THE SENDER. Should science fiction also be action cinema?

This is how the production studio PM Entertainment thought about the genre, a studio I’ve been a fan of since childhood, although back then I wasn’t fully aware that such films were part of a broader phenomenon within genre cinema. I know this now and take pride in that knowledge, as familiarity with niche productions provides unique tools for evaluating titles deemed artistically great and/or unimaginably expensive to produce. Above all, it teaches humility—a quality many critics lack when it comes to cinema, especially regarding works that are not just niche but also cheap, trashy, or even targeted at emotionally immature audiences. Such descriptions are often applied to sci-fi cinema. The Sender wasn’t expensive, but it wasn’t exactly cheap either. Eight million dollars was enough for Richard Pepin to deliver nearly an hour and forty minutes of intense action, containing everything a pure entertainment film, one that doesn’t try to overreach, should include.

The first ten minutes of The Sender are not so much science fiction as dizzying action, during which we get a sense of what the plot will be about. There’s a mysterious plane wreck, the defiant, brutal, yet sentimental Commander Dallas (Michael Madsen), his daughter with a unique power enabling interstellar travel, and Colonel Rosewater, who can be considered the chief antagonist—a final showdown between him and the positive heroes is inevitable. Among them is the angelic alien envoy, who, unfortunately, is the least well-executed character. The ethereal blonde alien lacked a personality suited to such intense action, though she certainly tried. Somewhere in the lab is also the brains behind the entire operation and the positive but minor character Ron Fairfax, played by the once-popular and distinctive Robert Vaughn. It was a pleasure to see him again in this role. Overall, for a PM Entertainment production, the director managed to assemble a cast of well-known actors, some of whom have legendary films in their portfolios. This makes The Sender even more noteworthy—a title that has so far garnered 925 ratings on IMDb. It’s hard to say why the ratings are so low overall. Perhaps viewers expected better execution due to the cast. While the film is packed with car chases, plot twists, gunfights, and even aerial combat, the models and props too often feel flimsy and hastily made. Eight million dollars isn’t eighty, so corners were cut. Still, it doesn’t look like cheap CGI, unlike Sky Captain. You can see for yourself what creators managed to achieve with $70 million. Personally, I prefer the better-spent $8 million. Yes, CGI was used in The Sender, but sparingly enough that its low quality doesn’t distract too much. This includes the depiction of the aliens, the spaceship, and the final transfer of the so-called “gift,” which, by the way, is quite touching.

Perhaps viewers also had issues with the story itself. The characters, as is typical of this kind of film, are emotionally simple and easy to read. The dialogue is as straightforward as possible to keep the action flowing quickly. The acting reflects this approach to the script because The Sender isn’t about lofty analyses of human-alien relations. It’s about intense action and a clear message—profoundly humanistic—intended to teach humanity, ironically through an alien civilization, how to treat other species. This is a popular motif, and I’ll admit that sci-fi cinema has used it to the point of exhaustion. Filmmakers continuously imagine that humans are so flawed that advanced cosmic civilizations might take notice and send someone or something to teach us Earthlings that, in our current moral state, no “contact” could ever happen. Yet we have potential. There’s an unrealized goodness within us, hindered by the establishment. This is roughly one of the main motifs in sci-fi films, explored across various titles for decades. Recently, themes of transhumanism and artificial intelligence have joined this. The Sender doesn’t stray from these ideas. And considering it’s a low-budget film that was virtually unadvertised, even in obscure internet corners, the average audience rating feels understandable.

Returning to the question posed in the title of this review: Should sci-fi cinema also be action cinema? I’d answer that for niche, low-budget films, sometimes it should. Intense action often saves such films from being formulaic or downright boring. It effectively masks the shortcomings of the fantastical discourse, as Richard Pepin demonstrates in The Sender. On that note, I recommend you check out this film, which I stumbled upon on YouTube, though in dreadful quality—a combination of poor visuals and more, which you’ll have to judge for yourselves.