Nic Cage is Knowing....

[Watashi]

Trailer (http://www.worstpreviews.com/trailer.php?id=1221&item=0)

This was originally a Richard Kelly film, but then Alex Proyas took over. It doesn't matter though... it looks laughably bad. Oh Nicolas Cage... you so crazy.

[eternity]

The premise seems like it was constructed in a manatee tank.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE NUMBERS RUN OUT!

I'm mildly intrigued, however.

[Qrazy]

I'm so tired of those rubble hitting the camera shots.

[megladon8]

I've never even heard of this before.

[Stay Puft]

I remember reading about this a long time ago, but as I recall the original concept involved actual drawings of the disasters, not this number pattern mystery.

I suppose I might watch it just because it's Alex Proyas.

[megladon8]

Seems like it's trying to capitalize on the...*snort*..."success" of The Number 23.

[Grouchy]

Wait... Didn't Nicolas Cage just predicted accidents and stuff in Next?

I miss Early Edition.

[Qrazy]

I miss Early Edition.

Me too, I love that intro. song. I didn't realize they had 4 seasons, I bet I missed a bunch. I also really liked Kyle Chandler as Bruce Baxter in the new King Kong.

[Grouchy]

Me too, I love that intro. song. I didn't realize they had 4 seasons, I bet I missed a bunch. I also really liked Kyle Chandler as Bruce Baxter in the new King Kong.
Wow, I hadn't realized that was the same actor.

[Sycophant]

Season three of Early Edition was lackluster if I remember correctly. Show totally deserved a season five, but it gave itself some good closing episodes.

[Qrazy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCD5gPm3DFg&feature=related

Revel in the xylophone (I think).

[Skitch]

While Nic Cage is climbing my list of actors I loathe, Alex Proyas is a director I really enjoy.

[Morris Schæffer]

I can't take Cage seriously any more. Every time that same puppy stare and softspoken "put-the-bunny-back-in-the-box" voice. Still, the hair's gotten more manageable so that's good. Nevertheless, this trailer, which reminds me of The Happening, has me intrigued a little bit. Although in the end I'm pretty sure it'll all add up to very little rather than something hair-raisingly twisty and clever.

[Ezee E]

Nic Cage will never outdo himself in Vampire's Kiss.

[Dukefrukem]

I'm there.

[Wryan]

They SO had an opportunity to use zero in the title--KN0W1NG--but they blew it. Therefore, and only for this reason, this movie will suck.

[Wryan]

I also really liked Kyle Chandler as Bruce Baxter in the new King Kong.

He was great.

"Good Christ!"

/checks mirror with brush-mustache

[MadMan]

I loved Early Edition back when it existed. However I never did see the second part of the episode where the main character (I forgot his name) was trying to stop a presidential assassination. I never found out what happened though.

As for the Nic Cage movie, I don't even care what its about.

[Dukefrukem]

its on apple now

http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/knowing/

i think im excited for this

[Morris Schæffer]

I guess it'll all depend on the resolution of the movie. It certainly does intrigue me, and it seems to lead down somewhere spine-tingling and suspenseful, but I also think there's potential for silliness and lameness like with The Happening.

That scene with the airplane was incredible however.

But I can't take Cage seriously anymore.

[Dukefrukem]

But I can't take Cage seriously anymore.

All i think about when I hear his name now is how crappy his performance as Dae-su would have been. Good thing that remake was put on hold.

[Morris Schæffer]

four stars from Ebert:

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090318/REVIEWS/903189991

[Qrazy]

All i think about when I hear his name now is how crappy his performance as Dae-su would have been. Good thing that remake was put on hold.

Pretty sure it was Will Smith as Dae-su.

[Sycophant]

I think Nic Cage was up for Oh Dae-Su at some point, before Spielberg-Smith were attached. I could actually see Cage pulling it off, especially if the rest of the film ended up being kind of schlocky.

A bunch of friends are way hyped to see this movie this weekend and I'm hoping my schedule allows me to accompany them.

[MadMan]

Aside from some of the really cool disaster shot/destruction moments in the trailer, I still think this movie looks pretty lame. I won't be seeing it in theaters.

[transmogrifier]

I think Nic Cage was up for Oh Dae-Su at some point, before Spielberg-Smith were attached. I could actually see Cage pulling it off, especially if the rest of the film ended up being kind of schlocky.

