Transcendence

SPOILERS AHEAD. I wouldn’t want to be in the shoes of those who go to the cinema for the new blockbuster starring Johnny Depp and then wind up watching a wordy low-key sci-fi flick in which their favourite actor is more heard than scene (and turns in a significantly less convincing voice performance than Scarlett Johansson in Her). To be very lenient, I will describe Transcendence as a mainstream variation on early Cronenberg films that also thematise the media as an extension of the human senses. However, this film isn’t clear on the position from which it wants to approach the intertwining of the virtual and real spaces, whether to reject it (because it turns people into robots) or celebrate it (because it aids the fulfilment of a romantic relationship).  ___ During the exposition, the originator of the idea of an all-encompassing artificial intelligence is presented as a generally likable scientist and respected colleague who is loved by his wife and admired by the lay public. Basically an acceptable protagonist. Except that when his ideas start to come to fruition, he stops acting “right” and the film starts to show him in a less than favourable light – among other things, by using sinister music like that found in noir films (just one indication of the work’s inveterate lack of humour). Should we thus start rooting for the technophobic opposition? However, that opposition is represented by people who are rightfully branded as terrorists. The only connecting link between these two extreme positions, the rationally thinking character played by Paul Bettany, joins the terrorists in the second third of the film for reasons that are not entirely clear. The most space is given to Rebecca Hall, who, however, lets herself be ruled by her emotions and spends most of the time just dumbly carrying out here husband’s orders. She starts to make decisions for herself only when pressured by other characters. Nolan’s mascots Freeman and Murphy then appear in and disappear from the narrative and their willingness to cooperate with anyone at any time is no less than surprising. Because of that, viewers who respect elementary moral laws don’t have anyone they can trust or root for, or anyone to guide them through the story (and at the end of the film, the same viewers may ask why the people who murdered many other people at the beginning have gone unpunished). ___ Perhaps it is possible to make someone or something other than a multidimensional character with clearly defined goals the driving force of the drama (Transcendence doesn’t have such a character), and the film plays with this alternative (interest in the protagonists is dampened by the fact that, thanks to the prologue, we already have a good idea of how the whole thing is going to turn out, who will die and who will survive), but Pfister does not offer a functional solution. ___ The underdevelopment of the drama corresponds to the screenplay’s contempt for logic and more sophisticated plot construction. Even if we accept a world in which there is such a thing as the internet personified, the degree of further denial required of us exceeds the tolerable limit. Why did the terrorists and the FBI let a potentially very dangerous project grow undisturbed for two years? Why is such a terribly gratuitous situation (which happens out of the blue solely for the purpose of pushing the story forward) used to introduce a new motif (treatment)? Why does Caster need rainwater to disseminate it, when he can use the internet, which is already in widespread use around the world? ___ If that’s not enough for you, you can add genre incoherence (the sci-fi and melodramatic storylines stumble over each other), visual unimaginativeness and a run-of-the-mill soundtrack to the amorality, illogic and contrivance of the screenplay. Wally should go back to cinematography before it’s too late. 40% (17/04/2014) (less) (more)