Transcendence (2014)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Posts: 534
Joined: November 2013
Location: Earth*
Release Date US: July 29th 2014. :gonf:

Posts: 534
Joined: November 2013
Location: Earth*
I am disappointed in the soundtrack...

Posts: 534
Joined: November 2013
Location: Earth*
This app is horrible. Poorly designed. Barely works.

Posts: 534
Joined: November 2013
Location: Earth*
antovolk wrote:Whoever had a teal shade in their poster, you win :)

Oh, and before the Chinese poster went up, a bunch of Russian sites used my #whatisPINN poster...

UPD: So I was bored and made a thing:

Image

(the logo is a recreation by me)
Nice a lot like the movie.

Posts: 99
Joined: December 2010
5/10 is a bit harsh. When I first saw the bad reviews for Transcendence, my instincts said they were wrong out of my respect for Wally Pfister and a great cast lead by Johnny Depp. My instincts were correct, for the most part. This was a good movie. It didn't deserve such poor reviews. The writing can be slow at times, but the premise and concepts are very interesting. The cast did all right for the most part and the direction was solid. The cinematography was solid as well. I liked the ending a lot, humanity fearing what it doesn't understand. Overall, the only weak link was the writing and lack of emotional development between the two leads before Will died. Also, it had too many supporting and unnecessary characters. So, yes, Pfister should've worked with a very seasoned writer for such a high concept. I say it's a 6.5/10

Can't wait for Interstellar though!

Posts: 965
Joined: June 2012
I was hoping that the critics would be wrong, but I have to admit that I didn't like the movie much myself. I didn't hate it, but it's not particularly good. The film has an interesting concept and starts off intriguing (if somewhat wobbly) and then becomes increasingly dull as it progresses. I felt that the casting was off in many places, starting with Johnny Depp, and the writing is pretty weak as well. Pfister's direction is bland and the visuals are nothing exceptional. In the end the film's biggest fault is its glacial pace and, quite frankly, I was just bored.

I'm glad I only paid $1.57 on Redbox rather than $13 for a movie ticket. I didn't have huge expectations for the film, but I definitely chalk it up as a disappointment.

2/5

Posts: 3488
Joined: May 2010
Location: Canada
I think this was worse than I anticipated, and that’s with hearing and reading all the negative feedback.

Posts: 4
Joined: October 2014
Most underrated movie of the year. If it didn't have the Nolan and Pfister involvement I doubt very much that people would have come down as hard on it as they did. They were just expecting far too much. It's certainly a heck of a lot better that Lucy anyway, which is practically the same film. I'd give it a 7/10 and I think Kermode's assessment of the film is spot on!

Posts: 889
Joined: January 2012
Location: Australia
:? To think I was keen for this movie.
What a piece of trash.

I blame it all on Jack Paglan's script. (No prior credits? It must be a pseudonym. If not, he's doomed)
He treats the concept of science and technology like magic, in which things happen if you will it to happen.
It's interesting that Nolan was involved in two films this year, one extremely promoting the idea of learning, exploration and science as a way to advance humanity (Interstellar); and the other (this film) to be completely the opposite.

Worst film of the year; and I bet everyone will want to forget this film happened.

Posts: 26115
Joined: February 2010
Location: Texas
We're gonna transcend them.
Image
Last edited by Cilogy on May 4th, 2015, 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply