Transcendence

Transcendence, much like most of the latest sci-fi themed films to hit cinemas, is a wasted effort. It exhibits signature Pfister cinematography that we've come to love over the past decade. With Nolan's Batman trilogy and Inception, it was only a matter of time for Wally Pfister to take a stab at directing. Unfortunately, the only thing that seems well done in this film is the cinematography. The story, while seeming fresh and exciting on paper, devolves into a half baked idea with mediocre acting. Johnny Depp does the best he can while only being a mere voice during the latter half of the film. The rest of the cast seems wasted, this is especially true because we know how great Paul Bettany, Morgan Freeman and Rebecca Hall can be. Wally Pfister focuses more on capturing really fantastic shots but seems never truly devoted to the actual story. This comes as a major disappointment especially because of the hype that this film has been generating over the last year. When it boils down to it, Transcendence is just another exercise in style over substance, never matriculating to anything more than an average sci-fi thriller that has a criminally underused cast and phenomenal camera-work.

Truly the questions this film asks leave me wondering. So let's start with the film itself, as a scifi thriller, it's beautifully executed with some stunning visuals, to the extent that sometimes it has the feel of a travel advertisement. The story hangs together well, with strong central performances which keep you engaged. Some of the ethics are quite complex, and you have to ask if the machine's intent is really hostile, or is that just the interpretation characters are putting on it because they don't understand. And we fear what we do not understand. The intent here is clearly to tell a story in such a way that you walk away thinking about it. Job done. I came away thoroughly entertained, and thinking more about singularity and transcendence than I have in quite a while. If you are after a Saturday afternoon blockbuster with a lot of action, this might not be the film for you, but if you prefer your action with a little more intrigue, this is a great film.

Critics and wannabe critics alike really lashed into this one. And I guess I have them to thank for me liking (not loving) this movie, as they lowered my standards significantly before I walked into the theater. Like them, my expectations were sky-high. I figured since Wally Pfister has been Christopher Nolan's cinematographer since 2000's Memento, maybe some sort of slow-release genius-osmosis had taken place, and Transcendence would be a stellar thriller/head- scratcher like we've come to expect from Nolan. Well, the cold hard fact is that it's not. But it sure isn't terrible.

As scientists are on the verge of a new breakthrough in A.I. technology, a rouge terrorist group known as RIFT begins knocking off labs around the country. One of their antics is the assassination, by radioactive poisoning, of scientist Dr. Will Caster. As his body slowly deteriorates, his wife and his partner work frantically work on a way to upload his mind to a computer, thus allowing him to continue his research. And as anyone could've guessed, the plan goes completely to hell.

Transcendence is not excellent, but it's also not the travesty that reviews from people more reputable than me are calling it. The main problem is the script. An excellent script can make you buy into even the most ridiculous of plots, but first-time-writer Jack Paglen's script never finds a constant tone, is unevenly paced, has underdeveloped side plots, and keeps you at arm's length from any connection with the characters and the story. In other words, it doesn't raise up any concerns or ideas we haven't already seen, and the shallowness of the script gives you plenty of time to question the incongruence of the story.

Other than that, Transcendence is pretty good. Pfister's direction is expedient, and he avoids the jumpy camera syndrome that typically plagues these kinds of movies. In fact I was even getting trappings of Chris Nolan's directing style at times (is it just me?). The ensemble performance from the cast is solid. The cast list may look like Nolan's leftovers, but they do an excellent job, and they make better use of the paltry script than I thought possible. Even though Pfister was behind the camera and not the cinematographer, you think he was going to let his baby look mundane? While not as gorgeous as, say Inception, Jess Hall hits it home and makes Transcendence look properly futuristic while still squeezing in some contrasting elements of nature in almost every frame.

Does 6 stars seem too high? I don't think so. In my mind, 10=revolutionary, 9=excellent, 8=very good, 7=pretty good and 6=jusk OK. An airtight script that rises up to the challenge was all that was needed to make Transcendence truly, um, transcendent. But it doesn't, and the lackluster script affects every other technical aspect of this film like a virus, and makes Transcendence a pretty- to-look-at popcorn movie. I know this is Wally Pfister's first time in the director's chair, but I still feel he was capable of making a film more nuanced than this.

This film will most likely split down the middle because of it's religious tones of God and evolution. Some people will love it and some will hate it because it might go against their belief system.

For movie purposes, it has great acting, great story (though some may feel it's a little too far fetched, which I personally don't think is too far fetched when you see what the world was like 10 years ago before the mainstream web), and pretty good action scenes.

At the heart, it's a story about a woman, Evelyn, who loves her husband, Will, so much she tries to hold onto him by helping him save his consciousness. She begins to wrestle with whether this being is really Will or is something new. It's also about evolution and the line between humanity and evolving into something more. This movie might be a turn off for religious people but it does make you think of what humanity could become whether you're religious or not.

Overall, it's a great movie that's enjoyable, thought provoking, challenges some beliefs, and foreshadows some future realities we will all have to soon deal with.

I would say go see it!

I'm glad that some of the reviews that I had read, even from fairly reputable and reliable sources like Bluray.com, were ultimately not accurate in their description of this film. For example, that site made it seem like this was a rather shallow movie that basically was about an Artificial Intelligence that typically goes amok. That is not true at all and completely misses the point.

Now that I've just seen it, I can understand why they named it as they did; this wasn't just some usual commercially catchy phrase to sell a film, but after all is said and done (and viewed) that SPECIFICALLY was actually the primary theme of the film. It will be a little difficult to 'talk' about this aspect of it without entering Spoiler territory, which I do not wish to do.

There are deeper themes running through this film than one may think at first. Without being specific, the final few scenes reveal that 'Transcendence' is indeed what is going on here. So, first and foremost, PLEASE do not be put off by those who say that this is just a shallow Sci Fi film about a machine taking over; if you like serious Science fiction that is done very well, then you should like this film.

One caution though... My impression is that this movie is the moral antithesis of a film like, say, 'CHILDREN OF MEN', which I also just watched recently before this one. That film too is very beautifully shot and technically well done; AND, it also would be considered very serious, adult Science Fiction. But, I personally ***ENJOYED*** this one quite a bit more; the themes and mood of it resonated a LOT more with me personally than the other film. I just mention these particular films as a comparison of two well done, modern Sci Fi films, but with almost TOTALLY opposite philosophies behind them. Whereas 'CoM' is what I would call much more gritty and 'Realistic' and even quite Nihilistic in it's tone, where basically just about bloody EVERYONE dies, Mankind is shown to be nasty, selfish, and brutal, and with the supposed exception of it's last minute ending, completely without any hope at all. This film though, in my lowly and wretched opinion, is MUCH more subtle and enlightened in the themes that it is emphasizing, and it may not be until the very end when you fully realize what the point actually is (I'll give you a hint... It has to do with one of the last things Rebecca Hall says) Don't get me wrong, BOTH films are very well done, but I just wanted to show the extreme contrast in tone, so that it might help you to choose whether you would want to watch this one.

Also, quite frankly, it is just a great film. It's a lot of fun, there is excellent suspense where you do NOT know what is going to happen next or whether what is going on is truly Good or Evil...

So, as I mention in a lot of my reviews: If you are a bit on the cynical side and are the kind of person who likes their entertainment, whatever the Genre, to be of the more brutally 'Realistic' type, and you don't care for more imaginative or Idealistic films, then this one may not do much for you. BUT... IF you do appreciate films where the underlying themes may cause you to question your own attitudes towards Hope and Faith (and I DON'T mean anything Religious at all - Just Faith or Hope in things or people in general) THEN you might, as I did, really find this film quite refreshing and entertaining.