Category: #WWMD

140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

I was surprised to read that this picture wasn’t successful critically or commercially, since I’ve always loved it & held it in high regard.

Spoiler-free Movie Review of Alice in Wonderland:

Lewis Carroll’s Alice stories are of endless fascination to audiences worldwide and so it is no surprise that they have been so often adapted for the stage and screen. Walt Disney of course adapted seemingly every known story in existence, and this very nearly became the first Disney animated feature after he had produced some Alice shorts in the late 1920’s. It was actually to have been a blend of live-action and animation, but rival studio Paramount rushed an Alice picture to market and Disney shelved the project. (It would not be the last time that the movie sat on the shelf…)

The movie took a long time to make and was Disney’s most expensive production to date. Reportedly it’s kind of a mess and an unsuccessful attempt to mix the work of multiple directors over a difficult adaptation. This is news to me, since I love the movie.

Disney’s 1951 Alice in Wonderland is my favorite version of the tale (yes, including the book). That doesn’t mean it’s the best, of course, just that it’s the one I grew up with and most closely associate with Lewis Carroll’s tale. In fact, it certainly isn’t the greatest version, as it’s more of an abridgement than an adaptation. I’m sure Carroll scholars detest Disney’s treatment of this most wonderful work, but honestly I’ve never had my hair blown back by his style of “literary nonsense” and all the hidden theological and political meanings in his writing.

So it isn’t an insightful understanding of the complexities of Carroll’s work. Guess we’ll just have to settle for it being a really fun kids movie. Maybe the picture only gets a corner of the nonsense, whimsy and absurdity of the source novel – that’s still a healthy dose for an animated movie in 1951.

At 75 minutes, it’s a short picture, typical of the time. It’s a pretty packed film for such a short runtime. Alice in Wonderland contains more songs than any other Disney picture, something you don’t really notice because many of them are very brief. The picture also includes a number of elements from the second Alice novel, Through the Looking-Glass, including one of the highlights of the picture, “The Walrus and the Carpenter”.

The film certainly was the product of many cooks, with three directors, ten directing animators, and thirteen screenwriters, not including the early draft by Aldous Huxley! Lots of stuff got left in draft form or cut, leading you to believe that the movie could have easily been twice as long. If it was a success, maybe they would have adapted the sequel.

Alas, the film fared uncharacteristically poorly for a classic Disney feature. It wasn’t a flop but if it made back its budget it could only be on paper when you consider the true costs of the lengthy development time. Unlike other Disney pictures which were re-released every 6 or 7 years, Alice wasn’t put out again by the company until 1974, although an abbreviated version of the film was shown on tv periodically. Unofficially the film was screened at universities in the late 1960’s for reasons that should be immediately apparent, causing the company to actually recall some of the existing prints from.

I love the picture – I’ve always loved it. Not all of the music works and Walt was right – Alice herself isn’t a very likeable character. But it’s the right amount of madcap fun for kids. The art direction is marvelous, making for a gorgeous film with wonderful voice acting. Possibly tame now, it’s pretty subversive for 1951, and I’ve never met anyone who didn’t enjoy it.

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Pass

The Representation Test Score: C (6 pts)

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

[schema type=”movie” url=”http://movies.disney.com/alice-in-wonderland-1951″ name=”Alice In Wonderland” description=”Join Alice as she chases the White Rabbit and journeys into a topsy-turvy world that gets “curiouser and curiouser” as her fantastical adventures unfold. Meet the Mad Hatter, March Hare, Tweedledee & Tweedledum, the Cheshire Cat, the Queen of Hearts and more unforgettable characters, all set against a backdrop of awe-inspiring splendor.” director=”Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson, Hamilton Luske” actor_1=”Kathryn Beaumont” ]

Main Cast	Kathryn Beaumont Alice (voice), Ed Wynn Mad Hatter (voice), Richard Haydn Caterpillar (voice), Sterling Holloway Cheshire Cat (voice)
Rating	G
Release Date	Thu 26 Jul 1951 UTC
Director	Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson
Genres	Animation, Adventure, Family, Fantasy, Musical
Plot	Alice stumbles into the world of Wonderland. Will she get home? Not if the Queen of Hearts has her way.
Poster
Runtime	75
Tagline	A world of wonders in One Great Picture
Writers	Lewis Carroll (as Lewis Carrol) (adaptation), Winston Hibler (story) …
Year	1951

140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

A masterful thriller from a time when family entertainment didn’t need to be cute or dumbed down. 30 years on it still plays extremely well.

