You might’ve heard of 2006’s “A for Andromeda,” which sees Tom Hardy (then only four years out from making an early impression in

“Star Trek: Nemesis”) and Kelly Reilly (herself similarly far away from exploding in fame thanks to “Yellowstone”) playing its leads (along

with a pitch-perfect Charlie Cox). It’s understandable if you haven’t, though, as this BBC Four telemovie (with a runtime of only 85

 

 

minutes!) didn’t make any waves except for becoming the channel’s top-rated program during the week it premiered in 2006. John Strickland’s sci-fi thriller aims to explore the ethical concerns surrounding artificial intelligence and the weaponization of science for capitalistic profit, all while telling an unconventional love story. But it’s also a remake of the 1961 TV series of the same name written by Fred Hoyle and John Elliot. But what kind of legacy has the original “A for Andromeda” left behind?

 

 

The 1961 “A for Andromeda” doesn’t sugarcoat things or beat around the bush, either. It’s a taut, well-written work that combines existential horror with fictional technology to raise an intriguing question: What would happen if humans had access to a line of code that could create a being who looks and feels organic but isn’t human in the traditional sense? People’s hardwired tendency to underestimate what it doesn’t understand (while also clinging to their instinctual distrust of the unknown) spells doom in the end, and these themes elevate “A for Andromeda” into a brilliant entry in the hard sci-fi genre.

Strickland’s “A for Andromeda” follows the story of the original series closely, focusing on a group of scientists who receive a radio signal — one from another galaxy — that contains instructions to build a supercomputer. Once this machine is finished, it provides the formula to create Andromeda (Reilly), an organic lifeform who will supposedly act as humanity’s savior. However, one of the scientists, named John Fleming (Hardy), views Andromeda with suspicion, noting that her intentions remain as cryptic as they were on the day she was born. Indeed, Fleming comes to believe she could actually prove to be the cause of humanity’s downfall instead of the catalyst for its advancement.