Transcendence (2014)

Will Caster (Johnny Depp) has been developing a self-aware AI for many years, with the help of his wife Evelyn (Rebecca Hall). He has relied also on the groundbreaking work of several colleagues in the field, such as personal friends Max Waters (Paul Bettany) and Joseph Tagger (Morgan Freeman), among others.

When our story begins, Will is giving a presentation to potential investors about the future of AI, and how it can advance not only the human race, but also technology in general, and indeed the wider world.

However, there is also a vigilante group who have been targeting AI researchers across the country, and even around the world. One of the members of this group - present at the event - shoots Will in the foyer after the seminar.

Will is fortunate that the bullet merely grazed him, so at first it seems like he will be okay and make a full recovery. However, the bullet was laced with polonium, so slowly but surely, his internal organs and nervous system begin to shut down, and he is told he has only a few months left to live.

Will Caster (Johnny Depp), Evelyn Caster (Rebecca Hall) and Max Waters (Paul Bettany).

As he faces the end of his life, and Evelyn faces the rest of her life alone, they come up with a 'terrible' - at least it is terrible to everyone who knows them, the two of them see no issue with it - plan; that is, to upload Will's consciousness to the computer they have been developing the AI system on, so that he can not only continue to live on - in a digital form - but AI as a concept can continue to develop.

The vigilante group, however - led by a young intern named Bree (Kate Mara), who had worked with Max in the past - continue their campaign against all advancement of AI technology.

Their crimes - they have already killed a number of researchers - are investigated by FBI Agent Buchanan (Cillian Murphy), with assistance from Joseph Tagger.

I'll leave the plot description there for now, you can experience it for yourself if you so choose.

Joseph Tagger (Morgan Freeman).

The screenplay, by Jack Paglen, is clever enough. The characters are reasonably well-defined, and there are plenty of plot twists to keep you guessing and keep you interested until the film's conclusion. That being said, a lot of the plot points are relatively standard for a film in this genre, so there aren't a lot of surprises for anyone used to films of this nature, but it is still interesting enough to keep you watching.

Mychael Danna's score likewise is relatively standard for the genre. It's not bad, in fact, it's fine for what it is, but there isn't anything too adventurous or outlandish in the score or the instrumentation. The music is suited well to the film, however, with all the major significant emotional points highlighted well by the addition of music. The film doesn't feel overscored at any point, either, which is good.

The production design, by Chris Seagers, is excellent, transporting the viewer directly into the middle of the film's world and environment. From tech servers to a post-apocalyptic world, everything has been created to suit the film, and it does so to a tee.

Agent Buchanan (Cillian Murphy).

Cast performances are again standard for the genre. Johnny Depp is perhaps not as good in this film as he has been in others, then again, he doesn't have a lot of screen time, so it's harder to judge for certain. While there may not be a lot of emotion or rise and fall in his voice for most of the film, for most of the film, he is nothing more than an AI interface, so this actually works well.

Rebecca Hall gives an amazing performance as Evelyn, particularly in the more intense emotional moments, when one assumes she is delivering her performance to an empty room - without the benefit of another actor to 'bounce off' emotionally - which only adds to the impressiveness of what she can convey.

Director Wally Pfister has made a fairly standard science fiction thriller here, that is certainly enjoyable enough to warrant more than one viewing. I have seen this film a few times now, and it still affects me each time, so that must be saying something. If you haven't seen it, it is certainly worth a watch; there is plenty to think about and discuss afterwards.

7 out of 10.

The Da Vinci Code (2006)

Based on the best-selling novel by Dan Brown, this film takes the viewer on an extremely fast-paced adventure through Europe on a quest to discover the location of the Holy Grail.

Harvard professor and symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) is approached at an event in Paris by a police detective who requests his help in solving a murder that has taken place in one of the galleries of the Louvre, as the victim has a series of strange markings on his body, and Langdon is believed to be one of the only people in Paris at the time who can make sense of the markings.

Langdon agrees, and soon finds himself on the run from detective Bezu Fache (Jean Reno), accompanied by police cryptographer Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou). Their running leads them through a series of clues and puzzles, eventually bringing them to Grail scholar Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen).

Pursued at every turn by Fache – and also a crazed religious fanatic known only as Silas (Paul Bettany), the two are constantly changing direction, and running somewhere else to the next clue, or just to escape being killed for the information they are slowly gathering.

I’ll leave the plot there, as there are so many twists and turns throughout the film’s nearly 3-hour running time, that anything else I say would spoil things too much.

As an adaptation, the script by Akiva Goldsman from Brown’s novel works well. As a film, however, there is just too much going on all the time. I realise that in the novel there is a lot going on all the time, but to have it all in the film does feel a little overcrowded at times.

Of course, given the worldwide success of the novel, a film version was of course inevitable.

The cast are all fantastic in their roles, the standouts being Hanks and Tautou, whose on-screen chemistry is electric in all the right places. Their personalities and backgrounds complement each other perfectly, and it seems the two belong together for this adventure.

Ian McKellen also gives quite an impressive performance as Teabing, an interesting character who has set himself up in a very antagonistic position to the Roman Catholic Church (who incidentally were very scathing in their dislike of the novel, which probably only increased worldwide sales!). In fact, the character of Teabing can be summed up in one of his lines of dialogue: “As long as there has been a one true God, there has been killing in His name.”

Another performer who shines in this film is Alfred Molina, playing a bishop by the name of Manuel Aringarosa. But of course, Molina shines in just about everything he does, so as soon as I saw him on screen, I knew I was in for a treat.

Ron Howard’s direction works well, but is nothing spectacular. One gets the impression that any director who has directed a fast-paced thriller before could have pulled off exactly the same result; there is not really anything uniquely Howard-esque about this film, not in the same way as one might find in his other projects.

I would say the same about the cinematography and the music. The music is composed by Hans Zimmer – and clearly so, for those who are familiar with his signature sound – but could equally have been composed by anybody else.

As mentioned earlier, the script is virtually flawless, at least as far as the original source material is concerned. The pacing and dialogue are just as tight and full as that of the novel, which was an entertaining read. Though as also mentioned earlier, to translate this all directly to the screen seems a bit much to me. It is difficult to see where the creative team could have possibly made cuts, as everything in there needs to be there for anything to make sense, so I’m not sure what could have been done about this. However, I will say that it was a good thing I was watching this on DVD, because I needed to pause every 30 minutes or so and take a break, not because the film was long, but because it was full and my brain needed a rest!

I would not advise seeing this film for its historical or factual information, because there is very little of that. Most of Teabing’s views can be discounted purely on the basis of evidentiality or common sense.

I would however advise seeing this film for its entertainment and thrill value. It doesn’t let up even for a moment, and you will certainly be entertained (just not informed).

6 out of 10.