Spoiler-free Movie Review of Cloak & Dagger:

The 30^th anniversary reviews keep coming. I think I’m going to need some serious convincing that 1984 was not the single best year in history for movies. Despite not having a movie with the words Star Wars in the title, it was an amazing run of features.

There was a Gary Cooper film named Cloak & Dagger in 1946, but the 1984 Henry Thomas/Dabney Coleman movie isn’t actually a remake of that picture, but rather a remake of the film noir The Window (1949). (The Window was itself based on a short story by Cornell Woolrich called “The Boy Who Cried Murder”. The concept of a witness to a murder who needs to be silenced sure appears in a lot of movies…)

If you saw the movie in theaters during the first few weeks of its run beginning July 13, 1984, you saw it as a double feature with The Last Starfighter. I don’t remember if that’s how I saw it, but I vividly remember seeing the picture in the theater and running home to augment my Dungeons & Dragons games with Jack Flack and a spy game. I don’t think it had occurred to me before this that you could have role-playing adventures that didn’t involve swords and monsters. I remember looking through the role-playing supplements at the local bookstore and in TSR ads for any spy modules. I know they had a game called Top Secret, though I never played it.

Cloak & Dagger came out at that great time when not only was it ok to be into D&D and video games – it was actually cool. Along with pictures like WarGames, Tron & The Last Starfighter, it was a golden age…

In the movie, Davey Osbourne (Thomas) is an 11-year old fan of video games and stories, always wishing real life could be as exciting as the adventures of his RPG hero, Jack Flack (Coleman). Jack doesn’t just star in the Cloak & Dagger RPG and Atari video game of the same name, he is Davey’s imaginary friend who follows our young hero around as the boy tries to inject some excitement in his life. Davey’s real life is mundane and unsatisfying – his mother has recently died and his father Hal (also Coleman) is loving but dull, trying to raise an introverted son while his job as a military air traffic controller requires him to be often absent. Davey spends much of his time at the local gameshop (The Gamekeeper, a real store – in California, not the film’s location of San Antonio) with his younger neighbor Kim (Christina Nigra) playing C&D (I forgot that’s how the kids referred to it in the movie – love it).

Everything changes, however, when gameshop owner and dungeon master Morris (William Forsythe) sends the kids on an errand downtown and Davey alone witnesses a murder. A dying man in a lab coat gives Davey a Cloak & Dagger videogame cartridge with instructions to bring it to the FBI and give them a code number. MacGuffin successfully passed, the mysterious man dies, thrusting Davey into a real-life Cloak & Dagger adventure as the killers try to silence him and retrieve the cartridge.

Just writing out the synopsis makes me want to go watch the movie again. It’s just so good! A near perfect adventure for kids, the film is surprisingly serious as a thriller. While perfect for a young audience, it works for just about anyone as screenwriter Tom Holland and director Richard Franklin crafted a taut tale that doesn’t flinch from violence and real peril for the main characters. This is the only film either made that is even remotely family-friendly as they were known for pictures like Psycho II.

The kids are in serious danger for much of the film and are exposed to very adult situations. That no one believes them makes it all the more compelling. This combination of an allegory about growing up and the tone perfect understanding of what it must be like to be a kid in this situation makes the movie not just entertaining for a young audience, but also I think an important step in graduating to more complex material. I’d argue that it is as effective as many of the famous novels in depicting a time in a young persons life when things begin to get scarily adult and would be good in teaching kids to come to terms with this transition.

Due to the video game crash of the mid-1980’s, there never was an actual Atari 5200 Cloak & Dagger video game cartridge produced. The game did appear in arcades (Atari repurposed a game in development, Agent X, as a movie tie-in) which is better than The Last Starfighter achieved. Despite the inability to play the game at home on your Atari, I’m sure I wasn’t the only one who re-enacted Jack Flack adventures with pencil & paper or running around the neighborhood pretending to be a spy.

