Published Nov 2024
Published Nov 2024
Published Nov 2024
Published Nov 2024
Published Nov 2024
THE CREATOR
THE CREATOR
54
54
54
54
Impressive sci-fi concepts and cinematography, undermined by a predictable and generic story that contains plot holes too numerous to list.
Impressive sci-fi concepts and cinematography, undermined by a predictable and generic story with plot holes too numerous to list.
Creators
Gareth Edwards
Year:
2023
Genre:
Sci-Fi
Watched:
1x
Director:
Gareth Edwards
Year:
2023
Genre:
Sci-Fi
Watched:
1x
From:
Gareth Edwards
Year:
2023
Genre:
Sci-Fi
Watched:
1x
Artificial love, design, and dystopia across the stunning and futuristic realm of New Asia
SPOILERS
The Creator may be the first AI film released since artificial intelligence began to take meaningful shape in society. Numerous profound questions and scenarios have been raised by political, tech, and philosophical thought leaders regarding this topic, so we are well primed for Gareth Edwards and his team to present their perspective on this emerging technology, which is brimming with potential for creativity and reflection.
An intriguing premise indeed set; A world where AI is fully established, with different competing West vs East ideologies and politics clashing on how this intelligence should be integrated and regarded by society. Unfortunately, this is as interesting as the story gets, which sadly is a thin and generic mess, riddled with plot holes, contrivances, and ex-machina moments that all strive to propel the plot toward a false mystery and twist that can be seen coming a mile away.
We’ve seen this 'man reluctantly escorts young child he soon learns to love' narrative many times before, leading to great films and shows such as Léon: The Professional, Children of Men, Logan, and the recent The Last of Us. It can make for great storytelling, often rich with interesting and meaningful character development, that typically with a a significant emotional payoff at the end. In the case of *The Creator*, the character development is largely superficial, exacerbated by poor dialogue and monotonous, emotionless acting from John David Washington, but with some positives found in Madeleine Yuna Voyles role as Alphie.
The relationship between these two felt entirely forced. No connection is established to justify the tender life-and-death moment we were expected to feel touched by. Even Joshua's relationship with his wife Maya lacked depth, repeatedly showcasing the same wistful beach scene and name screaming as they tried to establish a motivation we never cared about (which also by the way made little sense when scrutinized)
You would expect that with such limited time devoted to character development, the sci-fi world-building and underlying themes would be significantly stronger too. While there are moments of originality, such as the memory recapture technology and specialized AI designed for specific needs, much of the execution feels predictable. The AIs are intended to be relatable, and their deaths are meant to be tragic, but they never are, plus their competency is often alarmingly poor. I’ve seen Mario Kart characters with greater intelligence and accuracy than the police AI, whose sole purpose of being is surely to be able to hit a target.
The Creator may be the first AI film released since artificial intelligence began to take meaningful shape in society. Numerous profound questions and scenarios have been raised by political, tech, and philosophical thought leaders regarding this topic, so we are well primed for Gareth Edwards and his team to present their perspective on this emerging technology, which is brimming with potential for creativity and reflection.
An intriguing premise indeed set; A world where AI is fully established, with different competing West vs East ideologies and politics clashing on how this intelligence should be integrated and regarded by society. Unfortunately, this is as interesting as the story gets, which sadly is a thin and generic mess, riddled with plot holes, contrivances, and ex-machina moments that all strive to propel the plot toward a false mystery and twist that can be seen coming a mile away.
We’ve seen this 'man reluctantly escorts young child he soon learns to love' narrative many times before, leading to great films and shows such as Léon: The Professional, Children of Men, Logan, and the recent The Last of Us. It can make for great storytelling, often rich with interesting and meaningful character development, that typically comes with a significant emotional payoff at the end. In the case of The Creator, the character development is largely superficial, exacerbated by poor dialogue and monotonous, emotionless acting from John David Washington. Some positives can be found in child actors Madeleine Yuna Voyles role as Alphie.
