Customer Reviews

The Andromeda Strain

5 star:		(27)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

When a man-made satellite crash-lands on Earth near a small desert town, the town residents are unaware that it carries a deadly virus from space and therefore take no precautions when handling the device. Within a frighteningly short period of time, all of the town's inhabitants are dead. All, that is, except for a crying baby and the town drunk. After being alerted to the situation, the U.S. government fears that the world's entire population may be in danger of extinction, so a crackerjack team of the nations top medical scientists is dispatched to a secret underground laboratory so that they can study the survivors and discover a cure or treatment for the alien virus before it's too late.

1971's THE ANDROMEDA STRAIN is one of the few science-fiction movies released in the immediate wake of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (1968) that has successfully retained high status in the SF genre, and that's because it is also one of the few SF films from that era that actually takes the genre seriously and challenges the viewer's intellect. Based on the novel by Michael Crichton--one of the first movies based on a work by this now highly sought writer & director--scripter Nelson Gidding and director Robert Wise have crafted a stimulating film that is as much a scientific detective story as it is a sci-fi thriller. Audience members are kept on the edge of their seats as the scientists race against time to prevent the alien microorganism from destroying life on earth, yet viewers are also clued-in enough to stimulate their gray matter and keep them speculating right along with the film's characters. Yes, 30+ years of hindsight might make the special FX and the film's depiction of technology seem a bit dusty and dated, but Gidding's plotting and Wise's creative and innovative directing keep the excitement and the earnestness intact. To some viewers, the ending might seem a bit contrived, but overall THE ANDROMEDA STRAIN represents brilliant SF filmmaking.

The acting is pretty good, too, and Wise was ingenious in casting generally low-profile actors as the scientists, which contributes to making the characters seem true-to-life. One of the most brilliant examples of this is the casting of brash, average-looking Kate Reid as the gritty Dr. Ruth Leavitt. As is common practice in Hollywood, Wise could have chosen a sexy starlet (think Raquel Welch in 1966's FANTASTIC VOYAGE or, more recently, Rene Russo in 1995's OUTBREAK) in hopes of increasing the box-office draw. But Wise knows that in order to sell the plausibility of the plot, the characters must also feel genuine, and the wise (no pun intended) casting of non-glamour actors like Reid in this type of role more accurately reflects the real world and therefore enhances the film's overall sense of realism.

The DVD release of THE ANDROMEDA STRAIN from Universal Studios belongs in the film collections of all serious science-fiction fans. Not only does it offer the film in anamorphic widescreen at its original aspect ratio of 2.35:1--which, by the way, allows viewers to awe over some of the brilliant multi-view compositions of certain shots that were aesthetically mutilated in pan-and-scan versions--but it also offers a fascinating and insightful feature commentary by director Wise and a featurette on writer Michael Crichton. Of course, there is the requisite theatrical trailer, too. And all this for a very reasonable retail price.

This is a 1971 film based on a 1969 book with the same name. Together, they established Michael Crichton's reputation as a talented writer of techno-thrillers. His success culminated in his immensely successful Jurassic Park.

The plot is excellent and reflects Crichton's education as a physician. A returning spacecraft has brought back to earth a deadly organism, and a race begins to understand how it functions before it spreads to the rest of humanity.

I found the "odd man hypothesis" particularly intriguing. If you needed someone to make a decision that might require them to die to save humanity from a deadly plague, what sort of person should you select? For this tale, Crichton manufactured scientific research claiming that your best choice was the "odd man"'an unmarried man. Personally, I suspect you'd have to be careful to select the right sort of man.

Coming along after the 1968 film, 2001: A Space Odyssey, this film helped to pioneer special effects in movies. In fact, the circular hallways of the underground laboratory in it reminded me of those in 2001. Here, however, the computers are impersonal and benign. In fact, to modern eyes, they seem distinctly primitive, displaying green text on terminals and printing to teletypes. You're getting a glimpse into the past. I worked with minicomputers in 1968, and that's how they looked. Don''t laugh. In thirty years or less, our computers will seem equally primitive.

