PopSpective_net

Morgan starts with a simple premise of the moral and ethical implications of genetically crafting a biological being from scratch. Even if such a being looks and acts human, is it? Is the being a "she" or an "it"–and does the being have rights or autonomy, or can it be owned like a pet, or an iPhone?

Based on nothing more than the trailers, the movie struck me as a sort of biological / genetic mirror of Ex Machina. That turns out to be true to an extent, but Morgan doesn't do as good a job of exploring the philosophical question or examining the humanity of the being. The question is sort of posed, and then quickly falls aside as Morgan turns into more of a blood and guts action flick.

There is a twist at the end that I actually didn't see coming. My son says it was obvious early on, but the first hint I got was only moments before the truth of the twist was revealed.

I enjoyed the movie–and I recommend you go see it. I just feel like there was much more potential there to really dig into the philosophical issues and ethical debates of creating a genetic hybrid.

I had a chance to speak to director Luke Scott after seeing Morgan, and we dove into those issues a bit further. Scott told me that in his opinion the basic premise of Morgan is entirely plausible. "A lot of the background science–of course it's a fantasy that we made–but a lot of the background science is rooted in truth."

We talked some about the similarities and differences between the premise of Ex Machina and the premise of Morgan–a cybernetic android being versus a genetic hybrid biological being. Scott shared his belief that the technical possibility of creating something as advanced as the android in Ex Machina is far beyond our abilities, but Morgan, and the ability to create a biological being, is within our reach.

"The science is there," explained Scott. "The only thing holding us back is a moral question."

It is a valid and important moral question, too. If a company like Monsanto can create genetically modified seeds to produce healthier or more bountiful crops and own a patent on that seed, would we allow a genetic engineering company to craft healthier or more capable gene pools and own a patent on those genes? Could we create a society where those with the financial resources are able to purchase superior genetics–thereby artificially widening the gap and creating a population of genetic "Haves" and "Have Nots"? Or, would we deem a genetically modified or engineered being to be less than human–a thing or creature that can be owned, rather than a sentient being with rights?

Those are all great questions to explore, but Morgan really just scratches the surface of them.

I asked Luke Scott what's next on his horizon, and he let me know he's working on a project that also comes with a moral and ethical dilemma, but this one is based on a true story. Scott told me he is working on a script based on a book describing the story of the Donner Party–a group of homesteading pioneers that got caught in bad weather and stranded on a glacier and had to resort to cannibalism to survive.

Let me start by saying that I like 'The Principle'–it's just that I don't like it for the reasons the writer and producer would prefer. In a nutshell, the movie is supposed to be an enlightening look at current science related to cosmology and the origins of the universe, calling into question the idea that Earth is not necessarily special and is not the center of the universe. As far as I'm concerned, the premise and conclusions are nonsense, but the way the information is presented gives it an air of credibility and authenticity that prove to be a valuable lesson in how pseudo-science can appear legitimate at face value.

Are you a Watcher or a Player? My wife and I had a chance to see a pre-release screening of Nerve at the Alamo Drafthouse, followed by a live-streamed Q&A with Dave Franco.

The premise of the movie revolves around an online game called Nerve. The game website describes it like Truth or Dare…without the truth. I would say it's more like Fear Factor and Amazing Race, combined with Periscope live streaming and a splash of 4Chan. Basically, you can join the game as either a "Watcher" or a "Player". The Watchers pay money and propose dares for the Players. The Players have to complete the assigned dares in order to win the money. Simple enough.

As we have witnessed with things like Taylor Hicks winning American Idol, or "Boaty McBoatface" winning an online contest to name a polar research ship—the anonymous masses on the Internet have a sadistic sense of humor when given enough latitude. You can just imagine what sorts of dares you might be challenged with if you opened it up for the whole Internet to crowdsource a dare for you.

Nerve was pretty awesome. I don't get off in the weeds much about cinematography, lighting, or other things like that. I base my reviews and recommendations on one thing and one thing only—"Was I entertained, and do I feel like the movie was a worth my time and money." With Nerve, the answer is an emphatic "Yes".

Granted, the movie isn't without its plot holes, and events that defy belief. Suffice it to say that I don't feel like those things take away from the experience of the movie. I mean—it's fiction. The story and events are almost supposed to defy belief by definition. I still highly recommend that you go see Nerve. If you want to talk about issues with the plot after you've seen it, drop me an email and we can have that conversation.

The live-streamed Q&A after the movie was pretty cool, too. Dave Franco seems to be very likable and funny, but also a bit quiet—possibly even shy. He definitely portrayed his personal life as something that is both a tad boring and mundane compared to what you might imagine for a Hollywood star, as well as private. Ironically, given the premise of the movie, Franco says he essentially does not engage online or in social networks.

It was interesting to listen to Franco talk about making the movie and some of the things that challenged him. I don't want to give anything away, but you can see in the trailer that Franco's character rides a motorcycle. Franco said he did not previously know how to ride one, so the directors gave him a motorcycle and a couple weeks to learn before letting him loose on the streets of New York and trusting him to drive co-star Emma Roberts around.

Someone also asked whether or not there is any concern that someone will now try to create a similar game in real life. Franco described the movie as being "five minutes into the future"—meaning that it's feasible something like Nerve could exist. Again—we already have shows like Big Brother and Fear Factor, and people live streaming their own exploits and adventures on Periscope, Facebook, YouTube and more. It's not a huge stretch to imagine tying all of those things together into some sort of crowdsourced daredevil online game.

Franco replied, "I hope that more good comes from this than bad—like I really hope a game like this never exists," adding, "But, if it does—don't blame us." I like to think I'd be a Player. After watching the movie, though, I may think twice about that and just kick back and watch some more crazy YouTube videos.