Cloak & Dagger was one of my all-time favorite movies as a kid, and I’m amazed just how well it still works today as I revisit it. It was spellbinding to my daughter, watching it for the first time, and while I hope they never try to remake it (although I’m certain they will), I think that studying and trying to duplicate the spirit of this movie would be invaluable to modern filmmakers.

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Fail

The Representation Test Score: C (6 pts)

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

[schema type=”movie” name=”Cloak & Dagger” description=”A young boy, with a penchant for spy thrillers and video games, finds himself in the middle of real espionage when he’s relentlessly pursued by spies after he comes into possession of a video game cartridge containing top-secret government info.” director=”Richard Franklin” actor_1=”Henry Thomas” actor_2=”Dabney Coleman”]

Main Cast	Henry Thomas Davey Osborne, Dabney Coleman Jack Flack/Hal Osborne, Michael Murphy Rice, Christina Nigra Kim Gardener
Rating	PG
Release Date	Fri 10 Aug 1984 UTC
Director	Richard Franklin
Genres	Action, Family, Adventure, Crime, Thriller, Mystery
Plot	11-year-old Davey, whose mother is dead and whose father doesn’t spend nearly enough time with him….
Poster
Runtime	101
Tagline	Davey’s hero was imaginary . . . but the enemy agents were real!
Writers	Tom Holland (screen story), Tom Holland (screenplay)
Year	1984

140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

These 2 things may seem mutually exclusive but they’re not: 1) Green Lantern isn’t as bad as they say. 2) What’s wrong with it? Everything.

Spoiler-free Movie Review of Green Lantern:

I have never read a Green Lantern comic. He sometimes would show up in other DC Comics I read, but even then it was pretty rare. So my review is limited to the merits of the movie as a standalone and not on any adaptation criteria. So if you are a fan of the comic series or character, I will probably annoy you with the following statement: Green Lantern is not an interesting character. Maybe that’s just in this movie – it probably is. But most of the problems with the Green Lantern film don’t strike me as poor filmmaking…

I wanted to like this movie – I really did. And I don’t hate it. But it just really doesn’t work very well.

The problems start almost immediately – there’s something about a narrated introduction that fills me with dread. It means that you instantly are going to be told things that you are expected to remember – that isn’t a problem. No, the problem is that my silly meter is very often set off by a whole bunch of exposition filled with silly names and suspect logic. Sometimes this isn’t a deal-killer. Off the top of my head I can think of three great films with silly opening narration (written or spoken): Highlander, Terminator & Blade Runner. Sometimes you just have a bunch of info that you have to get across or the movie will be confusing. But the roll-out of Green Lantern had me rolling my eyes before the titles:

The immortals or Guardians on the planet Oa have harnessed the emerald energy of willpower. (The power of this story is based on a color?) They divided the universe into 3,600 sectors and sent out a bunch of green rings which would choose worthy peacekeepers, so naturally these oddly-numbered recruits would be known as the Green Lantern Corps. (Wait a minute, I thought the ring was the magic item? Now it’s a lantern? Did they send lanterns out to everyone, too? Why aren’t they called the Green Ring Corps?)

I know this sounds like a really nit-picky point, but I think this is part of the trouble I have with the character. There’s just too much going on. There’s a ring, but it needs to get charged by a lantern, which needs to get charged by a planet, which was created by weird looking aliens that are immortal, which is another way of saying they are stuck looking like that forever. It all takes place in space. And there are three thousand and six hundred of them. Oh, and the power doesn’t come from the lantern or the ring or the planet, it comes from willpower. Which is green. Not yellow, because that’s fear. Fear is more powerful but it corrupts. I don’t know what red does…

Parallax is the main villain. He is gross – really gross. All yellow and brown with an enormous forehead. In fact, there are a lot of ugly characters in this movie. And not just the villains. I consider this a bit of a deal-killer. Again, maybe I’m being petty and maybe long-time readers were thrilled to see Sinestro as pink with a widow’s peak and David Niven mustache. Or the fish-guy or Hector Hammond (also mustachioed…hmm…). But I think I speak for most of us when I say that watching the hero fight a nauseating brownish-yellow cloud and a sweaty guy with greasy hair and a bulbous forehead is entirely joyless.

