Tilda Swinton plays four roles in this award-winning film about Rosetta Stone and her three Self-Replicating Automatons, which she cloned from her own D.N.A.Tilda Swinton plays four roles in this award-winning film about Rosetta Stone and her three Self-Replicating Automatons, which she cloned from her own D.N.A.Tilda Swinton plays four roles in this award-winning film about Rosetta Stone and her three Self-Replicating Automatons, which she cloned from her own D.N.A.
- Awards
- 1 win & 2 nominations total
Diane Demmar
- Dana
- (as Diana Demar)
John Bradford King
- Nathan
- (as Brad King)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
First of all, you can't look at this movie in terms of realism, it's just a big psychadelic dream. Yes, we all know computer viruses and human viruses can't be transmitted to one another; but it's also not the point of this movie. This movie has to be looked upon as pure fantasy, not as a study of possible future reality. Hell, the solid red, green, and yellow color schemes should clue you in that this is more like 60's psychadelic dreams. Other clues that this is fantasy is that Rosetta talks to her clones, Ruby, Olive, and Marine through a microwave oven!
One great line in the movie that really got me rolling on the floor was when Olive tells Marine that a virus that she just eradicated was from an attachment, and Marine responds that "Rosetta was right attachments are dangerous". Of course, this was double entendre, one meaning of the word "attachment" meant email attachments, while the other one meant relationships. If you didn't understand this movie the first time, then you owe it to yourself to watch it again to catch all of these little pokes at modern life.
One great line in the movie that really got me rolling on the floor was when Olive tells Marine that a virus that she just eradicated was from an attachment, and Marine responds that "Rosetta was right attachments are dangerous". Of course, this was double entendre, one meaning of the word "attachment" meant email attachments, while the other one meant relationships. If you didn't understand this movie the first time, then you owe it to yourself to watch it again to catch all of these little pokes at modern life.
Don't be fooled by the provocative title and the R-rating, this film has only implied sex and only the briefest nudity. Rather, it is a thought-provoking but odd piece of work that delves into the meaning of relationships between men and women, the need to experience life's pain along with pleasures, and the different roles that we play to survive in society. The film is about a scientist who creates three computer generated/robotic duplicates of her own self. The duplicates exist in a virtual reality "safe" from the harm that the real world can levy on them. As the film progresses, we see through the interactions with the main character that they have become her alter egos. Trouble brews when they start to become self-aware and want more freedom. As I watched the film I was surprised by the apparent low budget it was made with but how it outshines most big-budget Hollywood blockbusters in its depth and scope. The acting is OK but amateurish, with occasional bad timing and wooden responses. The dialogue seems to get a little too long and pretentious at times and you have to be very attentive to catch the double entendres and metaphors in order to keep up with the script. Despite all this, it was a very good movie that proves that there is under-appreciated talent out there that Hollywood refuses to acknowledge. People that liked films like Slaughterhouse-5, Orlando, or the Handmaid's Tale would be advised to give this film a try.
"Teknolust" is so inane, it's offensive. As someone who has spent years in both microbiology and computer labs, I found the storyline & dialog completely nonsensical. It was so bad, I couldn't even laugh.
Remember those "corporate bs generators" that randomly chose one word from each of 3 columns to create phrases that sounded like they meant something, but didn't? I think the writers for this movie combined a "computer bs generator" with a "virology bs generator" and used that to create the script.
Lame, lame, lame!!! Don't waste your time.
Remember those "corporate bs generators" that randomly chose one word from each of 3 columns to create phrases that sounded like they meant something, but didn't? I think the writers for this movie combined a "computer bs generator" with a "virology bs generator" and used that to create the script.
Lame, lame, lame!!! Don't waste your time.
My wife and I saw this film at the Toronto International Film Festival in 2002. We both thought it was very creative and thoroughly enjoyable. Personally i wish it would be released to video at least.In some sense the movie reminded us of Thomas In Love.
I rented this from my local video store. It was so surprising to see something like this available from them, as this movie is not their regular run of the mill movie they rent. I enjoyed it for it's originality. I haven't seen much with Tilda Swinton, but will be looking out for more of her movies in future.. PS. this site rocks, I find user comments more informative than any of the "critic" sites.
Did you know
- TriviaThe car that Ruby drives is an electrical version of a Corbin Sparrow, of manufacturer Myers Motors.
- Crazy creditsWhile the credits run, Rosetta acts as a substitute for Ruby in the latter's internet portal and shares some thoughts and findings.
- ConnectionsFeatures Casbah (1938)
- How long is Teknolust?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Les trois Eve
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $28,811
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $9,475
- Aug 24, 2003
- Gross worldwide
- $28,811
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content