Advantageous (2015) User Reviews

seductive but with a fatal flaw

[minch007 · 6/10 · 12 July 2015]

hmmm, lots of people loved this film...and undoubtedly it is beautifully crafted and the acting is exceptional. The whole atmosphere draws you in with both poetry and passion, stylistically it is subtle but powerful. Yet the heart of the movie is the philosophical and spiritual meaning of the mother and daughter relationship between Gwen and Jules, and here there is a paradox which is the climax of the plot, and which the entire film depends on to work. This paradox, however is glossed over. The film would've worked better had it been confronted more clearly. As it was, it strained the credibility of the message of the film.

Gwen decides she must put her daughter's needs before all else. That's understandable, she loves her daughter, they have a deep connection, and only have each other in a sterile and insecure world where the status of women depends on their marketability and connections. Nothing groundbreaking there. To help her daughter, Gwen must take action when she loses her job.

As you watch it, ask yourself: does Gwen's decision really match her deepest values as a mother? Was there really no better alternative?

Here's the spoiler:

Gwen decides to sacrifice the one thing that her daughter needs more than anything...her own mother... So that Jules can go to an elite school. Where the other mothers are horrid, vapid things, whom Gwen clearly dislikes. Can that really be the best thing for Jules? Gwen seems despairing of the way the world is. Yet she sacrifices the most precious things in both their lives so that Jules can become the same commodity that Gwen became. WTF???

Several times the question is raised: why am I here? Why am I alive? But this question is glossed over. Gwen's best answer seems to be that she didn't know what the point of her life was until she had Jules, then Jules became the point of her life. So then she sets things up so that Jules can live the same kind of pointless life? WTF???

Gwen attempts to hide the truth from her daughter. This was the weakest point in the whole script. Presumably it was supposed to highlight Gwen's understanding that the most important thing to Jules was her relationship with her mother, the most real and secure thing she had in the world. And not let her feel guilty about her mother's sacrifice. Yet Gwen's decision destroyed this relationship. And clearly a smart, sensitive kid like Jules is going to work out pretty quickly that something is seriously wrong.

The last scenes ironically show the alternative decision that Gwen could've made. A simpler life with family rather than status giving security and meaning to life. The film asks us to believe that this option wasn't possible because the chance came too late. Well, that only works if you buy the premise that Gwen couldn't imagine that Jules could've have been happier with a working class life, even home schooled, but with her real mother.

For me this film would have had a far stronger feminist message had Gwen rejected the roles that society imposed on herself and her daughter, even if it meant being poor and old.

Major spoiler:

Finally Gwen also knowingly participated in a con that not only actively encouraged many other people, especially women, to be insecure about their aging, but amounted to being an accessory to their murder. Yet the film barely touches on this, except to emphasize the sacrifice Gwen made for her daughter. Hmmm.

This film seduces the viewer but left a nasty taste in my mouth at the end.

Creating a Science Fiction Film on a low-budget

[dyauf · 6/10 · 13 August 2015]

Making a believable science fiction film is hard. Making a believable science fiction film on a low-budget is nearly impossible. Well at least it used to be until director Jennifer Phang came along and proved otherwise in her Sundance festival hit, Advantageous. Phang was able to create a futuristic world with minimum visual effects by altering mundane human perception. There are three important techniques she uses to achieve this effect.

The first is the deceleration of time for background objects while objects in the foreground continue to move at a regular speed. This mixture of various speeds becomes a motif for understanding the futuristic world she presents to the audience.

The second technique is the compression of space achieved by using telephoto and zoom lenses. The human eye perceives depth of field in three dimensions. Objects farther away are small and objects closer to us are big. This is normally replicated with a dolly shot in films where the camera physically tracks forwards or backwards. However, in Advantageous, the zoom lens is used to compress the space in front of us. The camera stays still and we simply get closer to the subject. This causes a flattening of space to the point our eyes are no longer able to perceive the distance between the foreground objects and background objects.

The third technique Phang uses to create a believable science fiction world is silence. Yes I talk about silence a lot, but it does wonders. Our ears are not used to hearing complete and utter silence. In every moment, even at the quietest moments, we are subjected to some level of constant ambient noise. Whether it's coming from the Air Conditioner, the Fridge, the Wind, there's always something preventing us from experiencing complete silence. However, when we do finally get the chance and we see a character on a big screen screaming and crying in complete silence, our ears are hit with a new level of sensory experience. The new sensory experience is foreign to our ears and forces the audience to take the character he or she is watching out of his assumption of the character's world. This means, the audience finally recognizes that the character he or she is watching does not have the same sensory understanding of the world as he or she does.

