New Riverworld (2010) TV Mini-Series Review

I originally tried to write a traditional review for this new incarnation of “Riverworld”, but found it too difficult. The review just never came together, which happens when I find myself writing about a movie that I neither loved nor hated. “Riverworld” falls somewhere in there. As a result, I’ve written this non-traditional review. Please to enjoy.

WHAT IS IT: “Riverworld” is the second attempt by the SyFy Channel to create a TV series around the fantasy/science fiction novels by author Philip Jose Farmer, with the first one being 2003’s “Riverworld” (back when the channel was still the Sci Fi Channel). The 2010 version stars Tahmoh Penikett (of “Battlestar Galactica” and “Dollhouse” fame) and Laura Vandervoort (of “Smallville” fame). Penikett is Matt, a war journalist who is finally ready to settle down and Vandervoort is Jessie, a blonde, gorgeous tour guide. As Matt is popping the question to Jessie, a suicide bomber cocks block him, and it’s off to Riverworld for our heroes. “Riverworld” will air as a four-hour television event on the SyFy Channel April 18, 2010 as what is known in the industry as “a backdoor pilot” – that is, if the show proves to be a ratings winner, the network will consider an ongoing series.

WHAT THE HELL IS RIVERWORLD? Well that’s the question, isn’t it? Sort of like, “What the hell is going on on that island in ‘Lost’?” That’s the central mystery of the show – discovering the reasons behind the creation of Riverworld, which is, literally, a planet criss-cross with one giant, seemingly endless river. The premise is that, every person who has ever lived and died on Earth has somehow been reborn along the endless riverbanks of Riverworld. The purpose of their reincarnation is unknown, but it’s clear that otherworldly beings called Caretakers have designed the planet for some grand purpose. Food is supplied so no one starves, but everyone has reverted back to their prime fighting age – 30 or thereabouts (in the books I believe it’s around 25) – but there is no policing, so someone like, say, Hannibal the Cannibal could carry on his merry ways of dining on his fellow resurrectees if he so chooses. This has resulted in mini-kingdoms by various historic figures, something the show will, no doubt, dabble in often if a series would to happen. Time on Riverworld is also iffy and unpredictable, so you could die along with your best friend (or in the case of our hero Matt, your would-be fiancée) but she might end up on Riverworld years before you.

MATT’S JOURNEY: Being that Matt is our hero, we are introduced to Riverworld through his eyes. In the first two episodes, Matt finds himself the “chosen” champion of one of the Caretakers, who informs him of an ongoing civil war between the Caretakers, but does so in bits and pieces cause, well, what would be the point of just explaining the whole thing? Matt learns that in order to be reunited with Jessie, he must stop Sir Richard Burton (Peter Wingfield, of “Highlander” fame), who has allied himself with infamous Spanish Conquistador Pizarro (Bruce Ramsay). Burton, like Matt, has been brought into the confidence of another Caretaker (the top-billed Alan Cumming), who has assigned him his own mission. Along the way, Matt encounters other resurrectees: the female Samurai Tomoe (Jeananne Goossen), Samuel Clemens aka Mark Twain (Mark Deklin), and his old war cameraman, Simon (Arnold Pinnock), who helpfully informs Matt and us why there are no humans reborn on Riverworld past the early 21st century.

SO WHAT’S THE VERDICT? Interesting, but stale. The Brad Johnson 2003 version doesn’t fare all that badly against the new version, and if anything, the two-hour movie actually has much better pacing and action. 2010’s “Riverworld” looks like what it is – a moderately budgeted syndication TV show that probably blew most of its budget on all the lightning CGI. The sets are generic, as are the costumes, writing, and direction. You will never mistake the four-hour movie for anything other than four TV episodes stitched together.

So the question is, will it go to series on the SyFy Channel? Honestly, I can’t see that happening, as compared to the network’s other shows, “Riverworld” comes up lacking in pretty much every department. It could possibly survive as a syndicated action-adventure show, but I wouldn’t put money on it. The show doesn’t quite have enough “fun” to overcome its deficiencies ala shows like “Hercules” or “Xena”, or even the gratuitously sexy “Legend of the Seekers”. As our hero, Tahmoh Penikett has some nice one-liners and generally cuts a heroic figure, but he’s working uphill here.

