Conference noted::sf

223.0. "Cocoon Reviews" by SCAS::LENNHOFF () Tue Jun 25 1985 18:13

    Mini-review:  Cocoon is a nice movie.  If you like nice/sweet movies,
see it.  If you're into science fiction and didn't like E.T. don't see it.

*****************SPOILERS**************************
    Macro-review:
    Cocoon is a movie which can profitably be used in the 
recent sf/fantasy discussions.  Is it fantasy or sf?  The nomenclature is 
science fictional (aliens, spaceships etc) but the feel is fantasy, as are
the effects (fountain of youth, etc).  I think Cocoon was not an sf movie
at all but rather a movie of character.  Well over half the time is spent
without the aliens or their artifacts being present (well maybe not if you 
include the pool).  The movie fails if you start thinking about this as 
you would an sf story (i.e., think about how the rejuvenation effect might
work, speculate about the survival value of the alien's glowing bodies, etc.)
   
    I liked Cocoon.  The performances of the actors were a pleasure to watch,
and rang true as well. I have many older (70+) relatives and I can see them
in the actors.  All aspects of the rejuvenation were well handled (warning:
if older people talking about sex upsets you, don't see this movie). 

        Likes and dislikes:

    I didn't like the way Jack Gilford as the man who refuses immortality was 
handled.  I feel such a reacation is justified, but felt HE never explained it
well.  I was pleased he was consistent to the end. 
     Does anyone have a guess as to why the young boat owner stayed behind?
He's going to be in a lot of trouble when the authorities catch up with him.
Oh well, he was the least likable character in the movie anyway.
    I like the performance of the young kid.  It was very brave of him to 
give up his chance at immortality and the stars that way.  I don't think I
could do that (and thus wouldn't be worthy.  Oh well).
    Lastly, when I stop feeling and start thinking, I have problems.  As a
reviewer for the Boston Phoenix pointed out, what kind of happy ending has 
the old folks leave their family behind so they (the old folks) can be forever
young and happy.  

                                          Larry
"Once every 10 or 11 thousand years, I let myself make a BIG mistake". 

I haven't seen the film yet, but I'm curious --- why do you feel that if
one didn't like E.T., one should stay away from this one? Just because
it's a "sweet" movie? I didn't like E.T., but its sweetness wasn't the
problem. I felt that it was inconsistent and manipulative.

--- jerry

  RE: .1

  'Sweetness' is indeed the reason.  As mentioned in the macro review, if
you go to this as an sf film and try to justify everything you won't have 
fun.  Go to this movie to meet nice people of different species.
If being "sweet" wasn't manipulative in ET, what was?

                                        Larry

	I saw it.  It *could* be classified as SF from the standpoint of the
impact of technology on peoples' lives.  I don't want to spoil what people
might find enoyable to learn about, so I won't go into too much detail.

	If we can call a "nuclear disaster" book or film SF (best example: 
Wilson Tucker's _The Long, Loud Silence_), then surely this qualifies.

	It _is_ enjoyable_, and it is a particularly odd film these days
in that there are *no* villans.  Even the people who do hard don't do
so out of evil intent.  How utterly refreshing!

Steve Kallis, Jr.