--Michael W. Perry, editor of Eugenics and Other Evils : An Argument Against the Scientifically Organized State

THE ANDROMEDA STRAIN was the first of Michael Crichton's novels to be successfully screened. It's a tense, suspenseful look at what happens when an unknown virus returns to earth via one of our satellites and quickly decimates the entire population (except 2--a baby and a drunk) of a small town. The movie's focus is on finding out what the virus is and how it can kill so expeditiously.
Robert Wise who gave us THE HAUNTING and THE SOUND OF MUSIC uses some split screen techniques which work well, and keeps the movie dark and suspenseful. Although it has become somewhat dated in its technologies, Wise elicits good performances from the cast, especially Kate Reid, David Wayne and Paula Kelly. Arthur Hill is a little to stiff for my liking, and James Olson overplays some of his scenes.
Still a worthwhile film, and one that will scare the pants off of you in light of where we've come with germ warfare.

People should know that despite the comparable lack of name recognition director Robert Wise in responsible for landmark films like WEST SIDE STORY, THE HAUNTING,THE SOUND OF MUSIC,THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL and THE ANDROMEDA STRAIN as well as many popular movies most people count among their favorites. An aspect common to all of the above is the the palpable presence of a serious, absorbed and controling presenter. Wise films are serious business. There is nothing gratuitous or trivial in his work. One gets the feeling he is watching over we who watch him as he guides us through a story and his fatherly fingerprints are all over ANDROMEDA STRAIN. The science is believable and the effects frighteningly blunt. Entombed with the films desperate characters as they struggle blindly to solve the the impending disaster we are subjected to sterile matter of fact views and emotionless cuts to their unraveling efforts that will wipe us all out - or not. It's as if Wise were saying, "Things like this could happen and they could happen like this and all you could do about it would be to sit and watch." Rarely are science fiction themes supported by such restraint. Young viewers may be lost without the action factor but anyone who likes intelegent thrillers will not be disapointed. Robert Wise's movies are for mature audiences of all ages.

From the other reviewers you already know it is about some foreign piece of bio-hazard that lands in this small town in New Mexico killing everyone but two people. But the question is... why is this old move based on a story by Michael Crichton so good? There are many sci-fi movies.

We know why Jurassic Park was a hit. It was the first time someone thought of taking DNA and then re-created pre-historic dinosaurs - and then it was all done in fabulous beautiful color with special effects and helicopter shots and scenes in the rain. But this movie does not have that.

Andromeda Strain is in black and white about a small group of people and dominated mainly by Jeremy Stone (Arthur Hill) and Dr. Ruth Leavitt (Kate Reid) locked underground in this small laboratory trying to figure out what is this biohazard (exactly) and how can they control it. They use various gadgets including scanning electron microscopes etc. all dressed in white lab coats - the stereotypical scientists, never entertaininng people!!

My take on it is that it has a certain feel like the "Twilight Zone" where you really do not know if this investigation will succeed or suddenly go terribly wrong. It leaves you glued to the movie (TV). In fact it turns out that the "thing" is not from our world. It grows when it is radiated and they almost have a disaster blow up in their face. It is all just very suspenseful and well executed, i.e.: good acting and directing, with enough technical stuff to make it seem credible.

5 Stars.

Jack in Toronto

There have actually been very few science fiction movies that used any kind of science in their stories. But here they did, and it's a refreashing change from the useual sci-fi pictures that have little or nothing to do with science. The DVD Universal prepared for this movie is pretty exceptional. Full of still photos and behind the scenes footage, the interviews with Robert Wise, Doug Trumbull, Michael Crichton, and screenwriter Nelson Gidding are both informative and interesting to watch. They worked very hard on the movie and it still is a good picture today.

Based on the best selling novel by Michael Crichton, the 1971 film version of The Andromeda Strain, stands as a solid adaptation and one of the decade's top sci-fi films. Since, the 70's saw a surge for the genre, that's quite a feat.