A bunch of friends are way hyped to see this movie this weekend and I'm hoping my schedule allows me to accompany them.

I would consider not even bothering to watch the Oldboy remake if Nic Cage was the lead. Lazy, overexposed actor running through oddball tics is all it would turn out to be.

[Stay Puft]

But I can't take Cage seriously anymore.

Definitely a problem.

I otherwise agree with the sentiments in your signature, too.

There's a great sequence of events late in the film that had me howling with laughter, from the moment Rose freaks out and takes the kids, screams over the phone that someone has to save the children while they are simultaneosuly being abducted by the whispering people, to Nicolas Cage driving through the forest to save his son, gun in hand while steering the wheel. There is definitely some intentional humor in this film, but it eventually reaches a point when I couldn't tell if I was laughing because the filmmakers want me to, or because it's Cage. Or are the filmmakers aware of this, too? How else is anyone supposed to react to that shot of Cage driving his truck through the forest, gun in hand?

I'm not sure Alex Proyas will ever direct another Dark City, which is unfortunate, and disappointing when I think of what Knowing could have been with a stronger writing team. There are some great ideas here, and the directing is sharp at times, but too many other elements hold it back. I love the ending, too. Damn, I love the ending. Or at least the idea of it. It deserves a much better movie. The moment the credits started, the guy sitting in front of me stood up, gestured towards the screen, and said to his friends, "That was... weird. What the hell was... that.. that was weird." I agree.

But that also got me thinking: How are people going to respond to the "message" of the ending? It seems calculated to appease to differing ideologies. Like, if I'm a devoted Christian and believe in God and all that, I'm going to be satisfied with Cage's character arc. But, if I'm an athiest and skeptical of the Christian story, I'm going to appreciate the way the film suggests that it is all a fiction through the many visual allusions in the ending. Which is interesting, because the message of faith comes entirely from Cage's mouth, whereas it is the very structure of the film, its narrative, that seems to counter Cage's religious epiphany. And after all, Cage is just a character who says things. But even here the film seems to take things careful, as, if I recall correctly, it only suggests that Cage is having a spiritual epiphany, not an religious one, which is also interesting because...

Or, wait, maybe it isn't. Because if you're not Christian, why would you care? How the hell does this movie account for other religions? It still places Christianity in the center and makes it the source of some kind of truth. Oy, I have no idea what to make of this anymore.

[Milky Joe]

How the hell does this movie account for other religions? It still places Christianity in the center and makes it the source of some kind of truth.

I don't think it exclusively champions Christianity. All religions have a kind of promise to them of transcendence. Not only does this speak to traditional religions, but it also speaks to the people who think God is an alien. And then it speaks to non-believers through the vehicle of death: death as transcendence in itself. The most haunting, effective image in the film, for me, was of Cage falling to his knees as the spaceship flies away, rain falling on his face, denied transcendence. This is simultaneously one of the bleakest and most hopeful films I've seen out of Hollywood's asshole in a while. I kind of liked it, mediocre scripting aside.

[Stay Puft]

I don't think it exclusively champions Christianity.

Yeah, I see that, but I'm going back to the specific religious allusions the film makes, which are Christian. (Actually, I guess that's not true, since it's mostly Old Testament, but I think Cage's father was supposed to be Christian, which is why I defaulted to referring to that tradition. Or maybe because it's the most prominent. I'm not a religious person, I don't know what I'm talking about, so I should probably tread more carefully.)

My point: What occured to me as I was writing my last post is that, even if we accept what you say about the film and transendence, which I think is true, it still places a specific religious tradition at the center. It's like, if we're supposed to accept that everybody was wrong, the Bible still gets to be right, in a sense, because it is a(n understandable/inevitable) corruption, over time, of things that actually did occur. Other religions are just peripheral nonsense.

I don't know, I'm still not sure what I'm supposed to be taking away from the ending anymore.

[Milky Joe]

It's like, if we're supposed to accept that everybody was wrong, the Bible still gets to be right, in a sense, because it is a(n understandable/inevitable) corruption, over time, of things that actually did occur.

