The Creator

If the script had been as good as the special effects, then this movie would've scored a Perfect 10. That's because the special effects were absolutely beautiful and aesthetically unique. It's the type of sci-fi I love watching and which inspires my thinking on topics of the future and technology. Back to the script though...

The script for this movie felt uninspired and I didn't care about any of the characters at all. None of them had any unique qualities, and the dialogue was all totally predictable. It was definitely written by a professional though, but it just felt flat and it took no real risks. Towards the end of the movie, however, it seemed to pick up a little bit, but by that stage I wasn't invested in it anymore. Also, the movie went on for faaaaaar too long, considering I didn't care about the content.

So huge props to the special effects team for making me finish watching this film and not thinking it was a total waste of time, and that's the only reason it won't be unforgettable.

I watched this from start to finish without being drawn into the story at any point.

I think John Washington is miscast here, I had the same exact experience when i watched Tenet... found myself very disconnected as I he didn't seem to make a proper connection with the role he was portraying.

That is not to say the film isn't without issues. They have been fairly well documented by other reviewers so I'll not labour the points here.

My main issue is with the lack of emotional involvment with the characters. The film measures zero on the emtional richter scale, but more, the screenplay just doesn't manage to get you excited or involved with anything that is unfolding. Additionally, the characters seem to have little connection to each other. In fact it is only at the end of the movie that Joshua and Alphie seem to have any tangible emotional cohesion.

Contrast this with The Golden Child 1986 where Eddie Murphy plays Chandler Jarrell and the connection he makes to The Golden Child played by J. L. Reate. Here you can see what a great connection is established on screen and the massive difference in outcome it produces. Both films have two similar sets of pairings in almost identical scenarios with a stark contrast in outcome.

Additionally Thought the film is incredible to look at, much of what unfolds makes no sense. I'd liken this film to an iconic fashion show where the crowd Oohs and Aahs at the fantastic creations that unfold on the runway, that no one (bar Lady Gaga) would ever be caught dead in at a normal social event.

Anyway, for me the film was a big dissapointment, I can't say John David Washington was the cause of this since the Movie has many other problematic aspects, but the ones I've mentioned were particularly significant for me.

5/10 sadly.

Right away, this is a must watch film. If you love cinematic imagery, this is po*n.

The production is incredible. All the visual creative departments went ham on this, and it's incredibly beautiful, intricate and interesting.

However, the writing was, at times, terrible; even some of the acting, mainly the character named Josh wasn't good enough (the kid was great tho)

It felt like some of the scenes were "forcefully" inserted just for the sake of illustrating something, even though they had no logic or necessity (a robot bomb that's running? Really? Why not just shoot the bomb like you've already done dozens of time?)

And also let's not get into the philosophical opportunity that's missed here. I wished they would tangentially hit more some of the existential issues about AI vs humanity.

Anyway...Go watch the movie It's solid.

Walking into the theater, my expectations were a mix of excitement and curiosity, especially given the film's intriguing take on AI.

From the get-go, "The Creator" impressed me with its use of the $80 million budget. The cinematography was nothing short of remarkable, reminding me of the visual flair seen in "Blade Runner" "Elysium", "I, Robot" and "A. I." The world-building was immersive, creating a believable and lived-in environment that drew me in.

The performances, particularly the dynamic between Joshua and Alfie, were the highlights of the film for me. Their interactions brought depth to the story, and I found myself genuinely invested in their journey. However, as the plot progressed, I couldn't help but feel a sense of disappointment.

The story, which began with promise, started to unravel. The pacing felt rushed, and the plot became increasingly predictable. I noticed glaring plot holes that were hard to overlook, and the narrative lacked the depth I had hoped for. The ambitious theme of AI's humanity, which initially seemed thought-provoking, was undermined by the film's inability to maintain coherence.

While I appreciated the technical brilliance of the film, including the special effects and sound design, the script was a letdown. It was as if the movie wanted to say something profound about AI and humanity but ended up glossing over these complex themes, opting instead for a more superficial treatment.

The characters, aside from Joshua, felt one-dimensional. I struggled to connect with them emotionally, this emotional disconnect was particularly evident in the portrayal of the AI characters, including Alfie, who, despite being central to the story, lacked the depth to make their plight resonate with me.

While "The Creator" started off with great potential, it ultimately left me feeling underwhelmed. The film excelled in its visual storytelling but fell short in its narrative execution. It was a visually captivating experience, but the lack of emotional depth and narrative coherence made it a disappointing outing for me. I walked out of the theater feeling that the movie, despite its grand aspirations, missed the mark in delivering a fully engaging and thought-provoking sci-fi experience. It could have been a masterpiece, but a missed opportunity at best.

Oh dear. I was really looking forward to this, and managed to get a ticket for a pre-release showing. I left disappointed.

One fact that too many film-makers have failed to grasp is that CGI alone does not make a film. Effects can make a good film better, but they can't make a mediocre film good. Marvel, I'm looking at you.

It's not enough to string a few action scenes together and finish with some really big explosions. You have to have a story - preferably one that hangs together coherently. This is what's missing from this film, whose plot-holes are more pronounced than the holes where the AI characters' ears would be. Just one example - our hero is on the run in an unspecified Asian county, where it's established that he doesn't speak the language. He breaks down. A van stops, and he's asked if he needs help. Asked in perfect English. That's bad enough - but then for no explored reason, our good Samaritan progresses from giving a stranger a lift to helping him through a police road-block, risking the lives of his five children in the process.

Why are there gardens on Nomad? Why, if it's the last word in military technology, is it as easy to blow up as the Death Star or a Bond Villain's lair?

The child-McGuffin is portrayed by an excellent young performer, but makes no logical sense. The nuclear blast in Los Angeles (seen in the trailer, so it's not a spoiler) is cited as the reason for the war against AI. There's one throwaway line about this late in the film - but it's just that: a throw-away line. Following it up would've led to a much more interesting film.

I've heard it suggested that this should be seen as a metaphor for America's involvement in Vietnam, If so, it's a tired re-hash and forty years too late. Also, that would mean regarding it as an intelligent film, which it absolutely isn't

Just one more big-budget wasted opportunity.