Equilibrium

First of all, a extremly tought provoking film!

Definitely a great film that really captures the essence of what makes us human. And how we need to protect freedom, democracy and culture forever.

I really think it manages to capture the human mind and the human experience of life and society.

Christian Bale fits perfectly for this role capturing his classic performances and abilitys as a actor during these "cold" roles he usually does.

Soundtrack is amazing!

Amazing script and filming aswell!

What makes my rating abit lower, from being a stable 8 or 9 is the exaggerated actionscenes that takes too much space.

Otherwise then that, its a movie that everyone should watch to understand how dangerous power could be and that we need to fight for freedom every day.

I've seen this movie 5 times (it's the nature of satellite TV) within the past week and it's true...you catch something you've missed or see something new with every successive viewing. This movie is way ahead of its time, and much better than the over-rated Matrix. Bale is always exceptional, and so is his "Metroland" co-star, Emily Watson. Maybe it's the Anglophile or Brit-flick fan in me, but I must say that the added presence of Sean Bean and Angus MacFadyen all but confirms the pre-eminence of UK acting in quality films. Accompanied by very appropriate techno-musik, the action sequences are fast and Euro-flashy, heavily influenced by Jan De Bont--different from the weird, drawn-out, "suspended/string puppet" thing that apparently passes for martial arts these days. (I miss Bruce Lee)

Anyway, if you haven't seen it, give this a shot. If you already have & weren't impressed, take a look at it again. It will grow on you. See if you're inclined to show up to work the next day looking and acting very much a "Cleric" who missed a Prozium dose.

If there is one complaint about the Hollywood system that rings true, it is that Hollywood seems quite bereft of ideas. Then films like Equilibrium come out and remind us that it's not that we're out of ideas so much as we're just not trying hard enough. Not that Equilibrium is inherently new - it borrows a fair few plot concepts from Farenheit 451 and Nineteen Eighty-Four, to name the most prominent examples. It is the way in which the old ideas are combined with the new that makes Equilibrium a fun and underrated experience.

The premise is simple enough. In a kneejerk reaction to the horrors of World War Three, the survivors outlaw what they blame the chaos upon. Their own emotions, in other words. As the lead character has a series of revelations, we begin to understand that in so doing, they have also outlawed much of what gives our existence a point. In the bland, lifeless world that the law-abiding citizens inhabit, everything that the audience takes for granted to make their lives worthwhile is being systematically destroyed. Shades of the America of today, the whole principle of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, are shown in a stark horror show.

I've read people comparing this film to The Matrix or its sequels. Where The Matrix series' fights were overlong, and often with no payoff, Equilibrium's fights are short and to the point. The difference this makes is, needless to say, as uplifting as Preston's fight to regain the humanity he stripped so many others of. Instead of having fights with no emotional connection to the characters, the story is given sufficient development to make the audience care what happens.

The film is not entirely without flaws. The Prozium element seems to have been written with no regard for the facts about psychiatric medicines. Their purpose is not to suppress emotion at all, but to balance the chemical system of the brain in order to give the patient better control of them. Sure, they're not without problems of their own, but exaggerating them like this does not do the portion of the community that needs them any favours. That aside, however, the on-camera struggle is one of the most intriguing I've viewed for some time. Ergo, this minor plot problem is made up for. The only other real complaint I have is that the film could have done with a little more footage to give some characters more of a chance to develop.

I gave Equilibrium an eight out of ten. It's not the best negative science fiction you'll ever see, but it is enough of a breath of fresh air that this won't entirely matter. If the MPAA made more films like this, it wouldn't be suffering the constant financial dire straits that it so loves to blame everyone else for.

I really enjoy this movie, it's not perfect, but its enjoyable and is a good package considering its low budget. Christian Bale's acting style compliments the cool emotionless feel to the movie, plus there's a bit of heart in there to. It is a bit gimmicky, yes, but it packs a punch, with simplistic costumes that look realistic, to the brutalistic architecture style. I really recommend this movie for a fun scifi movie night, but don't be overly serious or you will look like a emotionless dictator.