That's a good point, but even though the film places Christianity at the center, I still think it touches on the common threads that run through all religions. It just happens to take place in America (and star Nicolas Cage). But it's an extremely spiritual movie, to be certain. I can see the atheist crowd just loathing it.

[Ezee E]

Pretty good actually. There's some good things that can be talked about, and I already see it through Puft and Milky Joe.

Regarding the final imageIt is definitely Christian in nature. "Eve" perhaps with the Tree of Life and all. Pretty obvious.

With that, the movie makes some strange choices, usually involving Cage, whether it be his chase in the subway, or the stunts in his truck. They could've easily been avoided.

I wish the movie used a better actor, it could've been great.

Nonetheless, quite the surprise. Nice score too.

[Ezee E]

I also think D-Davis may like this a lot.

[Milky Joe]

Regarding the final imageIt is definitely Christian in nature. "Eve" perhaps with the Tree of Life and all. Pretty obvious.

Yes, it's obvious, but it's also pretty subversive of Christianity, given that the final image implies that the "Tree of Life" and Adam/Eve storyline is a kind of generic thing, an ongoing, cyclical process that this higher-dimensional (or whatever) race of beings can basically repeat on demand, and not the one-time, only-on-Earth deal that the Bible would have us believe.

[Ezee E]

Yes, it's obvious, but it's also pretty subversive of Christianity, given that the final image implies that the "Tree of Life" and Adam/Eve storyline is a kind of generic thing, an ongoing, cyclical process that this higher-dimensional (or whatever) race of beings can basically repeat on demand, and not the one-time, only-on-Earth deal that the Bible would have us believe.
Don't know. THey had angelic features as they were going into the ship to fly off to wherever. Start all over again, and return the humans to the earth. If anything, I wonder if this is supporting some type of creationism.

[The Mike]

I just saw this, and kinda had my mind blown. Biggest surprise in a long time.

[D_Davis]

I also think D-Davis may like this a lot.

I did like it it quite a bit. It's interesting.

[The Mike]

Though, it did one thing that always bothers me about sci-fi flicks with the final shot.....

The catalyst in the movie is the sun, of course, and part of the message is how a mass that appears so small to us can destroy us in entirety. BUT, the final shot happens on a planet, which apparently, has another giant planet just outside of its atmosphere....isn't that risky? Wouldn't the Holy aliens want to protect the new society on a planet with a buffer between it and the nearest possibly destructive celestial mass?

Just sayin'.

[Dukefrukem]

Heh. My hometown is featured in this. It's actually a good shot of the Lincoln Labs observatory. I didn't think they would actually film there but they did. The rest of the movie was filmed in Australia as you can tell by the police vehicles and ambulances but the characters are based in my hometown. Kinda cool but it makes me wonder how Hollywood knew about this little gem of my town and why they decided to write it into the script. Who had that idea from the writing team?

This was a relatively entertaining and spooky Cage flick. Had a sense of the Forgotten mixed with typical Cage drama. Unspectacular but an OK popcorn script. The last shot was a little :rolleyes: though.

[Morris Schæffer]

I enjoyed it. It has at least one hair-raising action scene, the movie certainly pulls no punches with its finale and certain things are kept deliberately vague so as to not render the movie overly preposterous. But yeah, that thing with the kids at the end...

[Dead & Messed Up]

This flick has a great 70% in the middle, where the flick is just building on the mystery of the numbers. The beginning scenes with Cage in class are straight-up absurd, and I'm not sure of the coda, which is intriguing in theory.

In general, plays like a dumbed-down but good-hearted Childhood's End.

Will post more thoughts after work.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Okay, but let's seriously unpack how profoundly bad the classroom scene with Nic Cage is. He's a professor, and then he starts asking if the universe is deterministic or "chaotic." (You know, instead of determinism vs. free will.) When he discusses determinism, he suggests that it means everything happens for a reason. (He should be saying that everything has a cause.) When he's talking, he discusses whether or not events are "accidents." (He should be saying "incidental," because "accident" presupposes an order that was disrupted and an intelligence that disrupted that order.) When he discusses life on Earth, he suggests that it's a strange coincidence that the Earth just happens to be in the exact spot needed to foster life...

