Though clearly in the minority in this forum, I liked the movie.
Entertainment is successful when it stirs us (usually emotionally). Books do that by tickling our imagination and letting our minds fill in the blanks with whatever we choose. Cinematography stimulates us with (ever improving) visuals and still lets our minds fill in the blanks.
It seems that Riverworld did just that for me. The movie provided two hours of entertainment and stimulation that left me wanting to see more. Exactly what I want in a movie.
The movie ended with only part of the story having been told. Just like the Star Wars and LOTR movies, the story finds a natural break but doesn't complete. I doubt that a second movie will be made, but I'd like to see The SciFi Channel pick it up as an abbreviated series much like they did we The Dead Zone, Grey's Anatomy, etc. The real test will be if they can produce a series that earns a second season.
As far as the variance from the books, I don't care. That's inevitable.
Entertainment is successful when it stirs us (usually emotionally). Books do that by tickling our imagination and letting our minds fill in the blanks with whatever we choose. Cinematography stimulates us with (ever improving) visuals and still lets our minds fill in the blanks.
It seems that Riverworld did just that for me. The movie provided two hours of entertainment and stimulation that left me wanting to see more. Exactly what I want in a movie.
The movie ended with only part of the story having been told. Just like the Star Wars and LOTR movies, the story finds a natural break but doesn't complete. I doubt that a second movie will be made, but I'd like to see The SciFi Channel pick it up as an abbreviated series much like they did we The Dead Zone, Grey's Anatomy, etc. The real test will be if they can produce a series that earns a second season.
As far as the variance from the books, I don't care. That's inevitable.