I think we were all a little confused and wary when it was announced that the suit would be entirely digital. I’m going to say that again – the main character’s costume is CG. How could you possibly manage a budget when the costume has to be created for every frame that the title character appears in? They certainly didn’t skimp anywhere else, because the effects are top-shelf. Like the rest of the movie, they look weird and have questionable design, but they are unquestionably well done.

The action, too, is well done if not riveting. The actors themselves are fine. I don’t really even have a problem with Reynolds in the title role; he plays it too goofy, but again, I think that’s the filmmaker’s choice. And I’m not going to criticize anyone who had a hard time taking this seriously.

There’s a sameness to Green Lantern that is ultimately the most damning thing about it. The comic-book action is good but can leave you bored because of any number of reasons: story, design, characters. DC obviously swung for the fences with this one but really was undone because of the fundamental shakiness of the character. It may work very well on paper and I’ve even seen a fairly enjoyable animated movie, but for live action it’s just a little out there. That said, I think that the character would probably work much better in a Justice League movie. I’m just not sure that he’s strong enough to support his own franchise.

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Fail

The Representation Test Score: D (3 pts)

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

 

[schema type=”movie” name=”Green Lantern” description=”A test pilot is granted an alien ring that bestows him with otherworldly powers that inducts him into an intergalactic police force.” director=”Martin Campbell” actor_1=”Ryan Reynolds” actor_2=”Blake Lively” actor_3=”Peter Sarsgaard” actor_4=”Mark Strong” ]

Main Cast	Ryan Reynolds Hal Jordan/Green Lantern, Blake Lively Carol Ferris, Peter Sarsgaard Hector Hammond, Mark Strong Sinestro
Rating	PG-13
Release Date	Fri 17 Jun 2011 UTC
Director	Martin Campbell
Genres	Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi, Thriller
Plot	A test pilot is granted an alien ring that bestows him with otherworldly powers that inducts him into an intergalactic police force.
Poster
Runtime	114
Tagline	One of us… becomes one of them.
Writers	Greg Berlanti (screenplay) &, Michael Green (screenplay) …
Year	2011

140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

Wow. I don’t know if this is the best Marvel movie so far, but it’s definitely the most fun. An absolute blast, beginning to end. #iamgroot

Spoiler-free Movie Review of Guardians of the Galaxy:

I was very nervous about this one. I honestly had never even heard of the comic when the film was announced, and once it was described to me I thought that Marvel might be endangering their win streak. They’re feeling pretty good about themselves over there since all of their films have been big hits, and the announcement of a film version of Ant-Man and a movie starring a talking raccoon seemed like hubris. I no longer really have any doubt about their creative direction after they made this one into a smash hit. (Except for one thing: the practice of announcing sequels to films that haven’t been released yet – that needs to stop yesterday. It’s obnoxious and presumptuous.)

Once I started seeing artwork and stills and especially the trailers, though, I had another concern. Now that it was starting to look really cool, I worried that they’d screw it up. I kind of hated director James Gunn’s last picture, Super, so I was afraid this picture might try to be smarter or more clever than it really is. I worried needlessly.

Guardians of the Galaxy is a complete, unqualified success. Not just the most enjoyable of all of the movies from Marvel Studios, it was actually more fun to watch than anything I’ve seen in the theater in some time. The tone and the spirit of adventure are absolutely perfect.

The story is basically your standard Macguffin hunt with odd personalities that must learn to work together, blah, blah, blah. But the execution is flawless. Well, nearly flawless – I don’ t know what Glenn Close & Benicio del Toro were doing in this movie but they should have been asked to stop.

The acting talent in general, however, is amazing. It’s a seriously deep cast, from Chris Pratt in the star-making lead role down to Seth Green as the voice of…well, that would be telling…

All of the characters are original and a blast to get to know, with Groot & Rocket being my personal faves. I love that they got Vin Diesel to voice a character who only says “I am Groot”. And Bradley Cooper really loses himself in Rocket. But the live-action actors are very fine and particularly committed to working with dizzying amounts of makeup. Karen Gillan and Lee Pace are unrecognizable.

