The Reconstruction of William Zero

While it's probably deliberate, the plot development is decidedly stilted from the outset, and some of the acting comes across much the same. More noteworthy is that there's no mystery to be had, for the plot is also emphatically direct: we are told in short order what's going on, and we can guess it before that - a pairing of prediction and revelation that comes within the first twenty minutes, and then again well before one hour has elapsed. This is kind of like what Christopher Nolan's 'Memento' might be if we were told from the outset what the ending was, or could easily guess it. This isn't to say that the movie can't still be enjoyable on its own merits, but it's clearly not what we supposed it would be from the outset, and we can only hope there's greater substance to it that we'll uncover as it goes along. Thankfully there is; the title proves true in a different way. But this is just for starters. I do think 'The reconstruction of William Zero' is modestly enjoyable, but it also has problems that limit its value and audience.

We're greeted with notable themes of varying flavors, but I don't know that they're treated with the care they deserve. Dialogue and scene writing feels kind of half-baked; the substance is there, and in realization we get the basic form that's intended, but not the core, the heart. This rather goes for the narrative at large, coming off like a tableau playing out behind tinted, slightly cloudy glass that muffles the experience and impact, and dulls it. Dan Bush's direction is competent but unremarkable, in much the same way that the screenplay he penned with star Conal Byrne is functional, but somewhat hollow.

There are great ideas here, and I appreciate the work that went into this in all regards - including Bush's steadfast editing that enforces a disordered presentation, itself purely by design. The production design and art direction are well executed, and any effects, and the filming locations are choice. Sound design, cinematography, music, all swell. I think the cast is fine, with Byrne actually handling his role(s) quite well despite that uneven slant; others in supporting parts impress insofar as they truly make the most of what they have, including Amy Seimetz. All this is well and good. What 'The reconstruction of William Zero' lacks, however, is a spark of vitality to make the audience Feel It: it's earnest, but incomplete; present, but passive, as it presents. Or is this also deliberate, as though the construction of the picture is a meta reflection of its content?

On the balance I do believe this is pretty good, and worthwhile; I recognize the hard work and sincerity that everyone involved poured into it. It's just that these qualities aren't meaningfully communicated to the viewer, and as a result the experience of watching just isn't what it could or should be. I think 'The reconstruction of William Zero' is a solid sci-fi drama, by all means, a fair way to spend 98 minutes and a credit to the skills of all on hand. Only, better luck next time that the resulting picture is not just baseline satisfying, but also more readily absorbing and rewarding.

Briefly, the story evolves around the concept of clones, and a situation is conjured up as a sort of platform to deliver a plot theme centered on this arena of potential ethical questions.

It could have been a fantastically compelling film, but just didn't quite get there.

No spoilers here, so it's a bit difficult to focus on some of the key elements which are the demise of this effort.

What stood out the most, perhaps, was the absurdly overdone emotional moments of the key clone character(s), which came off as just being syrupy, like emotional molasses oozing out of the screen.

I know, it was supposed to represent the emotional neediness and psychological challenges of the main character(s), but it just came off painfully slow and pedantic.

Just a wee bit too much on the self absorbed delusionary role playing . . . and a bit light on the actual functionality of the overall plot premise.

Perhaps this might be remade somewhere in the future, with a different treatment.

The concept is certainly interesting . . . but this version, well . . .

It took me three attempts to watch this movie. Five minutes into the first attempt I went to sleep. Of course that's not fair. No movie is that bad. OK, very few movies are that bad. On the second attempt I got to about 20 minutes in before falling asleep. On the third attempt, after being well rested, I completed the movie.

By now you're probably wondering why was I so committed to watching this movie. I don't know. So, the one word I have for this movie is: somniferous. That is to say sleep inducing.

"The Reconstruction of William Zero" was a movie about cloning, and not a good one. Dr. William Blakely (Conal Byrne) is the subject of the cloning and two wrongs don't make a right. In other words, if you take one lifeless character and clone him what do you have? Yes, that's two lifeless characters.

The story was thrown together. There was a little twist in there but that did nothing to save it. Somehow we were supposed to care about him and his wife whom we saw for all of five minutes. It was just one slow, drawn out drama detailing number 5,362 of why cloning is bad.

to hard core sci-fi fans, this may not be your type.

but if you love movies like eternal sunshine of a spotless mind, you are gonna enjoy this one.

acting is great, not much action (sorry action fans), plot is a good one and the music helps in most case to express the movie more. i haven't watched any other movie from the director, but it seems like i am gonna look out for one in the future. lead actor did a great job. i could really bet there were two different characters in the same scene.

the movie keeps the suspense wherever it is needed. overall worth a watch, 7/10. i would really recommend it.

If you don't believe the NFL is scripted, you may believe that they tried to clone Tom Brady. What they got was a near-middle aged quarterback, who is past his prime. That's right, two Tom Brady's. Well, the clone Tom Brady is the bad Tom Brady. He threw a lot of interceptions, when the script called for a touchdown. Tre'davious White threw down the interception, like had had caught a poisonous snake. Then he fell down like he broke his leg. That man is a team player! But the bad Tom Brady wasn't done being bad. He cloned himself! This clone was a GOOD Tom Brady. But now there are THREE Tom Bradys! To me, one Tom Brady is more than enough. Seen on Tubi, the free streaming site, which has many free movies; and now, live TV.