The movie itself doesn't meet many film-making standards nor hasn't in-depth story, generally based on the important subject of technology/science misuse which is rapidly getting more present in everyday life. Some of implied global catastrophic scenarios are making a climate change old, weary and not immediate; unlike bio-technology, polymer pollution, techno-totalitarism, etc.
The story basically does a shallow dive into some of latter disaster scenarios. Combining misuse of bio and nano technology with corporate dystopian surveillance.
That's what actually drove me through the movie, beside (some of) esthetics.
With the great significance of those catastrophic scenarios, it really could do a better job, leaving us (after medium action) with very unfinished ending, "unchecked" science, unanswered questions and very thin characters and story. Not to mention other film-making goals that are not met. They really should have done a better job with obviously enough budget (judged by casting, effects, etc.) because those catastrophic subjects are of global great importance to us all.
