QuickFacts
Format: Film/Movie
Director: Wally Pfister
Writer: Jack Paglen
Genre: Science Fiction
Length: 119 minutes
My rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars
Spoiler Alert! Do not read this review if you do not wish to hear any plot details.
Directed by cinematographer Wally Pfister, the science fiction thriller Transcendence hit theaters on April 18. The film portrays the lives and actions of computer scientists Will and Evelyn Caster as they struggle to create a self-aware A.I. powerful enough to rid the world of disease and pollution. When Will is shot with a radiation poison laced bullet, Evelyn and their scientist friend Max upload his mind to PINN (Physically Independent Neural Network) the super computer brain child of their lives’ work.
While this film received bad review after bad review on Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, and elsewhere, I tend to disagree with what I feel to be their rash judgments. While others label Transcendence cliche, overdone, over-complex, and containing weak plot points, I found it to have a good balance of explanation and implication, creating in the viewer an enjoyable conflict of interests and plenty of food for thought. While the film may address a topic that is common fare in recent pop culture: the ethical issues surrounding the creation of an intelligent super-computer, Transcendence does it in a way that differs from those before it.
The two main ethical questions this film causes its viewer to ask are probably “At what point does a meshing of man and machine cease to be man?” and “How much power can a machine gain before it begins to abuse that power, and what constitutes abuse anyway?” The first of these is manifested in the film through the doubt of many of the characters that Will is still Will after he has been uploaded to PINN, and at no point in the film does it give a simple answer. In fact, it almost pounds the idea that Will is no longer human at all into the viewer’s head and then, at the last minute, re-introduces the concept that he really might be, causing an extreme case of shifting loyalties. This experience helps the audience identify with the characters, as there are few of them who do not switch sides at some point in the film.
It is exactly this characteristic of the film that I believe makes it most enjoyable: the fact that it makes you think. Predictability and interest are usually concepts that work in opposition when it comes to the medium of film, and that is why I find it so unusual that Peter Travers of Rolling Stone says of Transcendence “…every predictable thing that you think will happen does happen.” How do I find this film so entertaining while someone else finds it so predictable? I have an answer for this. I feel that, while some of the themes and questions that are raised by this film may be predictable, the answers are not. It seems to me that there is a shift occurring in the way that people enjoy the medium of film. Camera takes are now generally shorter than they used to be, CGI plays a larger part than it ever has before, and action scenes are so pervasive that many films rely on them rather than a well composed plot. It is my belief that many filmgoers have a certain expectation when they enter a movie theater these days, and it is to be entertained without any effort on their own part to do so. While Transcendence contains its fair share of CGI and a handful of action scenes, what it is best at is making its viewer think, making him sort out his own opinions and loyalties in order to decide who to trust and who to be wary of. That being said, if you are looking to be only passively entertained, you will not likely enjoy this film, but if you are an active viewer who enjoys having his/her mind engaged, you may very well love Transcendence.
So, is this uploaded brain pattern/A.I. combination really Dr. Will Caster? Who knows? He (or it, depending) seems to genuinely care for his wife, Evelyn, as he shelters her, feeds her, tries to make sure she is happy, and attempts to be able to have physical contact with her again on several occasions. These are not generally things a logic-driven A.I. would care to do. At the same time, however, he shows little facial expression (though he doesn’t seem to be very facially dynamic before he dies either), speaks in a relatively monotone manner, and even gives the same reply to the question “Can you prove that you are self-aware?” that PINN gave before he was uploaded to it: “That’s an interesting question. Can you?” When he/it begins taking in the weak and diseased and curing them using his newfound abilities, that can also be interpreted both ways. For one, he is changing the world for the good like he and his wife have always wanted to. On the other hand, it is constantly in question whether or not the healed have autonomy, as they all seem to go to work for him afterwards, and have technology implanted in them, in most cases. Will even inhabits one of them in an attempt to be closer to Evelyn in one instance. Whether or not the host was willing or not is never discussed.
When it comes to the question of “How far is too far?” an answer is, again, largely absent. It is almost as if Transcendence is simply a recording of the occurrences of a parallel universe, objectively documented in order to let the viewer come to his own conclusions. While the Will Caster A.I. never relays any plans for world domination, it does speak of a future where everyone is physically enhanced by technology and part of a collective mind. This concept is reminiscent of the predictions of author, scientist, and inventor Ray Kurzweil. He theorizes that, since technological advances, based as they are upon advances that have already been made, become more and more frequent over time, this exponential growth of the frequency of advances will eventually lead us to invent many different breakthrough technologies all at once, and man will merge with machine in a way that allows us to have technology running through our bloodstreams and in our minds, extending our lifespans and allowing us to access information via a cloud of networked information without a device in our hands or over our eyes. Near to this time, technology will develop an intelligence greater than that of man. This concept is called the Singularity. Here’s a video that may explain it a bit more:
Opinions of the likeliness and ethical nature of such an occurrence are many, but the resounding and majority reaction seems to be fear and the expectation that such a thing would lead to the moral and possibly literal downfall of humanity. It is films like Transcendence, The Matrix, iRobot, Her, 2001: A Space Odyssey, A.I., and Eagle Eye, to mention only a few, that play on this fear of futuristic technology. I would like to argue, however, that Transcendence addresses a different category of this concept than those that have come before it.
