I Dont UndersTand!


ok... someone explain to me how the zacharey boy was important at all? and how did adam get possessed by him? i just didnt get why he turned all evil-like.

Find a Penny...Pick it up...and all day long...you'll have a PENNY hahahaha...
~nice people bite~

reply

Zachary Clark's last name was Wells. He was the son of the Dr Wells (De Niro) that helped create Adam. Remember that Zachary killed his mother and burned down the Pius church, so he had basically been evil. Dr. Wells adjusted Adam's DNA to have some traits of Zachary, so Adam had some evil parts to him also.

Mountain Man

reply

The "evil part" as a matter of fact is the memory of Zachary. It isn't really a possession. Adam II is made of fysical "material" of Adam I with the "memory and feelings" of zachary. So Adam II remembers the killings of Zachary.

reply

I can't understand why the doctor would want to do that. His son killed his wife and then himself, why would the doctor want to put those memories into another boy! Its just asking for trouble!

reply

Because it's his son.. and probably he still loves him..

reply

No, because De Niro was available for a week's more shooting than the director thought, so they rescripted it to have more De Niro in it and make it a "Robert De Niro film". That is why very little of the plot makes any sense. The only parts of the doctor's son that were reincarnated were the evil parts, and who the hell would want to reincarnate that? He blagged Kinnear on his head with a candlestick with no apparent motive, since Kinnear didn't die and he didn't finish him off - so what was the point of that?

reply

I'm actually half way through the movie right now, and the flashes and wondering who Zachery was bothered me so much that I had to come online - even if it spoiled the plotline for me - to find out.

I had that same questions, and everyone's answers to this [below] explained it all - everyone made perfect sense, which is rare when you want to know some detail about a movie. Good job, and thanks everyone!

I knew there had to be some "evil" connection with DeNiro and his deep stares here and there - remnant of an evil scientist twisting his pointy mustache. :)

There was foreshadowing when Adam2 ran to the old run down shack and the camera panned up to the axe on one of the shelves. About this point I became curious, but when Zachery kept popping up, I needed some explanation.

For anyone reading this before you see the movie, I think this information helps enhance your viewing, because otherwise a lot of scenes make no sense. I totally didn't spoil any ending or storyline because of my snooping. I think my snooping actually will make the rest of the movie far more enjoyable. [Had I done this before watching something like The Sixth Sense, I'd be bonking my head on my table right now =) hehe]

Thanks for the explanations - off to [finally] enjoy, or at least understand, the movie with a better understanding of what isn't explained in the first half. :)




reply

Yeah- I either lost interest or did not get that either- This movie had to many things going on-!

reply

Look, it's not the fault of any of the viewers here that they couldn't make heads or tails of this suckass movie.

The basic premise of the movie is completely stupid and false, the movie does a terrible job of trying to attempt to convey the basic premise without actually doing -- because to do it would make everyone realize how stupid the premise is.

Deniro was supposed to have spliced some of his own dead son's genetic material into whatever they salvaged from Kinnear's dead son's genes. The result, according to the stupid movie, once the new boy ages past the death year of the dead boy, is "unknown effects", including mental possession of the new boy by homicidal visions and motivations.

So incredibly dumb.

What a lame crapass movie.

reply

Hey I'm no geneticist or whatever, but isn't this kid supposed to be a total copy of adam??? It looks exactley like him, so how does Zacharys DNA get in there?? I thought he was all burned up anyway.
OH FORGET IT, DON'T EVEN BOTHER ANSWERING THIS I ONLY CAME ON THE WARN OTHER PEOPLE OFF THIS FILM, IT WAS TRULY RUBBISH, AND NOT WORTHY OF ANY DEBATE OR COMMENT.

reply

hahaha! You are right on that last part- it took me 4 times...yes 4 of putting this in the DVD player before I got to the end.

reply

Ya know, I pondered that fact greatly (after, of course, I finally understood that Zachary was "a part" of him.)

But remember when Dad is teaching (and doing a really horrible explanation on DNA strands)? - - he starts rambling about how genes can be switched on or off, that and viola, he gets the grande idea and figures it out. (as if being a murderous maniac is a genetic "switch" to turn on and off :) - quite handy, I'd say!

Did WE, as viewers, figure this out, even as we managed to get to the end? Barely.. (and as you saw, I had to stop half way to get an explanation)!!

The premise of the film was really interesting - losing a child and purchasing an exact copy. I could go into a realist, scientific view and mention not only genes, but experiences and tiny mutations determine who we turn out to be, so the odds of being identical are ridiculous.. but I won't mention that. :)

But the premise was really interesting. But to add the Zachary subplot - and make it extremely hard to understand and make some sense of - was a really poor choice. This film COULD have been good. Instead it tried to be so mysterious and startling that it really lost all substance.

Or maybe this is just my altered inserted dna with switched on personality quirk genes causing me to really be disappointed by this movie. :)


steph


Cool fact ahead to make up for the previous lack of substance:


(((Just a cool side note, I was watching a documentary on Discovery a few days ago, and they isolated the gene that makes jelly fish "glow" - and they actually managed to insert this genetic material into rats, and these rats fantastically glowed in the dark!!)))

Relating this to the movie, had any of the physical characteristics been implanted, spiffy and understandable.. but somehow I don't think the humane genome will ever be able to insert and switch on and off psycho murderer genes :)


reply