Resistência

While the film boasts spectacular cinematography, breathtaking scenery, and top-notch special effects, it's truly disappointing that the storyline is painfully inconsistent. Despite the promising concept, the narrative fails to maintain a cohesive flow, leaving viewers grappling with disjointed plot points. The movie's visual elements, from stunning set designs to captivating photography, create a visually immersive experience that almost compensates for its narrative shortcomings. It's a regrettable case of missed potential, where the brilliance of the visuals struggles to salvage a story that lacks the cohesion necessary to make it truly memorable.

Oh dear. I was really looking forward to this, and managed to get a ticket for a pre-release showing. I left disappointed.

One fact that too many film-makers have failed to grasp is that CGI alone does not make a film. Effects can make a good film better, but they can't make a mediocre film good. Marvel, I'm looking at you.

It's not enough to string a few action scenes together and finish with some really big explosions. You have to have a story - preferably one that hangs together coherently. This is what's missing from this film, whose plot-holes are more pronounced than the holes where the AI characters' ears would be. Just one example - our hero is on the run in an unspecified Asian county, where it's established that he doesn't speak the language. He breaks down. A van stops, and he's asked if he needs help. Asked in perfect English. That's bad enough - but then for no explored reason, our good Samaritan progresses from giving a stranger a lift to helping him through a police road-block, risking the lives of his five children in the process.

Why are there gardens on Nomad? Why, if it's the last word in military technology, is it as easy to blow up as the Death Star or a Bond Villain's lair?

The child-McGuffin is portrayed by an excellent young performer, but makes no logical sense. The nuclear blast in Los Angeles (seen in the trailer, so it's not a spoiler) is cited as the reason for the war against AI. There's one throwaway line about this late in the film - but it's just that: a throw-away line. Following it up would've led to a much more interesting film.

I've heard it suggested that this should be seen as a metaphor for America's involvement in Vietnam, If so, it's a tired re-hash and forty years too late. Also, that would mean regarding it as an intelligent film, which it absolutely isn't

Just one more big-budget wasted opportunity.

This is a lesson to the movie industry on how to use a budget. 80 million dollars was used splendidly. The cinematography was amazing, (Not terribly surprising because Rogue One) acting was great, and the story was decent.

It wasn't without problems though. The story moves at an increasing pace and at some points you lose track of what's happening. Suspension of disbelief will be needed in some moments.

The theme of the story was to make AI to be more than just robots. I think they succeeded there, but at the expense of the humans. Most of the humans in the story ended up being one faced - except for Joshua.

The dynamic between Joshua and Alfie was by far the best part of the movie. The acting was great between the two.

It was a good movie. Not great by any means, but I'm all for supporting a movie that is trying something new.

Overall, I think Gareth Edwards should be given some more projects. AND filmmakers everywhere should learn how a budget should be used.

Walking into the theater, my expectations were a mix of excitement and curiosity, especially given the film's intriguing take on AI.

From the get-go, "The Creator" impressed me with its use of the $80 million budget. The cinematography was nothing short of remarkable, reminding me of the visual flair seen in "Blade Runner" "Elysium", "I, Robot" and "A. I." The world-building was immersive, creating a believable and lived-in environment that drew me in.

The performances, particularly the dynamic between Joshua and Alfie, were the highlights of the film for me. Their interactions brought depth to the story, and I found myself genuinely invested in their journey. However, as the plot progressed, I couldn't help but feel a sense of disappointment.

The story, which began with promise, started to unravel. The pacing felt rushed, and the plot became increasingly predictable. I noticed glaring plot holes that were hard to overlook, and the narrative lacked the depth I had hoped for. The ambitious theme of AI's humanity, which initially seemed thought-provoking, was undermined by the film's inability to maintain coherence.

While I appreciated the technical brilliance of the film, including the special effects and sound design, the script was a letdown. It was as if the movie wanted to say something profound about AI and humanity but ended up glossing over these complex themes, opting instead for a more superficial treatment.

The characters, aside from Joshua, felt one-dimensional. I struggled to connect with them emotionally, this emotional disconnect was particularly evident in the portrayal of the AI characters, including Alfie, who, despite being central to the story, lacked the depth to make their plight resonate with me.

While "The Creator" started off with great potential, it ultimately left me feeling underwhelmed. The film excelled in its visual storytelling but fell short in its narrative execution. It was a visually captivating experience, but the lack of emotional depth and narrative coherence made it a disappointing outing for me. I walked out of the theater feeling that the movie, despite its grand aspirations, missed the mark in delivering a fully engaging and thought-provoking sci-fi experience. It could have been a masterpiece, but a missed opportunity at best.

The Creator is an original sci-fi movie written, produced and directed by Gareth Edwards (commonly known as director of Rogue One: A Star Wars Story).

Lets start with the positives first. The Creator looks visually superb. They have really imagined a interesting future earth and used the production budget wisely, not over extending what is possible, and creating a curious mix of retro and future looking technology. The cinematography and location shots featuring the spaceships and battle scenes are really well done.

On the negative side, the script is not very strong and we are not fully invested in what is going on or the characters involved. We neither see the bigger picture of this post nuclear reality, nor are we given significant smaller details and depth regarding the people and what they are fighting for.

It is a bit of a mish-mash of seeing robots caring for children and animals and dressed as buddhist monks and US style imperialism (think post cold war foreign policy), with marines massacring indiscriminately while looking for 'the weapon'. We are given a nugget of thought when the Human / Neanderthal analogy is dropped in but it is never followed up with any real substance to carry the idea forward. Therefore we don't know who to root for and the viewer is left hanging.

The acting is average and not great, perhaps reflecting the reality of the budget more than the excellent effects do. John David Washington feels out of his depth with the emotional range he is asked to give, and is eclipsed by the child actor playing 'Alfie'.

Overall, it's not awful, it's a bit disappointing as the potential was there and perhaps another draft of the script could have taken it to another level.

6/10.