Identicals

I try and give low-budget sci-fi films more leeway to see without costly special effects if some nuggets of cleverness or originality can be found. Unfortunately, what I saw here came across as way too murky, obtuse, and nonsensical, for my tastes.

Told in a slow-paced and surrealistic manner, the story, from what I could garner, revolves around a nefarious and mysterious company, called Brand New-U, that apparently abducts or beats people into submission, to take them to their headquarters. Once there, they are transformed into a new version of themselves (or identical) via a type of hypnosis, brainwashing, and surgery. For what exact purpose this is done never really became clear to me, but there is a mention of rich benefactors of the corporation who believe a better human being can emerge. Huh?

The two stars of the movie have good screen presence but their talents, in my opinion, can't be realized within this dense plot. Simon Pummell handles the writing and direction, and just what he had in mind escapes me, I'm sorry to say.

All in all, this sci-fi flick didn't work for me at any level, and I would recommend not to waste your time here with this one.

In the near future, a couple have a romantic evening destroyed when a swat team visit them in the night and forcibly abduct the woman. The man is left alone but discovers that one of the attackers inexplicably has his girlfriend's face. This leads him to a high-tech company called Brand New-U.

This psychological sci-fi film deals with ideas of identity. It's not in all honesty always easy keeping track of what is going on as doppelgangers interact with each other and things get a little confusing, so it is a film that could potentially improve on a second viewing. The first impression, however, is a film that looks very beautiful at times but which is on the whole rather cold and unengaging. The central relationship is very important to the film as it underpins everything, yet we never get very involved with the characters meaning it is difficult caring much about their plights. The somewhat deliberate slow-pacing doesn't necessarily help very much either, with some scenes playing out far too long. But as I said, it is visually very beautiful at times with some great use of colour. So it has this on its side, while there does seem to be some interesting elements working their way in the background. But it was all a little too ponderously told for my personal liking.

I could only stomach 10 min of the pointless, seemingly randomly generated sequence of unrelated images that this nonsensical movie is. This movie is so terrible that a negative rating should be created just for it, exclusively. There is absolutely no logical reason why someone in their right mind, not under the effects of hallucinogenic substances, should give a rating over 1. Avoid at all costs.

At best this is a 3/10. IMDb is not reliable when it comes to the user ratings for the first couple of months or more as most people know, to see 1000's of people giving this movie a 9,10/10 rating is sickening! Do the film makers pay people for the score or is it the whole cast and crew giving the 10/10 lol. Please stop! it makes you look even worse.

Avoid this movie and save your time for something more worthwhile, like a walk to the shops or some gardening.

How on earth can this crapfest be currently averaging 7.3/10?

Seriously, IMDb's reputation is damaged beyond repair if garbage like this achieves such a high score, causing those who still trust the site to waste their time and money sitting through such an inane and pointless excuse of a movie.

So the production team summoned all their friends and relatives, urging them to clog IMDb with their 10/10 ratings, betraying those of us who actually care about honest recommendations.

Gaming the system this way is only hurting the art of cinematography.

Pathetic.