When a small space probe falls to earth in a remote village of New Mexico, all but two of the town's population meet their death, as their blood turns to a powder. After two reconnaissance pilots are called on to investigate the tragedy, they also perish, a national state of emergency is declared. The survivors and the recovered space probe are transported to a five-story underground laboratory, and a team of scientists--biologist Jeremy Stone (Arthur Hill), microbiologist Ruth Leavitt (Kate Reid), blood chemistry authority Mark Hall (James Olson), and pathologist Charles Dutton (David Wayne)--is quickly brought to the lab to discover the nature of the deadly organism transported by the space probe. The special team learns that the small bioagent nicknamed the Adromeda Strain, has an alien origin, and the scientists must somehow find a cure before all of the human race becomes extinct.

As with many of Crichton's works, there is clearly a battle between man and science, as its basis here. Adapted by Nelson Gidding, who also worked with Wise on the first film version of The Haunting, captures that aspect perfectly. Wise makes the film with lots great touches. Even though, it was made for a fraction of what it costs to make today's "blockbusters", thanks to a strong cast and winning production values--it hasn't lost any of its drama or excitement.

Sadly, the DVD doesn't have an audio commentary from Wise, and after enjoying his tracks on The Day The Earth Stood Still and The Haunting, given the film's history--I was a bit disappointed. To compensate for that loss, there is a fairly decent "Making of The Andromeda Strain" feature. The "Portrait of Michael Crichton" outlines what makes him tick and where the movie fits in. The theatrical trailer tops off the bonus material.

The Andromeda Strain was made at a time when man was still making regular trips to the moon and their was a glutt of genre films at theaters. Fortunately, with Wise directing and a Gidding screenplay, the movie holds up. The effects were also pretty cool for that time. Recommended

"Andromeda Strain" is one of my favorite movies because it stands the test of time. Although made in the early 1970's, the technology shown,
including the computers still looks up-to-date, with the main difference being that today, the graphical displays of the data would be much more colorful. However, the techniques used to analyze the "Andromeda" organism would be the same ones used today. Of course, much of the suspense of the movie is created by a stuck sliver of paper, and that would not occur today, but 99% of what is shown (including the threat to mankind for terrestrial biological warfare or extra-terrestrial organisms) is still very relevant. In fact, the society in which the film takes place is more "future-oriented" than our current one because reference is made to the Lunar Receiving Laboratory in Houston which processed the samples returned from the Moon by the Apollo astronauts, and which has since been idled by the loss of the spirit of exploration in our current society, so the makers of the film were able to do more futuristic thinking and make a story and laboratory that looks contemporary even decades later. Finally, the actors, led by Arthur Hill (one of my favorites) are all "cool, intellectual" types, and although there are differences of opinion between them, they all submerge their egos to get their vital work done. It is sad that films of this type are not made any more. Get it and see what I mean!

The year is 1971. A satellite has fallen to Earth and landed in Piedmont, New Mexico, population 68. The military has dispatched two men to retrieve it, but upon arriving in Piedmont, they discover the town littered with corpses. The men only have time to briefly contact their superiors before succumbing themselves. The military quickly realizes that the satellite, Scoop 7, which was intended to collect samples of microscopic extraterrestrial life, has brought back something very dangerous indeed. Emergency protocols are implemented and four top biologists from around the nation are called upon to investigate the threat. The leader of the team is nobel laureate Dr. Jeremy Stone (Arthur Hill). His colleagues are Dr. Ruth Leavitt (Kate Reid), Dr. Charles Dutton (David Wayne), and Dr. Mark Hall (James Olson), a surgeon and the only MD on the team. Drs. Stone and Hall first must go to Piedmont to retrieve the satellite. Once there, they find two persons still living, a baby who cries constantly and an old drunkard. They proceed to a top secret underground compound code named "Wildfire". Here, they must identify the contagion and find a method of containing it before the catastrophe spreads beyond the little town of Piedmont.

"The Andromeda Strain" is based on Michael Crichton's novel of the same name. The story's premise, a lethal extraterrestrial microbe on the loose, certainly presents opportunity for an entertaining, suspenseful sci-fi thriller. And the film does have its moments. But I found "The Andromeda Strain" overwhelmed with credibility problems and suffering from some basic storytelling mistakes.

