Mission to Mars

The film, produced by Disney's Touchstone Pictures, was distributed by Buena Vista Pictures in North America, and Spyglass Entertainment in selected European territories.[5] Mission to Mars explores astronomy, extraterrestrial life, and space exploration.[6] Despite the fact that the film employed the use of numerous extensive special effects, it failed to garner any award nominations from mainstream motion picture organizations for its production merits. On March 14, 2000, the original film score was released by the Hollywood Records label. It was composed, orchestrated, and conducted by Italian musician Ennio Morricone.

The widescreen DVD edition of the film featuring audio commentary along with a visual effects analysis among other highlights was released in the United States on June 4, 2002.

Among mainstream critics in the U.S., the film received mainly negative reviews.[7] Rotten Tomatoes reported that 25% of 110 sampled critics gave the film a positive review, with an average score of 4.1/10 and the consensus, "Beauty only goes skin deep in this shallow but visually stunning film."[8] At Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average out of 100 to critics' reviews, the film received a score of 34 based on 36 reviews.[7] Furthermore, the film was nominated for a Golden Raspberry Award for Brian De Palma in the category of 'Worst Director', where he lost to Roger Christian for Battlefield Earth.[9] Audiences surveyed by CinemaScore gave the film a grade "C-" on scale of A to F.[10]

The film's reception among French-language critics was markedly different in positive fashion.[11] Film journal Cahiers du cinéma devoted several articles to De Palma and Mission to Mars at the time of its release, and placed it as #4 in their list of the 10 best films of 2000.[12] The film was screened out of competition at the 2000 Cannes Film Festival.[13]

Sinise and Robbins, a couple of awfully good actors, are asked to speak some awfully clunky lines. When Robbins says, "OK, we're ready to light this candle" before ignition, it sounds like a parody of astronaut lingo.

—Bob Graham, writing in the San Francisco Chronicle[14]

Mark Halverson, writing in Sacramento News & Review, said "My inner child felt cheated that the film leapt from an astronaut barbecue to Mars without so much as a rocket launch and that the best special effect (a sandstorm nod to The Mummy) was unveiled in the first 20 minutes." He added, "This visually alluring mess also includes gobs of cheesy dialogue and a hokey-looking alien."[15] Left unimpressed, Bob Graham in the San Francisco Chronicle, wrote that the film "meanders into space-mystico mumbo jumbo. We're supposed to share the characters' awe at the wonder of the universe, but more likely the audience will wonder whatever were the filmmakers thinking." Graham characterized Mission to Mars as "a very mixed bag: rhapsodic cinematography, several genuine shocks amid a suffocating air of gooeyness, impressive visual effects – even if some seem to exist in a vacuum – and an absolutely loony conclusion."[14] Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times, said the film "contains conversations that drag on beyond all reason. It is quiet when quiet is not called for. It contains actions that deny common sense. And for long stretches the characters speak nothing but boilerplate". He believed that "It misses too many of its marks. But it has extraordinary things in it. It's as if the director, the gifted Brian De Palma, rises to the occasions but the screenplay gives him nothing much to do in between them."[16] The film however, was not without its supporters. Michael Wilmington of the NY Daily News, exclaimed the film was "One of the most gorgeous science-fiction movies ever - and probably also one of the most realistic in detail and scientific extrapolation".[17] Richard Corliss of TIME commented that "This isn't 2001, by a long shot, but for 2000, it'll do nicely".[18] William Arnold of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, added to the positive sentiment by saying "Here and there an inspired shot makes the film come alive, and at least three of its sequences had me positioned well on the edge of my seat."[19]

Writing for The Austin Chronicle, Marc Savlov noted that the "Mission to Mars falls prey to an overwhelming sense of a man trying to please everyone all the time." He went further, that "De Palma has reached out to embrace a larger audience and seemingly sacrificed those traits that drew us to him in the first place: his singular vision, his clinical stylistics, and the palpable sense of dread that his best films engender."[20] In a mixed review, James Berardinelli writing for ReelViews, called the film "Ineptly directed, badly acted, and scripted with an eye towards stupidity and incoherence, the film is worthwhile only to those who are in desperate need of a nap. And, as is often the case when a big budget, high profile motion picture self-destructs, this one does so in spectacular fashion."[21] Describing a mixed opinion, J. Hoberman of The Village Voice said the film encompassed "a touchy-feely esprit that's predicated on equal parts Buck Rogers bravado and backyard barbecue, the whole burnt burger drenched in Ennio Morricone's elegiac western-style score".[22]

Unfortunately, the filmmakers' imagination flags in the closing sequences; the movie's final reel looks like a high-tech museum exhibit entitled '"2001: A Space Odyssey" for Dummies'.

—Margaret A. McGurk, writing for The Cincinnati Enquirer[23]

Elvis Mitchell of The New York Times, stated that the "visual design is spectacular, and the scenes on the Martian surface look so real that the picture could have been made on location. A holographic sequence detailing the evolutionary link between Earth and Mars is staggeringly well staged."[24] However, he ultimately came to the conclusion that there wasn't "an original moment in the entire movie, and the score is so repetitive that it could have been downloaded directly from EnnioMorricone.com."[24] Similarly, Todd McCarthy wrote in Variety that the film's "dramatic package that it arrives in is so flimsy, unconvincing and poorly wrought that it's impossible to be swept away by the illustrated version of creationism on offer." He did note "Pictorially, the film is smooth and pristine looking. De Palma and his frequent cinematographer Stephen H. Burum go for their patented swooping and twisting camera moves whenever possible, and there are some very nice ones onboard the recovery ship."[25] Lisa Schwarzbaum writing for Entertainment Weekly deduced that "Mission to Mars wants us to think about lofty things: the bravery of explorers, the ingenuity of our nation's space program, the humility required to comprehend the possibility that we earthlings are not the be-all and end-all of creation. But De Palma's film is too embarrassed, too jittery and self-conscious to hush up and pay attention."[26]

The film premiered in cinemas on March 10, 2000 in wide release throughout the U.S. During its opening weekend, the film opened in first place grossing $22,855,247 in business showing at 3,054 locations.[1] The film The Ninth Gate came in second place during that weekend grossing $6,622,518.[27] The film's revenue dropped by 50% in its second week of release, earning $11,385,709. For that particular weekend, the film fell to second place screening in 3,060 theaters. Erin Brockovich unseated Mission to Mars to open in first place grossing $28,138,465 in box office revenue.[28] During its final weekend in release, it opened in a distant 72nd place with $17,467 in revenue.[29] The film went on to top out domestically at $60,883,407 in total ticket sales through an 18-week theatrical run.[1] The film took in an additional $50,100,000 in business through international release to top out at a combined $110,983,407 in gross revenue.[1] The film ranked 41st at the box office for 2000.[30]