Conceiving Ada

Sounds like an oxymoron right there. Contradictory as it may seem, it's literally that: Travels back in time, capturing a moment in history in "real" time -- "Mo-memory" captured and SAVE'd. Computer enthusiasts, come ye one and all -- this includes computer graphic artists, programming experts. Mind you, leisurely-paced is truly so -- nothing's really hurried. If you want action -- it's very much simply intellectual intercourse. It's not Hollywood intrigue -- it's mind game -- not tour de force like "Brainstorm" -- yes, L-E-I-S-U-R-E-L-Y-paced -- nothing really hits you over the head.

It's intriguing -- but NFE (Not For Everyone). Some might think it's too slow or seemingly just chatters and undramatic -- 'less you're a computer literate, -enthusiast, ever-fascinated by Tilda Swinton (no matter how long or short her appearance is), or simply love a film however it may be delivered. See it with an open mind (Empty your cache before you go).

There are nuances of little indications: a computer-minded person could very well be, at times, lacking in "real" emotions and feelings -- the human touches. E.g., Ada Byron King (Tilda Swinton) said to the main character Emmy, "Can you save me?" and Emmy (Francesca Faridany) said, "yes" and hit SAVE. Or, to take this further, one might see it as a comparison of then and now: what may seem difficult and impossible for a woman to break through barriers to be recognized (as the mathematical genius that Ada was) then, is fairly easy and accessible now, as Emmy hits a key and it's done -- she will be recognized for what she has researched, programmed and discovered!

Ah, there's some insights into the life of a computer couple -- some diet suggestions: they're presented as a certain COLOR day of the week, e.g., bananas are included on Yellow day, then there's BLUE day menu, WHITE day entree. (Are you curious?)

Written and directed by Lynn Hershmann-Leeson, it does feel like a story told from a woman's perspective. Definitely showed the "obsessive" pursuit of what the main character (perhaps autobiographical?) is after in her participation and wanting to succeed in this M.I.T. "ALIVE project".

You may say this is a love story -- love in different angles juxtaposed on the computer grids. There's also a dog of an interest called Charlene. Its ultimate gist of the whole event could be summed up in what Ada said -- that we should not be hung up in what she, the past, thinks and tried to immortalize her memory -- we need to move beyond and be in touch with the present and feel ALIVE and continue to discover things…

When Emmy was talking with her mentor (Timothy Leary portrays) who appeared on the wall size screen, it brought to mind Dennis Potter's "Cold Lazarus" -- a stylish scientific tale with also an advance techno challenge theme of capturing a specific person's memory and "SAVE" -- keeping the memory ALIVE and recallable. The specific person is namely Albert Finney's character in the prequel "KARAOKE". If you enjoy Albert Finney and relish Dennis Potter's amazing storytelling, you must not miss "KARAOKE" nor "Cold Lazarus".

This film also reminds me of Douglas R. Hofstadter's books -- 1) "Metamagical Themas: Questing for the Essence of the Mind and Pattern (An Interlocked Collection of Literary, Scientific, and Artistic Studies)", and 2) his Pulitzer Prize winner "Godel, Escher, Bach: An eternal Golden Braid (A Metaphorical Fugue on Minds and Machines in the Spirit of Lewis Carroll)". There's also 3) Rudy Rucker's "The Fourth dimension -- A Guided Tour of the Higher Universes". All three are worthwhile books -- fun and intrigue -- if you're so like-mindedly disposed.

A caveat: If you're tired -- unless you're a computer "nerd" -- you probably don't want to view this movie yet, as the seemingly flat tone and leisurely pace until Tilda appears may not pick you up. If you're curious and patient, and you love the idea of what computers can do, go for it, this can be enjoyable and insightful for you.

Other Tilda Swinton gems that has more of her: "Orlando" 1992 written and directed by Sally Potter, and "Female Perversions" 1996 written and directed by Susan Streitfeld, both for mature audiences.

Ok, first off *DO NOT* watch this movie if your idea of an independent film is something starring Johhny Depp or Hugh Grant. That said, *DO* watch this movie if you liked 'Pi,' or other movies that were shot on almost no budget, but still somehow manage to mix cinematic exploration of abstract concepts with elements of science fiction. Don't expect to understand this movie the first time you watch it, but after two weeks of mulling it over as you try to get to sleep at night, it'll come to have more meaning.

Conceiving Ada is an odd, but ultimately somewhat rewarding film. I had picked it up largely based on the presence of Tilda Swinton, not expecting much from it beyond her performance. I was pleasantly surprised.

The film has a somewhat awkward framing device of a modern computer scientist who discovers a means of communicating with the past. Through the eyes of the modern scientist, we see the life of Ada Lovelace, the world's first computer programmer.

