it's been hours since i returned from the much anticipated sci-fi opus `mission to mars' , and i can still detect the reek of moldy cheddar . 
why ? 
the movie is a shoddy cheesefest full of digital eye candy , stapled carelessly onto a flimsy screenplay which somehow manages to leapfrog the great promise of a space opera , instead shooting for the angle of a feel-good science fiction drama more akin to `2001 : a space odyssey' . 
i got the feeling that most of my fellow movie-going patrons were expecting another `armageddon' . 
but no , `mission to mars' certainly isn't one large action sequence about colossal disaster . 
this is a supposedly thoughtful , family-friendly space flick in which the apocalyptic excitement takes a back seat to visual elegance and uplifting drivel . 
you have been warned . 
of course , crafting a tightly claustrophobic space drama is not impossible ( see `apollo 13' for an excellent example ) , but few directors possess the skill and craftsmanship to pull it off without seriously scarring their reputation . 
brian de palma has enough directorial expertise and visual wizardry up his sleeve to pull it off . 
when he gets his hands on an intelligent , systematically practical script like `the untouchables' or `mission : impossible' , the director has the ability to create a sound technical achievement ( although his overly indulgent style becomes bothersome more than occasionally ) . 
of course , there's also the inexcusable string of crap that has carried his name ( including `snake eyes' and the notorious bomb `the bonfire of the vanities' ) . . . . 
all of which makes me want to call de palma the most talented hack in hollywood . 
that term may be too harsh , but if i were judging him solely on the perpetual waste of talent that is `mission to mars' , my choice of words would have been slightly less lenient . 
if i were gary sinise , i wouldn't touch de palma with a 10-foot pole . 
sinise is a wonderful , wonderful actor , but after appearing in `snake eyes' and this vomit-inducing sham , i'm sure he wouldn't want to risk the embarrassment of a third collaboration . 
the academy award-winner plays nasa astronaut jim mcconnell , a man who recently lost his wife ( kim delaney ) and is apparently psychologically unfit for an upcoming space shuttle mission to mars ( oops , forgot to mention the year - 2020 ) . 
after a barbecue get-together for the astronauts , we cut to luc goddard ( don cheadle ) and his team , who are already taking measurements and calculations on the red planet . 
suddenly , a towering formation of rocks and soil - probably best dubbed a `sand tornado' - appears and creates a whirlwind of suction . 
for some reason , the astronauts just stand there calmly to admire this , as if it were a lovely piece of art . 
the team is killed within seconds , expect for luc , who was able to send one final transmission and may still be alive . 
immediately , a second mission - consisting of astronauts mcconnell , husband and wife woody and terri blake ( tim robbins and connie nielsen ) and phil ohlmyer ( jerry o'connell ) - are dispatched to rescue luc and discover the mysterious secret of planet mars . 
let's put the `secret' on hold for now , and discuss the trip there . 
it is explained , whether scientifically accurate or not ( probably not ) , that a trip to mars takes roughly six months . 
i'm not sure why the quartet of screenwriters behind `m2m' didn't capitalize on this juicy opportunity of creating tension and claustrophobia . 
instead , we join the team during their final days aboard the ship . 
what happened during the five months prior to this ? 
did they just play cards and tell dirty jokes ? 
still , there are few nicely tense moments ( maybe the only in the movie ) during the time-frame involving a fuel leak . 
depalma's direction is quite good in these scenes , although the score by ennio morricone is largely inconsistent ( organ music in space ? 
c'mon ) . 
there's a few good , imaginative ideas in the landslide of cheese , a sad realization that causes me to sigh out loud . 
it's a colossal bummer that `mission to mars' is poorly assembled and laughably written , with a dubious and supremely silly finale that will only satisfy dedicated optimists . 
as mentioned before , anyone looking for some disaster-movie carnage is going to feel savagely disappointed . . . 
maybe even cheated . 
after the unbelievably hokey final shot ( with the words ? the end' somehow adding insult to injury ) , a few audience members made the effort to boo and hiss at the screen . 
others muttered obscenities , shaking their heads in disbelief while mumbling `jeez , that sucked . ' 
okay , it did suck . 
but you have to show the actors some sympathetic mercy . . . 
after all , they do pretty well . 
sinise is sincere and effective in many of his scenes , robbins and nielsen wholeheartedly convince as a loving nasa couple , and funnyman o'connell - well , he has a couple lines are actually amusing ( and intentionally so ) . 
the digital effects accompanying the sand tornado sequence are quite impressive . 
so , by golly , where did this `mission' go wrong ? 
looking back on the appalling experience , i would say in practically every conduit and crevasse it could have . 
while watching `mission to mars' , my suggestion would be to immediately abort , or better yet , don't even strap yourself in for lift-off .