Kill Command director Steve Gomez has a background in visual effects and it shows. Here is a great example of how to use CG to make a low budget movie look like a big budget movie. Gomez presents a narrow but sharply focused view of near-future tech, follwing a squad of soldiers on a training mission. Their uniforms, their weapons, their hardware, their corporate liason with her cybernetic implants. It’s all so deliciously Deus Exxy even if it doesn’t have fancy cityscapes. You don’t need the sprawl of Blade Runner to do smart cyberpunk.
I just watched this. It’s okay. It’s a competent movie. It reminds me a little bit of Predator, except it doesn’t have the charm. And it certainly doesn’t have the inflection that’s in Predator after Arnold falls down the waterfall into the lake. I loved how in Predator the movie changes at that point. Kill: Command does not change.
Yeah, Kill Command definitely isn’t a Schwarzenegger action movie. It doesn’t “change” in the sense that it doesn’t have an action hero who beats the villain with mud ex machina! Other than that, I’m not sure what you mean by “it doesn’t change”. Off the top of my head, I can think of a half dozen ways it changes.
from the forest into the bunker to the test site
the revealed motivation of Harbinger
who lives and who dies
how the team feels about Vanessa Kirby’s character
the evolving tactics of the drones
what we know about Vanessa Kirby’s character
By “it doesn’t change”, I mean none of those things you listed changes the fundamental flow of the movie that it’s still machines hunting the team. Nothing changes that makes me care more or less about the team.
I guess I was just hoping for … something, anything unexpected to happen. The flow of the movie was fine, but it was just very safe, trodden ground we’ve seen before.
Agreeing with the naysayers. Watched this after Green Room (which is a really great low budget movie). Big mistake. The problem with this is the lacking of bells and whistles to the main plot, i.e. killer robot. None of the characters are really worth caring about. No big question asked about AI. So no matter how exciting the main plot is (which really is not all that exciting…) the suspense never goes beyond who-will-survive-to-the-end.
For low budget sci-fi with a bit more heart I prefer that Halo 4 promo Forward Unto Dawn than this.
Overall - I liked it. I don’t mind the occasional straight forward A->B film. The characters were satisfying and believable, and after the first twenty minutes, the dialog got better. It was an enjoyable quick story, simply told, with just enough momentum to keep it going.
I enjoyed the small hints at world building throughout. Those little touches show some though and care, and give the movie some space missing by being such a low budget, location constrained affair. For example, the ramifications of Mills being “cured” by a company and then, I assume, working for them as part of a debt. That’s a cool little tidbit to throw in there, but it doesn’t feel like “Hey this is neat, it’ll make it seem like we thought this thing through”. Rather, those small details feel like intrinsic parts of building out the characters, and helping you understand the non-redshirts.
i just watched this , it is now my second favorite movie of all time. first is ‘‘the thing’’… this time, instead of stranded on ice with a violent alien pest runnin rampant, these soldiers are stranded on a far away island in a death trap full of killer robots who analyze their tactics and use them against them. i guess in this situation maybe a location constrained affair would have a nice effect? i mean think about it, you’re constantly reminded of the fact that there is nowhere to run or hide,while at the same time being hunted by ruthless blood thirsty killing machines. in my opinion i loved this movie and i definitely recommend it, 10 out of 10