Many have said that this film is just another generic look at the overdone concept of the possible evils of technological advancement, but I make two arguments against this viewpoint. Rich Cline of contactmusic.com states, “What should be a story packed with moral ambiguity is instead shaped into a straightforward good versus evil drama that betrays screenwriter Jack Paglen‘s [the screenwriter’s] mistrust of technology.” In my opinion, however, Transcendence is anything but black and white. As I’ve already mentioned, the film attempts to convince the viewer that the A.I. is no longer Will (a.k.a. that it is evil), and then, nearer the end, re-introduces the concept that he may still be Will and has, indeed, been Will all along (a.k.a. that it is good). How this twist was interpreted by Cline as a steadfast loyalty to the concept that technology is bad, I will never know. When Evelyn is finally uploaded to the A.I. network, she apologizes that she did not trust that the A.I. was Will, since she can now see everything it/he sees. She then sees the way that the nanotechnology it/he has integrated into the air and the water is clearing the air and bodies of water of pollution, allowing plant life to thrive, and how it can heal the injured and sick ofdisease. Such a plot twist clearly would not have been included if Paglan were a technology-shunning luddite. At the same time, this nanotechnology would cause all who come in contact with it to be networked as part of a collective mind. This is left fairly ambiguous, but does not seem to rob participants of autonomy. Still, who knows? Both the viewpoint that technology can be harmful, and the viewpoint that it can be helpful are represented. Silly Rich Cline.
My second argument is that Transcendence addresses a different category of the concept of the possible harm of technology than those that have come before it. Of the five similarly themed films I mentioned earlier: The Matrix, iRobot, Her, 2001: A Space Odyssey, A.I., and Eagle Eye, one focuses on the emotional implications, two on the inability of technology to feel, only to follow orders and use logic, two on the ability of technology to begin to feel, and one on the complete rebellion of computers against humanity to serve their own interests. None of these, nor any other that I can currently think of addresses the issue of what happens when the mind of a fully organic empathetic human being is uploaded to an A.I. When films have before addressed the humanity of Artificial Intelligence, they have always addressed just that: the Artificial Intelligence, never a hybrid like Transcendence does. The film even makes a couple clever nods to the things that have inspired it, namely the Singularity, and the Turing test. A documentary by Robert Barry Ptolemy titled Transcendent Man may also have inspired the title of the film, since it is all about Ray Kurzweil and his predictions for the future.
Uniquity and moral issues aside, Transcendence is a visual pleaser. Director Wally Pfister has long been the cinematographer behind the psych thrilling masterpieces of Christopher Nolan: Memento and the recent Batman trilogy to name a few. Such films are known for their superior narrative content, but also for their stunning visuals. Pfister, when taking on Transcendence as his directorial debut, has settled for no less, visually. The film begins with a haunting fade in and out of the title of the film, the type that has just the right amount of accompanying sound, just the right contrast of light and dark, and just the right font to make you feel you’re about to witness something bigger than yourself. The film then opens on blurred points of colored light and water streaming down what seems to be a window. As beautiful as this opening is, it is unclear that it is the view through Evelyn’s car window as she flees the Will A.I., questioning it/him for the first time. That scene then reoccurs later, explaining this so that, in the end, that visual gives the audience a sense of mystery and then, later, thematic continuity.
This method of blurring continues throughout the film, as Pfister shoots mostly in short focus, blurring the backgrounds in many scenes. The CGI, on the other hand, is clear and clean cut, conveying the image of Will’s A.I. and the actions/abilities of the nanotechnology beautifully. One of my favorite visuals was the question “Is anyone there?” flashed across the screen of the computer to which Will had been uploaded the instant before it shut down.
All things considered, Transcendence provides a thought provoking journey in the possibilities of technology. Its visuals are beautiful and convincing, its writing is decent at worst, and though it can seem convoluted and confusing at times, its concepts are accessible and engaging. I ignored all of the negative reviews I read, and went to see this film anyway. While I did not come out of the theater raving about it like I was hoping I would, it doesn’t deserve anywhere near the amount of contempt that it is getting from reviewers. It all boils down to this: if you like movies that make you think, you should see Transcendence. If you don’t, don’t watch it, and leave its ratings well enough alone.
Read/Use Reviews, Recycle. 