The relationship between these two felt entirely forced. No connection is established to justify the tender life-and-death moment we were expected to feel touched by, and even Joshua's relationship with his wife Maya lacked depth, repeatedly showcasing the same wistful beach scene and name screaming as they tried to establish a motivation we never cared about (which also by the way made little sense when scrutinized)
You would expect that with such limited time devoted to character development, the sci-fi world-building and underlying themes would be significantly stronger too. While there are moments of originality, such as the memory recapture technology and specialized AI designed for specific needs, much of the execution feels predictable. The AIs are intended to be relatable, and their deaths are meant to be tragic, but they never are, plus their competency is often alarmingly poor. I’ve seen Mario Kart AI with greater intelligence and accuracy than the policebots in this movie, whose sole purpose of being is surely to be able to hit a target.
There are honestly too many plot holes and nonsensical moments for me to know where to begin; that's how bad things are here. Instead, I'll simply highlight how amusing it is that the character Harun, played by Ken Watanabe, takes on the exact same role as he did in The Last Samurai. It’s identical. This character type and arc is so overdone as it is, but the choice of actor only underscores how generic this film manages to be in almost everything it does.
What a shame that such a poor script and story accompany one of the most visually stunning films we’ve seen in recent years. The movie was shot using a $4,000 compact Sony FRX camera. To provide some perspective, a typical blockbuster movie camera can cost around $10,000 to rent for a single day. It’s amazing how well this camera performs and what the filmmakers achieved with it. The dystopian atmosphere and grainy cinematrography is fantastic and the color grading just heavenly.
The design of the AIs were impressive as well. In fact, all the mechanistic elements of the sci-fi world—whether they involve weaponry, ships, transportation, or the formidable laser-annihilating HAWK station—are executed remarkably well. Even the graphic design is distinctive and thoughtfully crafted, rounding off a bespoke design direction that stands alongside some of the greats.
Place all this against the canvas of Asia's most stunning landscapes and you have a visual feast for the eyes that is hard to deny. Cambodia, the Himalayas, Vietnam and Laos all feature in jaw dropping screenplay with a complementary score from Hans Zimmer. This combination gives us visually striking action sequences that, at times, are almost thrilling, despite the stakes being so emotionally low that you never care about the outcome.
There are honestly too many plot holes and nonsensical moments for me to know where to begin; that's how bad things are here. Instead, I'll simply highlight how amusing it is that the character Harun, played by Ken Watanabe, takes on the exact same role as he did in The Last Samurai. It’s identical. This character type and arc is so overdone as it is, but the choice of actor only underscores how generic this film manages to be in almost everything it does.
What a shame that such a poor script and story accompany one of the most visually stunning films we’ve seen in recent years. The movie was shot using a $4,000 compact Sony FRX camera. To provide some perspective, a typical blockbuster movie camera can cost around $10,000 to rent for a single day. It’s amazing how well this camera performs and what the filmmakers achieved with it. The dystopian atmosphere and grainy cinematography are fantastic and the color grading just heavenly. It was a joy to find screen-grabs for this review.
The design of the AIs were impressive too. In fact, all the mechanistic elements of the sci-fi world—whether they involve weaponry, ships, transportation, or the formidable laser-annihilating HAWK station—are executed remarkably well. Even the graphic design is distinctive and thoughtfully crafted, rounding off a bespoke visual experience that stands alongside some of the greats.
Place all this against the canvas of Asia's most stunning landscapes and you have a visual feast for the eyes that is hard to deny. Cambodia, the Himalayas, Vietnam and Laos all feature in jaw dropping screenplay with a complementary score from Hans Zimmer. This combination gives us visually striking action sequences that, at times, are almost thrilling, despite the stakes being so emotionally low that you never care about
the outcome.
VERDICT
A concept brimming with potential receives the generic Hollywood treatment, abandoning meaningful connections and cohesive storytelling whilst going all in on beautiful scenery and striking sci-fi visuals. While technically impressive, it is ultimately robotic and soulless in almost all aspects, believing itself to be profound and sentimental while ultimately finding itself relegated to the ever-growing pile of forgettable sci-fi films from the 21st century.
RATING BREAKDOWN
Story
40
Directing:
50
Visuals:
90
Acting / Dialogue:
55
Music / Sound:
76
BONUS
cinematography
FINAL
54
54
54
54
54
MOOD
MOOD