At times, the approach gives a feeling of nothing so much as a PBS or BBC low budget documentary on Lovelace's life, particularly the way in which it is divided up into snippets. Furthermore, the science behind the communication with the past is preposterous, and requires a serious suspension of disbelief. This is not hard science fiction, folks, despite the real world elements. The cameos by Timothy Leary are equally distracting, adding nothing to the plot.

However, both the woman who plays the modern scientist and Tilda Swinton manage to be engaging. The film is definitely worth a look.

From the technical point, this was incredibly amateurish. Cheap computer effect, tasteless colorization of scenes made it sickening. Lighting was arbitrary, often leaving characters in the dark or completely black. Shaky camera movements, use of normal-telephoto lenses/focal lengths in tiny rooms caused an 'in your face' unbearable shots that induced dizziness. Clueless positioning and compositions were baffling and bizarre. No photographer on crew? The DP that insisted on using Panavision gear did not deserve that privilege. Continuity was the least concern here, often mixing computer screen shots with no relation to what the character is actually doing. (loved that holding the mouse in the air and clicking on nothing...) The MIDI (yes...) soundtrack was pathetic. Room tones where way too loud. Directing- All the scenes painfully reminded an acting class session. Weird exchanges, off-mark pompous reactions and unflattering intimate shots.

The editing was bearable but did not help fixing the flawed script. I felt as if I was watching a sequel and missed the whole explanation to the events. Arbitrary locations appear out of context and disappear in a few seconds. I did not gain anything beyond my basic knowledge of Ada. I only felt injustice to her character.

I could go on. The movie was so bad it was depressing. There is nothing like making art look bad to spoil my mood. I ended up renting Antz. Important? No. Honest effort? Yes.

Hey Lynn: Hands off that computer. And no buts! Ya hear me?!

The approach this film takes to storytelling is interesting, but somewhat confusing. I've never seen a cross between a science fiction film and a period film set in the Victorian era, so this was a refreshing change of pace; but many aspects of it were not handled well.

The way that a person in the present can communicate with someone in the past isn't outlined very well, although I've only seen this movie once and maybe I need to see it again. Communicating with someone in the past has something to do with something called "DNA memory" which I don't quite understand. I consider myself to be fairly well-informed about the general concepts of computer science but the way that Emmy explained her interfacing with individuals and memories from the past seemed quite cryptic and unintuitive... I don't really mind the fact that this isn't explained well--plenty of unexplained, far-fetched science fiction premises can still yield a viewer's suspension of disbelief--but the contact between present and past seems to be taken in stride rather than as something utterly magnificent. If I suddenly found out how to talk to my favorite historical figure and see his or her memories on a screen, I would be quite a bit more excited than Emmy, her husband, or her strange mentor. This is one of the film's biggest incongruencies, and it destroyed my suspension of disbelief.

Although I do appreciate the fact that the director attempted to integrate the digital technology (the uses of which Ada Byron predicted) into the film, it didn't seem to work that well at all. The backgrounds looked very two-dimensional (partially because no characters ever travelled much within a shot, and very little tracking and panning was done to give the environment a three dimensional feel, though such camera movements must be nearly impossible when the digital environments are two-dimensional to begin with). The fire effect in particular looked incredibly fake as the rest of the digital environment didn't respond properly to the flickering of the flames, so altogether the cinematography in the Victorian era was horrendous and reminded me of something from old CD-ROM adventure games like Phantasmagoria or Gabriel Knight II.

The portrayal of Ada's character was very well-done, however, effectively displaying both Ada's desires and modern ideas as well as her imprisonment by social standards and the people around her. In particular, her final speech near the end of the film is very well done.

One of my complaints about the film, however, is that none of the male characters really seem to be fleshed out at all; they're all very two-dimensional, without too much depth or personality, which really makes the film seem very gender biased.

Although I did enjoy the film overall and I thought the blend of science fiction and period filmmaking was a novel idea, I really think that this could've been a much better experience if the science fiction premise had been dropped entirely and the movie had just been a period film. I actually like science fiction very much and I'm generally not interested in period films dealing with repression and social mores, but Ada's character is particularly interesting because her interests are so modern--they have so much application to today's world and today's ideas.

I think that by adding the sci-fi premise to the film weakened it overall; with the ubiquitousness of the Internet, today's audiences generally know the ways in which computers can be used and this film's hasty, fleeting vision of someone in the present communicating with someone in the past only adds confusion to the film, not a sense of wonder about Ada's conceptions and the potential of virtual reality and artificial intelligence. I rather would've spent more time learning about the different kinds of ideas that Ada had from her point of view. As it is, the film spends so much time divided between the present world and Ada's world that it doesn't really have enough time to fully develop either of them.