The design of the film is fantastic, which is not easy to achieve in a sci-fi movie. There’s a tendency to be either derivative or totally out there (in an attempt not to be derivative).  But there are a lot of truly unique designs in the picture, with Star-Lord’s mask and gadgets, and the Novas ships sticking out particularly in my mind. There are an unbelievable amount of CG effects, which is unavoidable, but they are of an extremely high quality.

This is one of those times where a movie is so enjoyable that I have difficulty talking too much about it – I just want to say “go see it and by the way can I come, too?”

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Pass

The Representation Test Score: C (5 pts)

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

 

[schema type=”movie” url=”http://marvel.com/guardians” name=”Guardians of the Galaxy” description=”In the far reaches of space, an American pilot named Peter Quill finds himself the object of a manhunt after stealing an orb coveted by the villainous Ronan.” director=”James Gunn” actor_1=”Chris Pratt” actor_2=”Vin Diesel” actor_3=”Bradley Cooper” actor_4=”Zoe Saldana” actor_5=”Dave Bautista” actor_6=”Lee Pace” ]

Main Cast	Chris Pratt Peter Quill, Vin Diesel Groot (voice), Bradley Cooper Rocket (voice), Zoe Saldana Gamora
Rating	PG-13
Release Date	Fri 01 Aug 2014 UTC
Director	James Gunn
Genres	Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi
Plot	In the far reaches of space, an American pilot named Peter Quill finds himself the object of a manhunt after stealing an orb coveted by the villainous Ronan.
Poster
Runtime	121
Tagline	You’re Welcome
Writers	James Gunn (written by) and, Nicole Perlman (written by) …
Year	2014

140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW

Forget the totally undeserved bad reviews, this is a solid tale for modern smartphone era kids with the tone of the great 1980’s adventures.

Spoiler-free Movie Review of Earth to Echo:

Yikes! The vitriol aimed at this cute little movie is a little hard to come to terms with. I didn’t read one single review of the movie, but I kind of didn’t need to. Every time I looked up images or quotes or cast info, all I kept seeing was “shameless rip-off”, “uninspired”, “derivative”, and far worse. You people get that this is a kids movie, yes?

Part of the nastiness I attribute to our overly critical natures and simple schadenfreude. The films provenance is troubled, as it was developed by Walt Disney Studios who delayed release several times before they finally sold it off to Relativity Media, who then did some additional shooting. When you hear that sort of thing your antenna goes up and you usually assume that a project was thrown out with the trash as the studio didn’t believe in it. In this case, it seems to be more a case of being orphaned when there was a change in studio leadership. This sort of thing happens all the time in development; an executive who championed your project gets shifted and the new exec sees no upside to continuing with the inherited project (if it fails it’s their fault, if it succeeds the former exec gets the credit). It just happens much less frequently once a film is ready for release. With that news, however, everyone smelled blood in the water and proceeded to write the movie off, sharpening their knives in preparation of getting to rip it apart.

Most of the anger, though, seems focused on the perception that this movie rips off E.T. and is unoriginal. Stop right there – E.T. isn’t one of the finest films ever made because of how original it is. It was far from the first film to tread on this territory. (Spielberg himself took three tries to make the movie: Close Encounters of the Third Kind and the unmade sorta-sequel Night Skies. Another lesser-known fact is that both E.T. & Close Encounters were both dogged by claims of plagiarism of an unproduced script by Satyajit Ray called The Alien that made the rounds in Hollywood for years.)

No, E.T. was brilliant and remains powerful because of its great heart, how amazing the relationships are, and how touching, magical and awe-inspiring it was. It’s also 32 years old. It’s a great story of friendship with a wonderful sense of adventure and kid empowerment, so why don’t modern kids deserve their own story?

Think about it; how meaningful is the movie to today’s kids? I know we use words like timeless when discussing classic films, but oftentimes we’re kidding ourselves. Just because a movie is wonderful does not make it timeless. E.T. is very dated, and that’s not a criticism any more than applying the term to a Cold War film. While the picture is exactly as great as it was 32 years ago, it was a long time ago and utilizes outdated technology for major plot points.

We love the movies of our childhood and sometimes put them on pedestals where we can’t see that they’ve gotten a bit worn, and then we can’t see why everyone doesn’t view the films today exactly the way we did then.