These three techniques were vital in Phang's ability to successfully create a sophisticated and at the same time genuine science fiction world on a low-budget.

Feminist science fiction that focuses too much on metaphysical questions

[krachtm · 6/10 · 14 August 2015]

The plot: In a dystopian future, an Asian woman approaching middle age is fired from her job at a creepy multinational corporation because they want a younger, more racially ambiguous spokesperson. How far will she go to regain her job?

The premise is definitely interesting, and there were parts of the film that I really liked. However, the story continually came back to tedious metaphysical themes that bored me. In the end, I realized that the film was about the metaphysical themes, and this left me feeling a bit unfulfilled. I suppose it was even more so about cultural criticism, especially a feminist critique of how society treats female aging and beauty. But it kept coming back again and again to these questions of "why am I here", "what is my purpose", and "is there something insubstantial, such as love, that science can't replicate in a lab"?

Kim plays a woman who must make a life-changing choice. Unemployment is skyrocketing, men are pressuring women to leave the workforce, and older workers are seen as hopelessly out-of-touch with the modern market. In fact, humans themselves are being rapidly replaced, and the only way to secure any kind of hope for your child's future is for them to attend the most prestigious schools. The alternative seems to be child prostitution. Most of this is established in the background; if you don't pay close attention, you'll miss it. Unexplained explosions rock the sterility and eerie quiet of the world, and news reports hint at terrorist uprisings because of a hopeless, jobless populace.

So, when you lose your job, that basically means that you've lost everything. What if your employer offers to give you your job back if you'll let them control who you are? So, our protagonist becomes desperate to avoid forcing her own daughter to make these same kinds of desperate choices. What can she do but accept? The question becomes what price she has paid. As the film mulls this over, I began to lose interest. Normally, it takes very little for me to become heavily involved in a character's plight, but, in this case, I struggled. Maybe it's because I don't have kids. For a parent, maybe this would be a more harrowing tale.

There are many admirable aspects to this film, chief among them a woman-centric tale that feels genuine. In some science fiction films, the female protagonist seems to have been written as a male who then gets a gender-flip to mix things up. Or she's a sexual object for the viewers to ogle. There's nothing wrong with a bit of exploitative science fiction, but it's nice to see something with higher aspirations every once in a while. This certainly has that, but it goes so far as to seem pretentious at times.

Maybe this was simply too far outside of my demographic. On the surface, it's got a lot of themes and ideas that appeal to me, but the focus seems to be diametrically opposed to how I would have done it. Less metaphysics, more world-building. If you're interested in feminist science fiction, however, this is rare example. You should at least give it a chance if you're interested in such things. Perhaps you'll be more intrigued by the themes than I was.

Set in the future, what are your priorities when you get older?

[TxMike · 3 July 2015]

I found this movie on Netflix streaming. About 90 minutes long, the first half sets up the premise and introduces us to all the key characters, the second half delves into the choices and changes and how the various players deal with it.

This is not a movie for action junkies, it is told rather deliberately and takes the time to let concepts sink in. Time for a viewer to think "What would I do here?"

Jacqueline Kim, also producer and co-writer, is Gwen. She has a successful career in this 22nd century big city setting, but as she nears 50 and still looking good, her employer decides they want a younger image as a spokesperson. Money and jobs are tight, and with a daughter going into middle school, she can't afford to be out of work.

Her daughter is played by Samantha Kim, probably no relation in real life, as Jules. Jules is a bright and well-adjusted child, she and her mother have a very close mother-daughter bond.

The company Gwen works for has developed a new technology to allow aging people to transfer their thoughts and identity to a new, younger body. Gwen can have this procedure, to regain her young looks and continue on. But this might not sit well with Jules, and that is part of her dilemma.

The story plays out nicely, hardly a false move. The cast are all good and to me young actress Samantha Kim sort of steals the show. She is very good in her role.

Good movie for anyone who appreciates a good story that develops deliberately.

Excellent view of a dystopian future

[vovers1 · 6/10 · 5 April 2020]

I can't stop thinking how realistic is this view of the future of a trickle down world, hiding behind the cloaks of computerised and anonymous social systems. Well worth watching, a social commentary wrapped up in a scifi blanket. With humanity struggling and failing to define itself.