The film is poorly structured. The movie spends too much time demonstrating the features and protocols of the Wildfire compound, none of which have any relevance to the story with the exception of Wildfire's self-destruct mechanism. I felt like someone was trying to sell me the place. I also found the film's conclusion to be very unsatisfying. The plot essentially resolves itself by means of a deus ex machina.

An awful lot of "The Andromeda Strain" just doesn't make any sense. Science fiction doesn't have to entirely make sense, but I've always felt that it should be consistent within the parameters of the world the author has created. Part of the problem is that the movie takes place in 1971, contemporary to its production. If a story takes place on the other side of the galaxy or in the distant future, it is easier to write off nonsensical plot elements as artistic license. But "The Andromeda Strain" sets out to be believable. The filmmaker's go so far as to claim that the events are real at the film's start. So they should have given more attention to the film's credibility. I won't list all of film's breakdowns in logic. But here are a few. You will undoubtedly find more: Where would a satellite come by an extraterrestrial microorganism? Satellites don't actually go anywhere; they just orbit. Why do the scientists go through those time-consuming decontamination protocols? Any containment measures which protect the scientists from the organism will obviously also protect the organism from them. How could the organism's rate of replication and mutation spontaneously and exponentially increase? If the organism had behaved like that all along, the crisis would have been averted before it had begun.

It's possible that I would have been more tolerant of "The Andromeda Strain"'s faults if I had seen the film in the early 1970's. Audiences were probably impressed by the film's high-tech gadgetry at the time. But many other movies from the 1970's have stood the test of time. I think that "The Andromeda Strain" is more useful as an example of cinematic technique and popular culture from its time than it is a good or entertaining film.

As a kid I saw this movie but had no idea what it was - my parents did not want to leave us with babysitters so we just tagged along. The scene that got stuck in my head and remained way in the back was the one where somebody is climbing a ladder and "getting shocked" - as I saw it then and finally getting to to some device to turn it off.

In 1999, I rented every 1970 sci-fi flick to find out what movie had this scene. I saw some pretty interesting flicks like Omega Man, Westworld, and Zero Population Growth(which I thought was it!). It just happens that a movie buff I ran into told me what movie that scene belonged to.

Since then I saw it 9 times in 1999 and 3 more times in 2003, this now beats out Pricilla Queen Of The Desert.

This movie maximizes on Suspence and of course Michael Crichton's book. Now this is not some cheesy sci-fi about aliens invading or monsters. There is not much action, it's a slow-poker. What makes it so good is the way it engrosses you and keeps you tagging along all the way with it.

Some in a review says the acting is terrible. Now I am not much on detecting good and bad acting jobs (unless it's really fouled up) and I did not notice. However here is a note about the acting: In the DVD's "Making Of" feature the Director said he deliberately went for low-profile actors because he felt it would compromise the story. This makes sense because of it's documentary nature. (Like I said, it's a slow going movie that uses suspense for all it's worth).

Here you have 5 scientists who get pulled out of their lives, brought to the Wildfire installation to research a new virus or bug. They must go through rigorous sterilization procedures before they can begin their work. You get a realistic view of what goes on inside a scientist's laboratory and well, it's not all action and and focused on stud-men or sexy women love scenes etc (Although Kate Reid did turn me on, and Paulla Kella was hot). I am delighted that there were no love scenes in this film.

I really like the secret installation. This movie is not set in the future so it comes off as ahead of it's time in technology. It's not a stretch to imagine such an installation existing today with even more advanced equipment and procedures. The secret elevator, was sooo cool. It reminded me of when I read Independence Day because there was a secret elevator in that one but it was not in the movie. Who would expect a storage closet to be and elevator! I would have loved this as a kid.

Even thought this is a suspence-thriller sci-fi, the movie gets off a few elements of comedy but nothing that would detract from the seriousness. Kate Reid's "attitude-ee" character is mostly responsible for these, the most obvious one: "I MEAN IT STONE, YOU CAN TAKE YOUR BODY ANALYSER AND YOU CAN....{Thump! we see/hear. the door close on her face.}"

Great movie for drama, suspense, sci-fi gadetry and NO LOVE SCENES!!!!