MovieChat Forums > Replicas (2019) Discussion > Better than its reputation

Better than its reputation

posted 3 years ago by Ace_Spade (9658)
12 replies | jump to latest

With ratings like 5.4 on IMDb, this one is pretty pilloried, but I thought it was better than that. I don't disagree with the reviews that point out the crazy-illogical plot holes, I don't say the dialogue is stellar, and I think it's got big third-act problems (like so many films), but here's the positive:

1 - The scenes of loss and grief are pretty well-done. Keanu's acting skills aren't always great, but there's some stuff, like him just sitting with his head over that slip of paper and barely moan-gasping out a sob or two - that felt really real.

2 - The entire premise is awesome, and the ethical dilemmas, the very human reaction to this kind of tragedy - it's all pretty good. Because of these angles, I think the movie is pretty solid right up until the "awakening" moments. After that, it deteriorates.

3 - Balancing out the lives - managing the social media - that's good stuff.

4 - Constant pressure, ever-shifting, is great. I love a plot with lots of tension, and between work and personal, William can't catch a break here.

What I didn't like about the movie was, mostly, that it's too short. It has WAY too much plot for a movie running under two hours. Frankly, I think there's enough for a series. They've got the family plot, the idea of synchronizing their lives with the events of the movie (he barely manages the social media thing - imagine "real" lives!?), the car battery thing that just goes away, the pressures at work, the biotech company revelations later on - it's too much.

This is why the third act degenerates into an action movie: too much going on.

I would have liked to have seen the film focus more on William trying to adapt the family post-accident into their "regular" lives - that's enough for the film right there.

If they made a series, they could give more time for the plots to evolve more organically. They could also fix a LOT of the plot holes, many of which I believe are simply the result of not enough time to adequately explain the processes of the biotech company and provide solutions for them.

It might not be much higher than the grades given, but I think it's better than its rep.

[–] sati_84 (467) 3 years ago

Oh, how I wanted to like this movie... I agree, the premise is excellent. But the premises of most films usually are, see In Time for example - excellent premise, botched by horrible execution. Something like that happened here as well with Replicas.

The dynamic between Keanu and his family is great. The depiction and acting of his grief - spot on. These are the things I would mention as well as positives.

That's why it's really painful to see how they ruined the movie as a whole by handling almost all other aspects terribly.

So about your first 2 positives - I wholeheartedly agree.

But #3 the social media and real lives - the idea is great, but the way it is depicted in the movie is utterly ridiculous. He forgets the social media and real life stuff for days - it's understandable given the grief he is going through, but are we supposed to believe that one montage later everything is fine? Not to mention the outright disappeareance of Zoe would have been a huge problem going forward, and we were supposed to believe it won't be. I mean the writers already knew the second half will be an action movie, but the viewers didn't, and I was pretty confused. Even with grief-stricken mind Keanu cannot believe he will pull this off, I mean he deleted the memories of his family, but the surrounding people will remember her... and then what?

#4 - Constant pressure was fine, but from the point they took the pods it was again undermined by the idiotic plot. Up until the point of the revelation that tha bad guy was in on it, we were supposed to believe they could took the pods without anyone noticing...?

All these are signs of weak writing. Add the ridiculous plot developments from the mid point on (the main bad guy wants to kill Keanu? The ONLY person who knows how the technology works? Really??? And other assorted idiocy), and we have a trainwreck in our hands.

[–] Ace_Spade (9658) 3 years ago

We're agreed on basically everything. The social media thing was great, but glossed over way too fast.

As to Zoe, I don't understand why he didn't choose to resurrect/clone the kids and leave the mom dust. First off, I don't know any parents who wouldn't want their kid to outlast them and who wouldn't do anything to keep them safe and happy. Both for Keanu's character and his wife, this would be true, right? So, he'd also know that she would sacrifice herself for her kids. It just makes more ethical sense, more logical sense, and even more sense to keep his story intact. The mom's death would be easier to stage. Create a fake car accident and kill her off, leaving the kids alive. Make up a story about a tumour nobody saw coming until it was in literally the last stages of cancer. There are a dozen ways to do this that wouldn't leave a Zoe-sized hole in the memories of friends and family.

And yes, it's weak writing. I think the biggest problem is that they had so much they wanted to do (clone ethics, action movie, etc.) that they ran out of room, stuffed it all in, and thus had to speed over stuff, leaving us with half-baked explanations for things.

A whole movie could be made just of the cloning process and trying to juggle their social lives and fill those gaps. Heck, that movie could even take on some dark comic/farce aspects.

[–] sati_84 (467) 3 years ago

Fully agreed with your idea of a series. With much better writing, the plot fleshed out and minus the need of mindless action, this could be something great.