"Nice Try"

[Bijan_Karim · 6/10 · 1 November 2015]

Advantageous explores themes of technology in relation to the alteration of the human physique and the social impacts of it. The film also asks the question how far these ideas can be taken by humans. The main character in the film, Gwen, has to change her appearance in order to become a better public figure for her job. The obvious idea here is that she is getting old and her looks are not enough. But I found it interesting that the film had a large cast of East Asian actors, and that when she switched her appearance to that of a Caucasian woman. This speaks about the obsession that Western media has with the looks of Caucasians.

We find out near the end that Gwen in reality had to die and a clone of her with a different appearance took her place when she got the augmentation. This twist is shown to the viewer via a flashback. Gwen wilfully agrees, knowing that her daughter will be raised by this clone. Themes of family, capitalist economy and determination come to the forefront. The second half of the Advantageous is largely spent on the ramifications of this decision. And to me, is where the film finally becomes interesting. I initially found the movie to be a tad dull. Many of the actors in the film, including the lead are very blank faced, humourless and oddly stoic. Even the usually goofy Ken Jeong shows up for a limited part where he does not even get to crack a smile. The film is going for an aesthetic of pure realism, though I have never found that "plain" can equate "relatable". The lack of personality for me always makes scenes of exposition similar to the experience of reading a book unless the acting is absolutely perfect. So, on that level, the film did not work for me as much of the dialogue is in fact, exposition. However, this sense of realism began to grow on me as the film went along. I have always found myself to be interested in the theatrical aspects of cinema, working with actors, telling narrative stories. And this film took a turn for the better in its second half, because my favourite type of science fiction is the type that is about the feeling of ideals rather than an analysis of them.

Film, to me, is a medium that is purely about making the viewers feel emotion, and this movie at its core is about the relationship of a mother and daughter. The idea of science fiction films being an impossibility as mentioned in Grant's "Sensous Elaboration", I think is more about the distinguishment between interesting and uninteresting science fiction films. The difference between 2001: A Space Odyssey and Interstellar is that despite being films about similar subject matter, they handle it differently. In Interstellar characters discuss the science fiction ideals with expository dialogue so that the audience understands what is happening while in 2001, Kubrick does very little to explain what is happening and the film is therefore more of a sensorial experience. This film explores a what-if scenario in which these two characters faced an impossible situation, which made it interesting. The movie to me is about how the relationship of two people would be affected in a fictional world. Since the intricacies of the technology is not necessarily spectacular, the film explores the characters, and if it were to focus solely on the technology, the film would be very boring to me. Instead, it is a serviceable character piece with a science fiction backdrop.

could have been much more

[rdvljunk · 7/10 · 28 December 2019]

Science fiction doesn't show the future, it shows the expectations of the current society. In the 50-60's we dreamt of reaching the stars so the space-opera was born, in the 80's with the rise of computers we saw the rise of cyberpunk. In these days SF usually addresses the fear of our society that we simply can't handle the technology of the future. Not that it overtakes us but simply that we as people aren't able to oversee the options and mainly the consequences what technology will do to our society. Advantageous takes one of these aspects where technology allows us to switch bodies. But the impact of that, the consequences to ourselves and our environment is much larger than expected.

Advantageous does a descent job adressing it, but it however fails to get any depth. With 1h30m it simply takes to few time to work out all relations and characters and tries to squeeze in too much on the side. That is a pitty because the rest of the setting, like actors/dialogues, etc are charming and interresting. As mini-series it would prosbably have worked better.

Worst pacing I've ever seen in a movie

[corpdog · 2/10 · 25 July 2020]

This movie is 100 minutes of tedious setup, one major decision by the main character, 15 minutes of dealing with the consequences of that decision, and then a non-ending. The main idea itself wasn't even original. It has been done before in far better movies and books.

And through it all, the main character wasn't even likeable because she's a homewrecker that destroyed her own family.

Save yourself 90 minutes and watch another movie.

Humbling, subtle and finessed.

[Jodie_ds · 10/10 · 4 July 2015]

Watching this film made for a beautiful and worthwhile evening. I loved the stillness it evoked, as it asked me to consider what is important in my life.

Samantha Kim, (Jules), did a wonderful job of showing all that a young girl can be: kind, humble, and entranced by the delicate joy that life can hold, while also questioning her place and position in a world that only sees what she can give - instead of what she is.

Jacqueline Kim, (Gwen), evokes the challenges facing many women today - when career and family choices have long lasting results - in a performance full of silence. The cinematography that supports the silence means that Kim's message is heard more than if it were shouted.

