Rating: 
Summary: Horrid
Review: The movie was absolutely mind-numbing torture. Not only was the dialogue contrived, but the movie lacked suspense (mostly I think due to the cheese organ music that almost put me to sleep...not even 50's sci-fi movies have music that bad). It also lacked intelligence, dimensionality, and well anything else you can think of going bad in a movie. I must say I was surprised that a movie could be so bad in this era, but then again, it *is* a mainstream movie. No one said Kubric owned the license on "serious" space movies but unlike the DMV, they should be more selective who they give licenses to.
Rating:
Summary: Worst movie.....EVER
Review: This movie lacked everything including a story, original special effects, good acting and the ability to keep me awake. Don't pay money for this, borrow it from a friend so you can have a good laugh too.
Rating: 
Summary: Unrealized Potential
Review: This is one of those movies that I found prfoundly disappointing because it had the potential to be one of the greatest of the American Sci-Fi films and it blew it.The movie is great in that there is an attempt to respect the laws of physics and mechanics. So, an astronaut is lost because he approaches a derilict spacecraft at too high a velocity to hold on. The others can't rescue him due to lack of fuel, and the lengthy startup procedure for the spaceship. I couldn't help thinking that in another movie there would have been 15 minutes of death-defying stunts and whizzing spaceships to rescue the astronaut. I also thought that the ship used to fly to Mars was very realistically designed. The problem with the movie is the requirement to basically watch a 15 minute home-movie before the action begins, more home-movies in the spacecraft headed to Mars, and finally an extra-terresrial at the end that looks like it belongs in a B grade Sci-Fi flick of the 50's. These shortcomings are enough to ruin what could have been a great movie.
Rating:
Summary: Bad Science/Fiction!
Review: Chardboard characters, hokey sci/fi elements and laughable dialogue are the only things this film has to offer. And the worse thing is the movie insults the viewer's intelligence. As with all De Palma films this one has a memorable suspense sequence, that is the tornado attack, and that's about as good as it gets, everything goes downhill from there, and that's only 20 min. into the film. With a pace that drags and a plot that we couldn't care less, the film becomes a 'waiting cycle' for the humans to meet the aliens. And not even the ending pays off, with an alien that looks so awful, that we begin to wonder who thought of this. Some amusing elements, such as De Palma's ode to '2001', by choosing the space suits similar to those of that Sci-Fi classic. The cast is also nothing short of boring, but it's not really their fault, they didn't have the right material. From a scale of 1-10 I give this film a 3!
Rating:
Summary: Horrible, Absolutely Horrible!
Review: The movie starts slow and never picks up speed. A total flop of a film with nothing to show for it's lame plot lines and hokey ending. I was completely disappointed with this one.
Rating:
Summary: Ed Wood is back!
Review: This movie is really one of a kind. You could almost think this is a tribute to ol' Ed Wood. All SF effects are terribly underdone, badly computer animated or totally cut out of the movie. (Can it be the same team that made the effects in Air force one?) The ending of the movie leaves you with a bad taste in your mouth..
Rating: 
Summary: A First Rate Science Fiction Story
Review: Ok I know there are those out there who said that this movie was dull and boring. Well I have to be honest and say I found it quite the opposite. I am of the opinion that Science Fiction fans should not rate Science Fiction movies. They just dont get it sometimes. Its hard to compete with the action Science Fiction of Star Wars or even my own beloved Star Trek. But I have put science fiction movies that make you think at the top of the list. Imagine going to the red planet and finding evidence that might lead to permanent human settlemant on Mars. Only to discover later that you have returned to the place where your species originated? What would you do, and how would you react. These are the questions faced by Gary Sinise and his crew. The ending is not, what some have told me, unbelievable. In fact it is very possible. If you want good special effects and feeling of realy flying to Mars then watch this movie if you havent already. If you want a movie that will move you, and actually make you think for about two hours and give you a new perspective on life then by all means watch it. The acting is good, the effects great, the music moving. And dont be suprised if you feel like a little Kubrick (who directed 2001: A Space Oddyssey) has been thrown into the mix. Oh and by the way, check your inhibitions at the door when you watch this movie. Take it for what it is and enjoy it.