The way it stands now, is a mediocre movie with some good aspects, held down by bad writing and an increasingly more ridiculous plot. Maybe these are indeed because of time constraints, but the writers knew from the start that this is not a series, so they should've handled everything accordingly.

[–] Ace_Spade (9658) 3 years ago

Yup. I'm with you all the way. Make a series or focus up the film. You can't have three and a half plots in one two-hour flick.

I still think it's better than it's rep (reviews and public opinion seem to write off every aspect of the film), and it goes (for me) into a whole category of films I have that are basically, "I like this film as much for its potential as the realization, or lack thereof."

[–] sati_84 (467) 3 years ago

Recently rewatched this for a (non public) film analysis project of mine, and I finally could pinpoint why I was so harsh about the movie, even upon first viewing. The problem is the following.

They really did not think through the scenario of the accident and its immediate aftermath. Case in point: THE CAR!!! They did not go back and did not retrieve the car! And on the passenger seat, there is a huge amount of blood from Mona getting pierced with a tree branch, which of course can be identified easily, and that's something William will not have a chance explaining away. The car is last seen in the river when they are copying the minds of Mona and the kids. It is not even submerged fully! And the river is not deep enough to comfortably conceal it - there is no way someone wouldn't find it in a few days - a week tops, and that is if you are stretching it way too thin. And there is no solution ot that. The car is just... gone!

But I'll tell you what's worse, because I could let the car thing slide if otherwise the movie was well written and presented. But there are two fundamental flaws in the script, and for me they completely destroyed the whole plot.

The first flaw is basically how they failed to connect the first half of the movie to the second half of the movie. And that is a huge writing flaw, really basic. What do I mean? The events are played out like this: William "resurrects" the family. Ed takes back the pods to the biotech company. Ed got rid of the bodies (forget about the car... and Zoe... for now...), so all is well - no one knows about what went down, except for William and Ed. They are in the clear.

So how could the plot move forward from now? Easy! Have Ed call William telling him that a new subject has arrived and they need to work on an experiment again. Why? "If we don't solve this, we are compromised" - says Ed (or something to that effect). And this is where I just couldn't believe what I was hearing. This statement is beyond stupid.

[–] sati_84 (467) 3 years ago

(continued)

No, this doesn't make sense! Why would they be compromised? What is the worst case scenario if they don't solve the problem and can't make the experiment successful in the end? Well... they lose the funding and will be fired from their jobs (and this may only apply to William, as Ed's cloning activities are not connected to William's mind transfer activities, at least officially they aren't...). So what? William can take his family, find a backer for his experiments, or, hell, worst case he can land a job as a college professor, and teach Neurology 101 for the rest of his life with his family mind you... and no one would have any idea about the car accident, the cloning and the mind transfers performed. Ed sure as hell would not rat him out, William would sure as hell not tell anyone - so what is the conflict here? There is not conflict!

What Ed says is a performative statement. He later adds: "If we don't solve this, your family will go to prison." This is even more nonsensical than before! The writers desperately needed some stakes to justify the second half of the movie, but couldn't bridge the gap. Who would sue William's family? On what grounds would they be sent to prison? Just... WHAT???

For William, there was more motivation needed to continue the experiments and looking for a solution. But if we accept the scenario depicted - there isn't any. But the writers are pretending there is... this is just pathetic and for me quite infuriating.

The second flaw is just as severe as the previous one. And that is also about character motivations, but this time it's more specifically about the hero VS the villain.

[–] sati_84 (467) 3 years ago

The second flaw is just as severe as the previous one. And that is also about character motivations, but this time it's more specifically about the hero VS the villain.

Jones is the villain - as it turns out, he wants to use William's mind transfer invention for military purposes. So far so good. But with the same breath he immediately tells William, that he knew about the accident and the subsequent "resurrection" of his family (the pods going missing for 17 days makes a bit more sense now, but the car and Zoe are still not addressed - nevermind), and that he is going to kill his family now, because someone in the future might find out they are not real people, and that is unacceptable, bla-bla. He then asks for William to bring the algorithm that he recently worked on, and if he does that, he will allow him to say goodbye to his family.

OK, so first of all anything a villain does must make sense from their perspective, there has to be a vision, there has to be an ideology, or at least a personality to them. Here? Jones doesn't even tell William why it is good to have this tech to be used in military - he doesn't say why he is working with a shady organization, using biotech companies as fronts for military research. That would have been interesting and that would have characterized him... so we can't have that (rolls eyes)

[–] sati_84 (467) 3 years ago

Second of all, when a hero defies the villain, there needs to be a noble motivation behind that act. There should be an option for the hero to just lay low and not do anything in the face of injustice. Here? William smacks Jones across the face with the algorithm (that is conveniently stored on a really huge and heavy hard drive or something, nevermind that for now), and I didn't take that as heroic defiance. Because it is not. See, by Jones telling William that his family is toast either way, he has nothing to lose. So there is nothing heroic in what he is doing - that's his only option... and that makes the villain stupid, because the obvious thing to do is to lull William into thinking his family will be spared if he hands the algorithm over. Why didn't Jones take that option? Because the writers couldn't even figure out how to clue William in that Jones doesn't tell the truth... and that is beyond pathetic.

