Efenstor

Everyone who's deeply interested in folklore, as I dare to say I am, knows the story of the Fairies of Cottingley, it's one nearly-epic story of the two girls who inadvertently made a half of the world actually believe in magical creatures (I don't count children, for they did, they do and they will believe, and that's wondrous), and the best part of the epic is that they had never straightforwardly confessed that they've forged it just not to ruin people's glimpse of faith in magical.

If that's what this movie should have been telling about then it certainly does not the job. Despite the wonderful and believable acting of Florence Hoath and Elizabeth Earl, the incoherent screenplay and direction ruin everything and only a shadow of the childhood magic remains in the dark corner pushed away by the social-drama clichés (they even managed to insert there a villain and the goddammit comic relief!). And the top-notch CGI doesn't help out. There's more magic even in ghost-story movies, such as 'Lady in White' or 'The Changeling'. Worth watching, but only once. I deeply hope that some day someone will make a movie worthy of this story's spiritual background, so you'd understand why some perfectly sane people believe in fairies, even without the photographs.

One of my favorite books is the collection of narrative tales, recorded in the middle of the 20th century among the Siberian villagers, mostly in the Chita region, by V.P. Zinovyev, and the thing I really love and adore in those stories is that those people actually believe all the folklore things they're speaking about! It's grievous that there are less and less such people live in this world, of that kind who believe because of the purity of the heart, not because of fear or passion. Some call those people dark and unenlightened, some laugh at them, but the thing they actually have is the faith, whilst everyone else have only a ghost of it. That who knows cannot believe.

The film is often compared to Darren Aronofsky's "Pi" and it's actually similarly intelligent and visually creative, yet "Pi" is more consistent and logical. So what we have great about "1.0"? First and foremost is its message, which is very relevant for the consumer society of today; the very discovery of that message while watching the movie is a rather exciting thing, yet it's a common thing for intelligent movies; but that's not the point, the point is that "1.0" warns you about living to consume products, the corporations will never care much about you, they only want money, more and sooner. That's why they would never care much even about debugging the programs they put into their consumers. Of course, this movie is a sci-fi because I think it's virtually impossible to create a virus for the human brain, even with some kind of microscopic electronic "mites". But doesn't, say, propaganda sounds like someone's trying to put a mind virus into your brain, to make it possess your will and so to control it? Or weren't communism and fascism a real kind of mind plague striking billions of people? May be then even there are demons who possess people and make them do things they wouldn't like to, and they are actually mind viruses, thoughts that have an ability to transmit themselves using verbal channels? We should learn to watch attempts to control our will and to resist them, or we won't be human anymore just like those poor people in this amazing movie. 7 out of 10, because the pace of the story is yet too sluggish and the visuals are overly grotesque which I don't really like, here "Pi" did better.

I'll be short: the movie is very well directed, acting is great, photography is notable, plot is mediocre (as always with King) and the very idea is as old as schools exist. I always wondered: can King write a multilayer and profound book at all? Movies made after his books often overshadow his books because of direction, acting, etc. but it's always obvious that the plot, King's creation, is always weak and has nothing to think about after the movie's ended. You can remember spectacular scenes created by a cinematographer, wonderful acting but never can remember anything wonderful about characters' minds. The only exception from this rule is "The Shawshank Redemption", but still even there is not much originality, even there you cannot find any inside work in the characters' souls. Have they souls at all? As to Carrie, it's again a typical kitsch about a peer-terrorized girl raised by a religion-obsessed mother. The characters are so cartoonish that sometimes even incredible acting cannot bring them to life (especially it concerns Carrie's mother). There is nothing much to discuss. Would I recommend this movie? Yes I would. Watch and decide yourself whether you'll watch it ever again or not. As to me I don't know, because the filmmakers did their best and their work looks really great. 2 out of 10 for the King's work and 5 out of 10 go to the filmmakers.