Jan 29, 2008 14:21
I watched this incredibly bad movie the other night. It had these extremely tall (7-8') aliens enslaving somewhat barbaric humans dressed in skins and strips of cloth. The aliens looked like a cross between Klingons and ex-80s rockers who had wanted to be Kiss. I'm watching this thing (because there was no other SF on) and I'm thinking, gee that head alien looks like John Travolta. And isn't that other one Forrest Whittaker (sp)? And then I finally see the title of the long, ungainly, badly acted movie: Battlefield Earth.
I never read the tome that L. Ron Hubbard wrote but had heard it was abominable, proving that he had always been much more successful inventing a religion rather than being a writer. (hmmm, maybe I should start a religion) But if the book was anything like the movie, yeegods. The only way they got Travolta and Whittaker was that they're scientologists (I presume Whittaker is, or must have been doing a big favor for someone). It stunk. It was bad, cheesy, overacted. Why on earth would either of those actors have done that to their careers? They must have been fairly secure in their fame (and Travolta already in his comeback phase) because it certainly didn't rocket the guy doing the main human into fame. Or did it?
No idea who he is or if he has done other stuff but his acting was better than the big names. I wouldn't have continued watching the film except I was curious as to how awful it truly was. Yech!