Nicole Jones-Dion
Stasis

Frankly, I just can't understand the rationale behind a film of this kind.

Who produces it? Why? For what purpose? Who is the target audience?

Science fiction b-movies, even before horror films, had defined references: a large community of fans interested in the genre paid attention to every production. There was a continuous sub-cultural exchange. Thus, it made sense to shoot low or very low-budget films, even with naive content, because there was a constant demand for material on one hand; on the other, there was the desire to take risks and venture into the world of filmmaking.

Consider that this type of sub-culture, 'sub-culture' in the sense of underground culture, in a country like the United States, constituted a very significant phenomenon. There were numerous so-called 'fanzines' by enthusiasts, which often hosted the early works of great genre authors.

But this film instead?

'Stasis' (2017) by Nicole Jones-Dion is evidently a b-grade production: it possesses all the characteristics.

Although the quality of the scenes themselves is not low, it is clear that the film's direction, as well as the actors' performances, are not first-rate.

Furthermore, the film probably required, because of its story, some special effects that are rendered in what you might call a 'poor' manner.

The truth is that in the world of cinema, unlike music, in some cases you nevertheless need a minimum budget to shoot a film.

You definitely need it to make a film like this.

Firstly, you need the right equipment; then you need technicians. Finally, a good number of actors and, if possible, at least a couple of 'quality' lead actors.

And yet, even without being faced with a major work, there must have been producers who invested in this film, and in particular, there are 'important' producers involved because the executive producer of the piece is the same as for a colossus like 'Cloud Atlas.'

And still, I can't understand why they wanted to carry out a project of this type.

Perhaps the original idea seemed good, but then the development dashed all expectations?

In truth, there really aren't any interesting points or moments throughout the duration of the film, which, with lighter tones, almost like a teen movie, reprises themes and ideas from other famous science fiction films. I think of 'Matrix,' but especially of Terry Gilliam's '12 Monkeys.'

In fact, I would say that we could easily say that the film deals with and in a similar way in the starting ideas and even in the development of the first actions, exactly the same concept as Gilliam's wonderful masterpiece film.

We are faced with an imaginary world that is undoubtedly fascinating because issues like time travel are at stake, with the aim of intervening to change the future and save humanity from complete deterioration.

Imagining at first a whole series of developments and temporal twists is inevitable, but the viewer is soon disillusioned when, in the end, even the characters themselves declare unexpectedly, and without any particular speculative process having occurred, that they consider these journeys useless to stop the inevitable.

The plot: it’s the year 2067, and the world has been completely destroyed by an unspecified nuclear war.

The global population is decimated, the living conditions of the surviving poor, and a kind of empire, aesthetically reminiscent of some 'Star Wars' solutions, reigns over all.

In practice, the leaders are military personnel who are always and only seen during consultations on the 'bridge' and control stations.

The film doesn't tell us more about them. Probably not even having the time because at a certain point, it tries to cover too much ground, leaving many points unresolved or unexplained.

But that's fine.

Let's try to judge the film, also considering this limitation.

A group of people organizes and rebels against the situation and discovers how to clandestinely use 'time holes' to leap into the past.

Of course, this kind of action is forbidden, but the rebels use it as an attempt to overturn the situation by sending their agents back in time to attempt unspecified disruptive operations.

The time travel happens in a way that partly recalls '12 Monkeys': travelers enter a state of 'stasis' and total unconsciousness, and through unspecified mechanisms, in certain points of the past, in this case, they literally take control as 'containers' of people who at that particular moment are losing their lives.

That's how the two protagonists, Lancer and Seattle, undertake time travel, finding themselves living in an era they consider ideal and which is not theirs, with the specific mission of interacting with the other rebels on-site to intervene and change the future.

Of course, everything is immediately complicated by the intervention of opposing forces, who send to the field - that is, back in time - one of their best and most ruthless agents. Moreover, equipped with new dangerous technology.

In all this scenario, another variable is added: sometimes it happens that one of the 'containers' belongs to people who indeed weren't meant to die and for this reason, can't find 'peace' and become a kind of ghosts.

This happens in the case of Seattle and her container Ava, who, initially unaware of everything happening to her, decides to rebel against the situation and becomes a kind of third wheel.

There are no particular plot twists or, if you are interested, intense action scenes.

There are no particular special effects and in any case, essential moments of pathos are missing.

Nevertheless, I watched it all from start to finish, hoping for a twist in the end, something that would allow saving the human race or at least the entire film. What a shame.

Perhaps what's missing in this case is not even so much the quality of the film but rather the absence of a broader context like the one I referred to at the beginning of the review. The charm of the science fiction that once existed is missing and today it is no longer there because tastes have changed, and trends have changed and perhaps because, in general, there is less capacity to dream about the future than there once was.