I bought Equilibrium just because Christian Bale is in it. To tell you the truth I was certain that it was going to be a goofy, direct-to-video sci-fi fiasco that most involved would just as soon forget. The cover box reminded me of Universal Soldier. As it turns out however, it's not a movie that those involved want to forget, it's an overlooked gem, no doubt because it came at the height of the Matrix craze, which it may resemble in too many ways. Unfortunately, too many people will callously write it off as a Matrix rip-off, and it's a shame because this is one of the best science fiction films to have come along in quite some time.

It takes place in the far off 21st century, but it's not about the future (given that it exists in a future that can't ever exist), it's about the disturbing reality that war is a part of human nature, and in order to eradicate it from the modern world we would have to become a homogenized society of emotionless, drug-controlled zombies. No jokes about that already being a reality.

The movie's biggest assertion is that it assigns blame for man's inhumanity to man to his ability to feel (ignoring the real causes, such as religion, political power, and less dogmatic things like national pride and human rights). The current government is based on enforcing the mass removal of emotion from the masses using a drug called Prozium, and is the source of the movie's main irony, that in order to eradicate war, it has waged war on all of it's own citizens, who constantly live under close surveillance.

The government employs Grammaton Clerics to handle that surveillance. They are highly trained officers authorized to kill anyone they deem to be "sense offenders" on the spot ("I trust you'll be more vigilant in the future?"). There is, in fact, a staggering amount of irony in the film, given that all emotion or feeling is strictly forbidden under penalty of death, and yet anger, suspicion and fear are all alive and well, and even flaunted. It's also interesting to consider that in real life it is the dogmatic, Cleric-like believers who aspire for war, and the normal people who just want to live their lives.

For the most part the movie ignores the fact that it is governments that wage war, not citizens (even emotionally sensitive ones), but no matter. The important thing that you need to know about the movie is that it goes way, way too far, and because of that, it's fun. I cheered out loud several times during the film because the gun fights, which are so unrealistic it's almost funny, are genuinely well-choreographed and exciting. If I may say so, this is what gun fights in hard core science fiction movies should look like.

Many people criticize the movie for being unrealistic or too extreme, altogether forgetting what kind of movie they're watching in the first place. The movie is not about moral dilemmas, even though the main character suffers a tremendous one, it's a fast, gritty science fiction movie that makes no apologies, and owes none. The characterization may be just a little heavy (Bale's character going from not understanding a question about what he felt when his wife was incinerated to having a soft spot for puppies, etc.), but like another outstanding and equally over-the-top film, Shoot 'Em Up, nothing is out of place. All of the excesses look right at home.

It is interesting to consider the real-world implications of the content of the movie though, regardless of how unrealistic it is. The totalitarian regime, for example, resembles Mao Tse- tung's manner of oppression with startling closeness, even down to the children spying on and reporting their parents. Under Mao, children who reported their parents engaging in "counter'-revolutionary activities" were publicly hailed as national heroes while their parents were generally tortured and executed. Whether the crimes were real or not was unimportant, what mattered is that, as you can imagine, in a society where people were so easily made to desperately fear their own children, you can imagine the level of control the government (Mao) had over the people. Something similar happens in this movie.

The similarities to The Matrix films are obvious, but limited mostly to superficial things like the fight scenes and some costumes. Thematically, the movies are totally different, and even with all of the similarities, this movie is more than able to stand on its own, and any similarities are more just an unfortunate bit of timing, as this is probably what caused the movie to be so overlooked. If you can't handle a little excess in the movies, definitely stay away from this one. But if you can watch a movie just for a good time, you could do a lot worse than this.

Note: Keep your eye out for Dominic Purcell, Prison Break's Lincoln Burrows, in the opening scene. He should have had a bigger role in the movie...