Uncanny (2015) Reviews

• Almost excellent.....

  s32761692015-11-30

  Uncanny is one of those very rare movies that quickly and effectively engages the viewer. This is a slow burn sci fi, there is not an abundance of special effects or action. What you get instead is a mostly well written, very clever story with a message about deception and surveillance. Technology may be amazing but, in the wrong hands, it is not necessarily our friend. The acting is of a very high standard. Its hard to fault the cast in any way. That said, the story which is almost excellent lets the film down somewhat in the last five to ten minutes. Its conclusion is a little clumsy, whilst the rest of the film is carried with an airy, almost effortless, deftness. A more subtle conclusion, would still have carried the films message and I suspect, left a more indelible impression on the viewer. So is Uncanny worth your time? Yes it is. It may be a little flawed but this is still a very good film with a very relevant message. Eight out of ten from me.

• Forever hidden in the shadow of Ex Machina.

  siderite2016-01-17

  The film's title is appropriate, since that is the feeling you are getting from the movie. Somehow, something is wrong with it, but you can't put your finger on it. The twist at the end was pretty predictable as well, but somehow they botched it up with the very last scenes. If they change the ending - not in its idea, but its handling - the movie gains an instant extra rating point. However the biggest harm that anything can do to this film is that it was released soon after Ex Machina when they are approaching similar subjects. It is not the same thing, but close enough, and clearly not as good. I have to think, would I have liked the film in 2014, let's say? And the answer is probably yes. Change the ending scenes, make the pace a little more alert, maybe remove some of the slow scenes or some of the bad ones (because there are some that are just stupid) and you get an instant winner. Bottom line: interesting concept, not bad yet mediocre implementation, badly written ending scenes. Uncannily close to a good movie. P.S. Why do movies try to seem smart with chess analogies, and then really botch them completely? Even the weakest chess player in the world would instantly see that the people doing the scenes had no idea how the game is played.

• Stellar low-budget sci-fi.

  Seth_Rogue_One2016-04-06

  Comparisons with 'EX MACHINA' is inevitable, the set up is almost identical; 1 scientist has created a shockingly human-like robot and 1 person is sent to investigate just how life-life the robot actually is. But let it be known that in no way is this a rip-off of said movie as it was released just 9 days after 'EX MACHINA' was... Hardly enough time to write a script of this magnitude and cast it as well as this was cast etc etc. The acting is great (Mark Webber is just one hit-movie away from becoming an a-lister I believe, if you've seen him in other things you know that this performance is very unlike his usual performances, if he even has such a thing) and the atmosphere as well. The writing is very good for the more part, I was slightly let down by the ending though I must admit but I still enjoyed the movie as a whole and will most likely watch again sometime. If you like low-key up close and personal sci-fi's then this will most certainly do.

• Artificial Intelligence movie for the thinking person

  jamesanderson3892015-11-03

  Im surprised this movie has only one review, so I thought Id better chip in. Its not often one sees a movie and is so moved by it, as to submit a review, but this one did it for me. Its quite a cerebral movie, with preference to dialogue over special effects. The film is well directed and the script well written, the character arcs are well formed and detailed. I wish more big budget movies would be made like this, but I suspect they wouldn't attract too many viewers sadly. Anyway if you're a thinking person and like sci fi / especially anything to do with AI, this is a real gem of a find. The story line is gripping from start to finish and the attention to detail is just superb. All the actors did a great job, and its refreshing to see people putting real effort into their craft. The creator of the AI entity in this movie is believable and authentic unlike that drunken character in Ex Machina - which was that particular movies real weakness. The twist at the end was shocking and not something I saw coming. A real treat and thoroughly enjoyable experience.

• The point being...?

  tktansey2016-01-06

  That Matthew Leutwyler's sci-fi chamber piece "Uncanny" was made 3 years before Alex Garland's "Ex Machina" is interesting. That Leutwyler made his film for a fraction of Garland's budget is admirable. That Leutwyler's plot doesn't make a lick of sense is a shame. Seriously, what was the point? "Uncanny" and "Ex Machina" share similar story lines: an outsider is invited into the high-security lair of a reclusive genius in order to interact with and evaluate a new form of artificial intelligence. In each case, the outsider and the AI are of different genders and the reclusive genius has an agenda. Predictable consequences ensue. But where "Ex Machina" follows these events to their logical conclusion, "Uncanny" gives up on logic entirely for the sake of a surprise ending that a) isn't much of a surprise and b) negates almost everything that happened over the preceding 80 minutes. On paper, the movie was probably conceived to be an insightful meditation on what makes humans humane and robots less so. Thrown in for good measure are some thoughts on what can and can't be controlled in sentient beings and whether we as a race are innovating and engineering ourselves right into obsolescence. There's also a bit about masters and servants and which are which. All big, important ideas that Garland's film handles with much more style and intelligence. Still, it wasn't "Ex Machina" I thought about as I watched the film. What came to mind more was "Frankenstein." The book, not the movie. In the book, there's a relationship between the creator and his creation. They're in this together in the name of science and discovery. But that relationship sours when Dr. Frankenstein rejects the monster to be with his fiancée. I'm paraphrasing here, but that's the gist. "Uncanny" seemed to be moving in a similar direction. Actually, the movie was moving in exactly that direction. There was even the interesting possibility that roles were being reversed. Then came the final cryptic ten minutes and it all turned out to be a huge waste of time. Adding insult to injury, there's an end-credits scene so nonsensical it's laugh-out-loud funny. Not, I'm guessing, what the filmmakers intended. "Uncanny" isn't a bad movie, it's a bad story. The cinematography is fine (though the lingering shots of Shiva, the Destroyer, are a bit overly), the acting is adequate (if you don't mind watching Rainn Wilson, in a mercifully short cameo, chew scenery), and events move along at a fairly brisk pace. It's just that those events simply don't add up when you get to the end. Note: One question bothered me as I watched both "Uncanny" and "Ex Machina". Why, why, why—if you're going to build a creature and make it both smarter and stronger than yourself—why wouldn't you include an "off" switch?