The descendants of the first ones to travel space are regarded as people of lesser worth. Half a millennium after the first ships launched in search of a better life, the Pilgrims still are discriminated. When the Kilrathi declare war against the human race, it is up to Christopher Blair, Pilgrim halfling, to help avoid complete annihilation. Since the Kilrathi managed to conquer a Navcom unit, they know the jump coordinates to Earth. And since the terran fleet is two hours further away from home than the Kilrathi fleet, the only hope of Mankind is to set trust in a Pilgrim, who can astrogate by feeling and does not need a Navcom unit - it's all genetics. Blair, a fighter pilot, joins an interstellar war to fight the evil Kilrathi who are trying to destroy the universe. Reading through the comments for this movie, I seem to see two types of people: those who played the games this movie is based from and those who haven't, but the opinions in both those groups could not vary more. I have played several of the Wing Commander games, but never to completion so I only have a passing familiarity with the characters and locations, but enough to know their names. I have heard how bad this movie is, but I thought I'd give it a shot for the sake of comparing it to the games.<br/><br/>Smart move. The movie has a cookie-cutter plot, that's for sure, but the sets and technology are marvelous. The idea that 600 years in the future we're tooling around the galaxy in hunks of junk that seem more like submarines than spacious, well-lit starships like on Star Trek is a completely different take on things, and something that the producers of the film should be proud of. People assume that with time comes progression in technology, and while that is true to a limited extent, in the last 100 years we have seen little change in the implements of war–tanks, planes, ships, submarines–aside from their overall firepower, safety, etc. Nearly 100 years ago in World War I we were flying biplanes and dogfighting over Europe. Now we're flying jet planes and dogfighting over Iraq. During the American Civil War, we used wooden ships to fire cannons at each other, now we use huge steel ships to fire rockets at each other from longer distances. The tool is the same, the methods are the same, only the quality has changed. People 50 years ago thought we'd be living on the moon by now and traveling in hover cars, so who are we to say what technology we'll develop in the next few hundred years? I have no trouble in my mind picturing our space battle fleets in the future consisting of cruisers, destroyers, and carriers, and firing torpedos with nuclear warheads on them with the same tactics we use now. Just because Star Trek has massive energy weapons doesn't mean we'll be able to develop them ourselves, maybe we'll be firing bullets like they did in Wing Commander. Maybe energy weapons DO exist for the humans in this movie (they do in the game, by the way), but the rigors of deep space travel prevent the ships from using them effectively. Submarines have limited weaponry and capabilities because they travel in places where we can't normally go and resupply them easily, particularly in times of war.<br/><br/>The acting itself was a little sketchy. Freddie Prinze, Jr. was better than I expected him to be, and Matthew Lillard was perfect for the over-the-top role of Maniac (not Maverick as some others in the comments have wrongly remembered). There was, of course, a huge plot hole concerning the cross worn around Blair's neck, but that was thanks to a scene that was cut from the final movie. The physics were a little off, but let's face it: how many sci-fi movies use real physics? I hear people complaining about this movie that sound doesn't travel through space so they couldn't use sonar, yet no one complains that you can hear the ships and weapons firing in Star Wars, right?<br/><br/>Don't go in expecting Star Wars, or even Top Gun in space. Go in with your mind open, and forget what you've seen in other sci-fi movies. Just because phasers, photon torpedos, and anti-matter driven ships exist elsewhere doesn't mean they exist here or even in real life. If you're a fan of war movies, then you might like this one, but don't be expecting Tora! Tora! Tora! either.<br/><br/>For those that rag on this movie constantly, just back off. It has some redeeming qualities, and while it isn't one of the best movies ever made, it has enough to make it interesting and worth a look on a Sunday afternoon. It doesn't take a genius to realize that this movie was never intended to be good. At least, I pray that it wasn't - that it was solely to make some money off a famous game, which, ironically, included a great part of movie clips. For a movie like this, no great actors are required, just some semi-known ones to pride the cover with their names. These roles fell upon "cutie boy" Freddie Prinze Jr., who seems to have but two expressions - surprised and concerned - and his friend Matthew Lillard.<br/><br/>As for the plot, is a plot really required for plot holes? It is supposed to be a space adventure with a bit of a love story and a bit of shooting and explosions, but this messy patchwork of illogical, pathetic scenes made me wonder if I wouldn't be better off cleaning my bathroom.<br/><br/>I gave this movie 2/10, only because I didn't fall asleep as I sat watching it in a wooden chair. Formulaic, humdrum and sometimes unintentionally laughable.
Gibmaehe replied
363 weeks ago