The filmmakers responsible for Earth to Echo have acknowledged a desire to create a movie with the adventurous spirit of those great 80’s movies and they have succeeded, while imbuing the film with a modern sensibility that will better resonate with its target audience of today’s kids. (And I reject the idea that modern films can simply update the old stories for kids who won’t appreciate older films. My daughter has seen E.T. – she loved it. And she loved this one. There’s nothing mutually exclusive about it – good, fun movies will be seen for what they are and will hold up if they are well-made. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to also have newer pictures that infuse the same spirit of wonder and adventure.)

The film centers around a group of best friends from a neighborhood in suburban Las Vegas that is being demolished to make way for a highway. (Amazingly I didn’t spot any Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy gags in here, which seems like a called shot.) As the families make their moving plans, phones around the diminishing neighborhood begin to act strangely, displaying seemingly nonsensical electronic noise. Of course our heroes, Tuck, Munch and Alex, detect a pattern in the signal and resolve to have one last adventure before they all are forced to go their separate ways. Over a crowded 24 hours, they’ll make 2 new friends – one out of this world – and get their famous last stand.

The film is shot in “found footage” format, a stylistic choice seemingly meant to resonate with a generation of smartphone users. It is largely an effective tool, although they clearly felt they needed to add some reshoots and additional non-shaky-cam footage, either to make the film more family-friendly or easier to follow, and it does make the look of the film sort of inconsistent. The basic conceit is that Tuck (played by rapper Brian “Astro” Bradley) aspires to YouTube fame and records his actions all the time through a combination of camcorders, smartphones and go-pro cams. Because of this, it makes sense that he’d get all of this footage, but it also means he and the other actors play to the camera a lot. Like any footage of people aware that they are being filmed, this is a little annoying at first, giving the film an amateurish feel, but through the course of the picture it leads to some great moments as real emotion is captured by characters who have let the omnipresence of the cameras lull them into forgetting that they are being filmed.

This premise of best friends being separated (a la Goonies) certainly is not new, but it is played out more effectively than most. There is some meaningful content here, and the picture doesn’t shy away from the emotional depth of these kids. Impressively, the found footage style really enhances the confessional feel of the moments when they let their guard down.

The desert and deserted setting factors hugely in the tone of the film as the neighborhood clears out, giving a ghost-like quality to the area and believabilty to the concept that these kids could wander around so freely at all hours.

I haven’t mentioned much about the effects of the movie as I don’t consider Earth to Echo to be a big FX picture. What it does it does well, but other than a highway chase FX scene from the trailer that was an add by the second studio, it’s not showy and I like that. In the most significant break from the movies it is accused of ripping off, the point of the picture isn’t really even about the alien – it’s a story of the friends.

I freely admit that I allowed all of the negative vibe around this movie lower my expectations dramatically before seeing Earth to Echo. For that, I thank all of the haters, because I enjoyed it possibly more as a result. It was a fun picture that surprisingly avoided too much sentimentality. It’s not cutesy and frankly doesn’t sugar coat the feelings of the teen leads or insist on everything being wrapped up nicely. Put aside the criticism that this is ripping off a 32 year old movie and go with a kid who will remind you of the simple fun of watching a story with a cute alien.

Poster:

Trailer:

Bechdel Test:

Fail

The Representation Test Score: C (5 pts)

(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)

[schema type=”movie” url=”http://callhimecho.com/” name=”Earth to Echo” description=”After receiving a bizarre series of encrypted messages, a group of kids embark on an adventure with an alien who needs their help.” director=”Dave Green” actor_1=”Teo Halm” actor_2=”Astro” actor_3=”Reese Hartwig” actor_4=”Ella Wahlestedt” ]

Main Cast	Teo Halm Alex, Astro (as Brian ‘Astro’ Bradley) Tuck, Reese Hartwig Munch, Ella Wahlestedt Emma
Rating	PG
Release Date	Wed 02 Jul 2014 UTC
Director	Dave Green
Genres	Adventure, Family, Sci-Fi
Plot	After receiving a bizarre series of encrypted messages, a group of kids embark on an adventure with an alien who needs their help.
Poster
Runtime	91
Tagline	No one will ever believe our story.
Writers	Henry Gayden (screenplay), Henry Gayden (story) …
Year	2014