Stuart Gillard (director) / Robert Hewitt Wolfe (screenplay), Philip Jose Farmer (books)
CAST: Tahmoh Penikett … Matt
Laura Vandervoort … Jessie
Mark Deklin … Sam
Peter Wingfield … Burton
Jeananne Goossen … Tomoe
Romina D’Ugo … Allegra
Kwesi Ameyaw … Youseff
Thea Gill … Female Caretaker
Alan Cumming … Judas Caretaker
Arnold Pinnock … Simon
Bruce Ramsay … Pizarro


Buy Riverworld on DVD


  • Dorothy

    This is terribly boring and confusing. If my DH wasn't watching it, I'd definitely have something else on.

  • Melissa

    Just watched the movie. One of the worse mini-series ever made by scifi channel. Nothing flowed. Wish I could get that 4 hrs back.

  • Tarcy

    Disappointing as hell! But I'm not sure TV is ready to do this series justice. There is too much story to pack into a movie or pilot that would get enough ratings to continue the story. Too bad. Here's hoping they get it right the next time

  • totiequeen

    it is just terrible.
    the script consists of platitudes stung together with pregnant pauses. you feel like something significant must be occurring but you are just wasting time. now part 2 is on do i waste my time or give up. fan of Wingfield, big, big Burton groupie but what the heck is going on?

    if Scify or whatever they are called these days, wants to make a series, go to your beginnings, good vs evil, invisible man, special unit 2, not to mention serenity are better suited to reprise.

  • John Salsbury

    Has anyone asociated with this travesty ever read any of the books? On the basis of this POS movie, it seems doubtful. I own and have read them all, numerous times, and there is little if anything in this stupid movie that connects to anything Mr. Farmer wrote in the Riverworld series. He must be spinning in his grave with the issue of this horrible thing.
    If ya can't do anything like the actual story, just leave it alone. For those of us with the books, reading them again is better than a movie anyway.

  • scotts13

    I'm sorry, isn't the point of remaking something to make it better? Apparently the inability of the Siffy channel to spell their own name portends the scriptwriting of what they produce, as well. Just awful; Farmers estate should get the Riverworld name taken off this mess – certainly there's little enough connection to the novels, and this will ruin sales of the books.

    • justjack

      I highly doubt it's wrecking book sales. In fact a check in the trades shows there's already a spike in sales of the series.

  • jitterbugperfume

    I actually think this was one of the stronger shows that SyFy has done in a while. Most things have been total crap since they changed the spelling of their name. The editing was poor, which made it confusing at times to piece together. That guy that played Samuel Clemens is a total hunk! That made it worthwhile for me.

  • justjack

    Jeebus, from the comments you'd think this was as bad as Dinocroc or something. Sure it didn't rock but it wasn't that bad! First, when are people going to clue-in that textual artifacts are NOT films-in-print and correspondingly, neither are films visual-books. If you want true to text, hire Peter Jackson, and then win six or seven lotteries because the guy won't work on an NBC (they own SyFy, the brainiacs who ditched Star Trek TOS, remember?) bullshit budget. Pinikett and Vandervoort are just fine and the writing, while not BSG or Caprica quality isn't horrible. YeahI kept falling asleep and had to rely on the DVR to get through it and I wanted more racy scenes with Laura, of course, but it held my mate's attention straight through and she's the kind of viewer that instantly falls asleep by the end of the opening credits. So there was something there. My only persistent annoyance trigger was the Samurai chick. Pick and accent and stick with it: she cycled through eastern European, to briefly pseudo Japanese (there wasn't a Japanese actress who could handle that role?! Come on…), to Italian, to Spanish, to a slip into straight Canadian English… Maybe it was the round-eye factor, I dunno. I read the books too and I just don't expect films, esp. films-for-teevee to be mimetic. Books are books and films are films. That's how it is.

    • Mitur Binesderti

      I was with you till you said, “…while not BSG or Caprica quality…” Caprica is HORRIBLE! BSG was a great sci-fi space opera for men who like big space ships and beautiful women while Caprica is a soap opera for women who like cute purses and hirsute men. The writing is terrible, they don't seem to comprehend what's interesting, e.g. robots and virtual gangster land, and whats boring, , e.g. drunken/crackhead grandmotherly women bemoaning their lives while luxuriating in their palatial digs.

      Caprica has horrible pacing, bad direction, terrible writing, illogical plot twists, ridiculous adherence to preposterous religious dogma, and overall sucks donkey balls… but not in a good way.

      • GabrielSilvers

        wow tomoe is really hot.. =D

  • Kate

    This is one of the best science fiction series books I have read. This Riverworld adaptation is horrible. The writing and directing and interpretation are third rate–more like a high school production. This is really a bad show. I could only watch it for about 45 minutes before I got completely bored. It's a shame because Farmer's work could be adapted to make a fantastic movie with the right writers and directors.

  • rebecca1973

    I did not get t at all people reborn over and over thats it