The Dark Planet (1989) Online

The best way I can describe Corben's only publicly-released film is "Dr. Who in Hell... or on a Hellish planet with no dialogue"... I apologize if my review skips around, because this is not a very memorable film.

In Richard Corben's Art Book (vol 1) he warns the reader in the caption for his painting of the cover for this film's video box that his beautiful airbrushed art of the towering monstrosity over the heaps of dead bodies made his fans expect more from the film than it delivered.

It starts out nice, with Philip DeWalt's dark score brooding over an opening series of starfield and galaxy sequences. As it zooms in more and more in the galaxy, down to the planet, then down to the surface to what appears to be a tower (really the monster/demon on the cover box)... you think you can expect something really great.

You can TELL the monster is a puppet. It's obvious that the house (supposedly a space station) being demolished by it later on is a tiny model. Scenes of rivers and the dark planet's landscape are nothing more than stock footage of rivers and trees on Earth, in our plane of reality. This movie is very cheesy, so why do I watch it at least once every two weeks?

You get to see Corben's style in live-action form, that's why. Granted, it's nothing as enthralling and ass-kicking as "Den" (why isn't Hollywood cinematizing Den right now? the MPAA will censor it beyond recognition, anyway =/). Corben fans can see his work at claymation (very crude, but he animates the tentacled creatures lively anyway) in "Tower of Blood", as well as his sculptures he uses once in a while for his comics and graphic novels. There's also a blonde woman in "Relief Station" who looks strikingly like Katherine from the "Den" series... it probably is her, but I dunno. Also some of Corben's longtime collaborators appear... Simon Revelstroke (those dark glasses look good on him), Bruce Jones, Herb Arnold, et cetera.

Well, this movie is overall sloppy, ill-written, and has no direction in plot whatsoever. CAMP CAMP CAMP! But I'm not going to be angstily critical, I mean I think Corben did this just for fun. But why did he release this and not his other many films he made (according to Rich Corben's Art Book Vol 2)? Maybe the Dark Planet would look and feel better in comic form, as silence is easier in illustrated stories than in films. Despite the camp and lack of plot, Corben collectors should still try to get their hands on this film, just for curiosity purposes and perhaps for that "collector's high" many comic art perusers seem to go after :)

I'm a big Richard Corben fan and wanted to see THE DARK PLANET for some time now and I finally got hold of a cassette and I have to say that even though I'm happy to own the video, I have to admit that the whole thing doesn't make much sense. It's very long and repetitive, and it's mostly a collage of nonsensical scenes shot on video or super 8 stitched together haphazardly. I thought the whole thing was fascinating and sorta cool mainly because I was watching home movies of an artist I admire but it's not very successful as entertainment or even as a time killer. It's most definitely for Corben fans only.

I wonder what Corben would be able to do if he had enough money and resources to create one of his warped stories for film. With CGI being cheaper and more spectacular than ever these days, maybe Corben should try making another "home" movie.

The video's cover art was worth the price I paid for it.

I have stumbled on this video and been dazzled. I was very surprised to learn that the writer director was Heavy Metal illustrator Richard Corben. ... This is certainly not the same sort of entertainment as the comics.

The video has a distinct sensibility that has more in common with the films of Kenneth Anger, Nick Zedd, the Kuchar Brothers, etc. ... Maybe a Psychotronic creation myth.

Dark Planet is not for a general audience, and probably not especially of interest to Heavy Metal fans. More appealing to Cinephiles. The "special effects" may be distractingly amateurish for some viewers, but they are a delight if you are a fan of experimental narrative films. The movie succeeds in creating a mood and an environment, and the scale of the whole thing is a big part of that.

There is some great landscape cinematography, very flavorful and iconic, very effective and ambiguous closeups, a unique pace and timing and some beautiful lighting scenarios.

Honestly I have only watched the first 30 minutes so far. But that was enough for me to start digging and looking into it. I'm into it and looking forward to spending more time with it, preferably on a television rather than this computer.