For bonus points, there is another huge flaw at this point. William says: "I'll bring the algorithm" - feigning obedience. Jones is then left alone for a few moments, and he is texting his henchmen to "get ready", and we are shown two men outside of the house with firearms, getting promptly ready... to murder William's family right then and there? Smack dab in the middle of a suburban neighborhood? WHAT?

Nevermind the unnecessary attention this would bring, it's obvious, that if Jones gives the kill order for his family, William would be next, and... is Jones really that stupid to kill the only person who knows how the procedure is working? I mean he didn't even have one successful experiment yet, and Jones is ready to whack him? Before he knows for 100% that the procedure is working? And what if new problems will surface? Well, congratulations, you just killed William, so he cannot troubleshoot... tough luck there, dude! WHAT?

[–] sati_84 (467) 3 years ago

This scenario in the middle of the movie is not meant to make sense. At all. It is meant solely for creating a scenario in which the second half of the movie (with the really weak action scenes) could happen. It must happen, because it is already written.

So, there it is. Sorry if I was too harsh in my wording, but I just realized, how fundamentally flawed this movie really is. There is no villain, there is no hero, and it doesn't have logical plot progression from point A to point B. As a result, there are no actual character motivations, and the whole thing becomes a performative affair of going through the motions, dictated by the script. At that halfway point, the movie loses all credibility and all internal consistency. And the second half of the movie also has a plethora of problems. I won't get into analyzing the events now, but at one point the henchmen sent to kill William and co. find their car parked in front of a building. Both henchmen move into the building... and they don't render the car unusable before doing so. No shooting through the engine block. OK, that might have alerted them, but on foot they don't stand a chance to escape... Scratch that then, but they don't even slash the tires! William and the family are successfully evading the henchmen and go on their merry way in their car! This is again a case of some really lazy writing which I can tolerate 2 or 3 times in a movie, but Replicas is just full of them, especially in the second half.

For this reason, I stand by my rating of 3/10. It has some promising elements, but it quickly and inevitably falls apart completely, latest at the halfway point.

(Sorry for the flood of replies, but you know... character limit and all...)

[–] Ace_Spade (9658) 3 years ago

Your criticisms are accurate. And if you think it's a 3/10, that's not going to keep me up at night - at the end of the day, these are our experiences with the film.

Starting out, I 100% agree with your criticisms. I do think that you've accurately pinpointed the two biggest flaws with the film. First, that the writers rush over details of the cloning cover-up, and second, that the second half of the film isn't connected with the first.

I consider these two flaws related. If they had stuck with the clone scenario, they wouldn't have needed the second part at all. There's enough tension there already with William needing to pick a family member to not resurrect, William needing to cover his tracks (yes, rushed), and William needing to cope with a clone family. That's a whole movie. No need to add machine guns and a moustache-twirling villain.

If they really needed an evil corporation, there's always the threat that, technically, William's family are company equipment and owned by the corporation.

Even with that stuff, I still liked it at around 6/10. Why?

Well, the first half of the movie sets up the clone plot nicely. I liked watching William try to solve intellectual problems while dealing with his emotional problems. The scene of him crying with the name he's pulled out a hat is haunting. Frankly, Reeves does a great job with these scenes, showing us a guy who is just trying to operate from moment to moment, shoving down tears and vomit so he can hold himself together long enough to claw a semblance of hope into his life.

The movie presents some great intellectual ideas, good sci-fi premise, and for the first part of the movie, it's doing well.

They could have fixed it by wiping out the second part and instead of using that time to deal more with the main plot. The real third act/climax of the film would be William just trying to live knowing his family aren't really his family, maybe the mom actually finding out.

So, again: respect. I understand why you give it 3/10, but for me, the promise of the premise and some of the execution bump it up a little higher than that.

[–] sati_84 (467) 3 years ago

I understand why you give it 3/10, but for me, the promise of the premise and some of the execution bump it up a little higher than that.

I think we have enough history on these boards to not get hung up on this. Agree to disagree in the rating, but we see eye to eye on the rest. I already commended Reeves' performance, but I'll do it again now, because I agree - if there is one high point in the movie, it's gotta be him.

[–] Ace_Spade (9658) 3 years ago

I kinda getting to say that: Keanu Reeves was great. I like him as an actor, and I feel bad talking smack about him, but come on... Dracula...

So, yeah, getting to see great work from him makes me happy. Maybe that's why I'm bumping up the rating - I'm just pleased to give it some Keanu points.