circumstances is effectively communicated and the frictions here and there are entirely appropriate. As mentioned elsewhere, the cinematography is very well done and I had no problems at all with the closeups -- nice job.

I would suggest that anyone who doesn't appreciate the classic film "Lifeboat" by Alfred Hitchcock, definitely wouldn't like "Stranded". (Sure "Lifeboat" is clearly the more powerful of the two, but "Stranded" has a similar character.)