Overall Recommendation:
4.0 stars
(2)
5 Stars:
50.0%
(1)
 
4 Stars:
0%
(0)
 
3 Stars:
50.0%
(1)
 
2 Stars:
0%
(0)
 
1 Stars:
0%
(0)
 
Premise:
3.5 stars
(2)
 
Story structure:
4.5 stars
(2)
 
Character:
3.5 stars
(2)
 
Dialogue:
3.5 stars
(2)
 
Emotion:
3.0 stars
(2)
 
 
1-2 of 2 reviews
Sort: Newest | Most helpful
3 out of 4 people found the following review helpful:

A new twist for an ancient tale

Overall Recommendation:
5 stars
 
Premise:
5 stars
 
Story structure:
5 stars
 
Character:
5 stars
 
Dialogue:
4 stars
 
Emotion:
4 stars
 
May 05, 2011
I think some reviewers are failing to emphasize the positive elements of this script. If it were ever made into a movie, Godstone would be worth watching for the eye candy factor alone. Domed cities--glowing green orbs--zombies in outer space--What's not to like? The script is not without depth either as it ponders the origin of life and challenges existing Judeo-Christian theology. (SPOILER ALERT!) Adam and Eve as a mixed-racial couple? That ought to piss off the fundamentalists. I've already reserved my tickets for the premiere. This is a modern "2001" for the ADHD generation. I LOVE it!
 
3 out of 8 people found the following review helpful:

Brave but Too Ambitious

Overall Recommendation:
3 stars
 
Premise:
2 stars
 
Story structure:
4 stars
 
Character:
2 stars
 
Dialogue:
3 stars
 
Emotion:
2 stars
 
May 03, 2011
To me this script has good things in it but some serious underlying faults. It is well presented without typos or spelling errors. The sci-fi/action/horror/revenant zombie/religion mix is ambitious but very visually presented. The characters are not very original or energetic and we don’t care about them enough. Perhaps they’re a little too pleasant and contemplate their various impending painful deaths with a casualness that is admirable rather than dramatic. (Look at the Culture novels of Iain M Banks to see how these alien situations can be handled with great dramatic force, originality and energy).

Often the spoken grammar is so good that the dialogue sounds staged. People don’t sound like this. There are too many double-entendres, for example when the Primus (Gribaldi, Italian name) tells the mortuary crewmember ‘I’ve got a bone to pick with you’, then later Garth goes off telling Sam ‘I also need a little time to myself’ (for what? I hardly dare imagine), and Sam seems to feel the same too because her only response is ‘Oh.’ The new beginning reads like an addition for the Director’s Cut. It doesn’t tell us anything we don’t know from dialogue in earlier versions. And it introduces new problems. Since we are specifically told that we immediately recognise Sam dressed as a web-handed Arcadian, why doesn’t the Squadron Leader do so when he scrutinizes her?

The waking-from-hibernation scenes are well done but derivatively recall Alien/Aliens (just as the Creator ball later recalls Sphere and Star Trek V). Events too often happen unreasonably. Why does the ship crash instead of going into a safe orbit, as any sensible ship would do? In Alien there’s a good reason for the crew to go down, they’re responding to a distress call, they have in fact no choice. In Aliens they’re going for greed. Once they’re down, why should the ice collapse then rather than when the ship crashed? It doesn’t carry the story forward. And if the Creator’s tool has summoned them, as it claims, why has it then stopped them, or failed to aid them? On a minor note, why are we twice given the motif of a brilliant meteor? Is this the Star of Bethlehem and is the ship guided by it in some way?

The Garden of Eden sequence at the end is very dicey. Sam is no innocent to have been, through Garth’s love, introduced to evil. When she eats the apple, as I assume she does according to precedent, what are the consequences? She and Garth are chucked out naked into the -15C Arctic wilderness? I didn’t understand this at all.

But all in all, I did think this a brave effort. Some of the ‘whys’ from earlier versions were cleared up, for example Garth’s drowned brother and Garth’s obvious all-important but-unasked question ‘How did you know about that?’. The story overall just needs to decide, in my opinion, what it is about – science fiction movie homage, religious debate, revenant movie (fitted uncomfortably with the Christian resurrection ethos I thought), or what?

Most of all, the clarity of the writing is impressive, and that’s the enduring image I carry away. Thank you.
 

Reviews for