And, argh, the anthropic principle. Okay, look. It took ten billion years of a lifeless universe before, as best we understand, the Earth formed. And even then, it took nearly a billion years for the first prokaryotes to arrive. And after that, nearly two billion years for the first eukaryotes to evolve. Nearly two billion years of single-celled life. How the hell can we argue that the Earth is specifically tailored for the emergence of life? What it actually looks like is that life barely happened over and over and over. A series of incidental turns. And even then, the principle itself is silly, because if conditions were different, we can't say a different kind of life wouldn't emerge - they might in fact look something like tardigrades, actual animals who have little need of the precise conditions us mammals require.

UGH.

[Sorry, that went long, will come back to this.]

[Dead & Messed Up]

All right. All right.

So, something that drove me mildly batty about the film was its epilogue.

In which the two children who've been hearing whispers from telepathic angel-like space-farers not only get taken into space, but get taken to an alien planet that's meant to unambiguously remind us of Eden. Which means that what we've been watching is to some degree all about a New Eden. Yes, that old sci-fi staple where you watched an entire story play out so that the author could dump a man and a woman (boy and girl in this case) on a fresh paradise so they can start the whole damn thing over again.

Now, this can have its place, providing the material is up to snuff. But what a mountain to climb. Please know that this type of ending was considered so predictable/canned/tedious from amateur writers that sci-fi magazines straight-up stopped accepting any stories that ended with a paradise pullback (Aldiss called them "Shaggy God" stories). But again, a priori, an ending like this could function. Provided that the story gave it some sort of real value and connection to the rest of the film. But while this matches iconographically with the film, it offers no real catharsis to any of the prior concepts or characters. It's an ah-hah aren't-we-clever touch, fusing a scientific story trope with religion (the film also makes sure its A.I. robot-looking aliens have wispy ephemeral angel wings, which is less annoying because those characters are conveyors, not destination).

To the film's credit, though, it finds a clever way to end Koestler's reconciliation with his preacher father by having him agree that his son is in a "better place" (Koestler knows this is literally true), and that he and his dead wife and his son will be together (because he's given his son a locket that ensures the parents will stay in the child's memory). This is all a little hoary, but it's also sincere, and the film doesn't impose any sort of contrived "come to Jesus" moment for Koestler.

[Dead & Messed Up]

SPOILERS FROM HERE ON OUT...

What really worked, though, was the brick-by-brick buildup of the code. When it was written. How it was written. The secret numbers in the door that come back in the end. How Koestler first notices patterns - it's a hilarious coincidence (the water-stain from the glass), but that absurdity felt endearing enough to offset the contrivance. And then how he has the insight to find the meaning of the number strings that follow the date/death strings. Just happening to be a few blocks from an imminent disaster was tough to swallow, but the actual epiphany when looking at the banal GPS on his dashboard felt right (and the plane crash luckily is dramatic enough with its faux-Lubeszki camera movement to paper over the coincidence (or is it something more? ooohhhh....).

Additionally, this is a disaster film where the disasters escalate effectively. One of the noticeable issues with Roland Emmerich is that, while he can stage his apocalyptic shenanigans with enormous scale, clarity, and a sort of gallows-humor misanthropy, he tends to fall into the Poseidon Adventure trap of peaking in the middle. The flooding of New York in The Day After Tomorrow is a good example. Emmerich tries to find new stakes with escaped wolves, which shows how poorly he thought out the stakes of his story. Similarly, the peak of 2012 is undoubtedly the glorious destruction of Los Angeles, but after that... why bother?

But the airplane is a terrific inciting disaster, the subway sequence is a bit smaller in scale but larger in tension and impact (as it makes firm Koestler's impotence). And then it's a slow march forward to the heat death of the Earth. Setting the end-of-film large-scale scenes of panic to "Symphony No. 7" feels super-hacky in theory (the cue's a half-step above the eye-rolling ubiquity of the Ninth or Toccata and Fugue)... but it works because Proyas drops out the diegetic sound altogether and just lets us watch the planet die. Koestler looks out his car window and sees his buddy (Ben Mendelsohn) recognize him amid the clamor. They just look at each other, and that's that. I like that fatalism.

[Skitch]

I liked it. :D

[Dukefrukem]

I rewatched this. Enjoyed it much more the second time around. It's going in my collection.

[Skitch]

I rewatched this. Enjoyed it much more the second time around. It's going in my collection.

I need to bust this bluray out again.