Rating:
Summary: Quite tragic (with some good parts)
Review: Mission to Mars has the ability to both satisfy your craving for decent science fiction while at the same time have you go sprinting into the bathroom to throw up your dinner. I have never seen a film in my life that has so many genuinly good elements to it, while at the same time being so cliched and just down right terrible. The plot is simple enough: Don Cheadle and his gang of astronaut cronnies dissapear under mysterious circumstances on Mars. Tim Robbins and Gary Sinise are the men assigned to bravely go to their rescue. These two are the biggest walking cliches around. Frankly I'm stunned that two such good actors as Robbins and Sinise would take roles that are so obviously garbage. Sinise especially... He plays a man who is still mournful over the loss of his wife (like we care) and this trip into space is going to be his redemption. That's just lame. Along the way one of the crew members is forced to kill himself for the good of the other astronauts. This is typical American bravado that makes the audience laugh not feel roused by its heroic sentiment. The holes, the glaring flaws are so bad, so contrived you wonder if a two year old was responsible for writing this film after repeated viewings of Armageddon. Fortunately it's not all bad. The sci/fi aspect of the film about life on Mars is quite ingenious. The special effects are also to be commended. Unfortunately it is not enough to save this film from the Hollywood mire. I live for the day when Hollywood creates another space movie that is actually intelligent and not just full of bluster.
Rating:
Summary: Cosmically dismal
Review: The great cast and breathtaking cinematic vistas of the Mars surface are utterly wasted in this film, which fell so short of its potential that it's difficult to know where to begin when blasting it. For my part, I loathe movies that never seem to begin, and Mission to Mars is a particularly bad example of that. There are perhaps four plot points at best, each dragging from one to the next with a horrific plodding pace. In between the 20-minute gaps in the storyline--during which literally nothing important happens--there are scenes that, while full of suspense and danger, are nevertheless ridiculous. A spacecraft unprepared to deal with micrometeors is also unprepared for simple repairs? The jet packs don't contain that much more fuel? NASA's budget may have been slashed to ribbons in recent years, but I still would rather believe there are people working there competent enough to plan for one or two contingencies. The final half hour or so is of course the crowning failure of the film. It plays a lot like a child's drawing of the end of 2001: a poor imitation done by someone who just didn't get it. Holding hands with a simplistic CGI alien that probably took 10 minutes to throw together on a renderer (I kid you not: Jar Jar Binks puts this to shame), one expects the astronauts to start dancing in a circle singing "we all fall down"; such would be in keeping with the intellectual level of the story. The film's great "revelation" is nothing spectacular, and was telegraphed so clearly from the previews that the sense of anticlimax was palpable. Once that point was reached, the rest of the film up to the end was completely predictable and not even worth including in the final cut. Misson to Mars was a waste of a good cast and a top-rate cinematographer. I won't blame the director alone for this failure: The screenwriters deserve considerable credit for failing to develop a story of any kind. Unless you want to see the effects alone and are willing to skip over all else, avoid this flop at all costs.
Rating: 
Summary: Overall entertaining, but missing something.
Review: This movie starts out just like a 2010 version of Apollo 13 (Gary Sinise again), except the characters seem too modernized for the new millenium and are not written very well (characters are cliches). After all that, our brave crew leaves to rescue a stranded team on Mars. This is when the movie gets fun, with a lot of action scenes and some very tense moments. This movie is directed well, it definately pulls you in, unfortunately it spits you out at the end. In other words, the first 80% of the movie does a great job setting you up for the climax, but then we are let down by an unimaginative and unbelieveable, somewhat stupid ending. After it is all over, you may be sitting there unsatisfied, but most of the movie is still great, so it is overall pleasing. I believe this movie, however, will lose its flavor after repeated viewings. The DVD has some nice features, with an OK movie. Reccomended.
| 