The cover image is almost a misnomer as it appears to import more value to the science, when this film is most definitely about the human condition. I absolutely recommend taking the time to watch, think and share.

Thought provoking and entertaining

[kwingate · 7/10 · 12 June 2016]

I can't figure out why this got such a low rating. Those of us who feel our middle class existence slipping away from us and our children will appreciate the contemporary feel. I would think any man with a wife or daughter in the working world (or any women who have a career or aspire to one) may find the film hitting a bit too close to home.

The story was well-written, the acting reasonably good, and the cityscape both attractive and well-created.

It prompts a discussion of the very nature of self: Who am I, who will I be in the future; if I have my heart surgically replaced, I am still me, no? What about my brain? What about ... everything?

Feminist dystopia featuring tale of mother-daughter bonding, might have been better as a one hour Twilight Zone-like episode

[Turfseer · 4/10 · 2 February 2016]

Advantageous is the second feature by Jennifer Phang based on the screenwriter/director's award-winning short film of the same name. Set in an unspecified future, Advantageous' setting was described by one critic as a "feminist dystopia."

The protagonist Gwen (played with great intensity by Jacqueline Kim) is a spokesperson for a biotech company, Center for Advanced Health and Living. When her superiors deem her too old to continue working in a job that demands a younger look, she's unceremoniously given the proverbial pink slip.

The problem is that in the future not only are there virtually no jobs for older, middle-aged woman, but an economic recession has led men to be given preference in the marketplace (sound like someplace you know?)

Gwen is faced with the crisis of not having enough funds to ensure that her teenage daughter, Jules (played by sensitive newcomer Samantha Kim) gets into an elite private school which will guarantee her upward mobility (the consequences of what happens to those who fail to move up in the world is hardly touched upon).

Gwen is so desperate that she tries to hit up her estranged sister for money. That's a no go after the sister gets wind of a family secret involving her husband, with whom Kim had an affair with long ago.

Of course that sounds more like melodrama--where the sci-fi comes in involves Kim contacting her ex-boss at the Center and agreeing to get involved in their untested soul transfer procedure. There's a Twilight Zone episode from long ago much like this: an "ordinary" woman is pressured into trading her body in for a new one with "model looks." Here, Gwen asks for the trade-in and ends up in the body of a much younger, supposedly more attractive woman, Gwen 2.0 (played by Freya Adams).

There are few surprises after Gwen becomes Gwen 2.0. Jules rather predictably can hardly stomach her "new mother" until there's some measure of acceptance at film's end. The female companion I was with at the film screening found Jules' dissonance and eventual coming to terms with the new situation to be an emotionally cathartic experience. For me the turn of events (that truly smacked of melodrama) suggested a lack of imagination.

Advantageous' central conceit, basically a body swap, has been used in countless other sci-fi potboilers. This might have been better as a one -hour episode in a Twilight Zone-like series. But here, the pacing is so slow, that only an extremely clever twist ending could have saved the floundering narrative.

Given its low budget, Ms. Phang did well with the limited resources she had to work with. Utilizing CGI effects, drone-like saucers are seen flying across a future urban landscape. Holograms are also made use of to suggest the future dystopia. The bulk of Advantageous was filmed in Brooklyn—thus, along with the special effects, one feels firmly ensconced in both the present day and a fanciful future-scape.

Most of Advantageous' drama revolves around the bonding between mother and daughter. Social issues are reduced to mysterious bombings in high-rises that are never truly explained. And the world Gwen inhabits is basically limited to immediate family and her employers. We really never do get a sense of what the world is like in the future beyond Gwen's narrow universe.

Advantageous' strong suit is the compelling performances of its principal actors. The rather derivative sci-fi plot however, is merely a vehicle to highlight the melodramatic interconnection between Gwen, Gwen 2.0 and Jules. I suspect that many more women can relate to a film such as this than men. The mere trappings of a futuristic society are not enough to truly engage a demanding, critical viewer. Again, this is a film that simply needed to be far more imaginative than the final product proffered up here.

Mesmerizing sci-fi portraying real human emotions and interactions

[omnimog · 10/10 · 3 July 2015]

Wow. I had no idea what to expect when I put this on, but it blew me completely away. I am certain that the pacing may alienate many a viewer expecting every, "good" sci-fi to be filled mainly with spectacular future-tech fighting, and maybe scratch the surface of big questions in a futuristic society.

Advantageous do approach the latter, although nuanced, and more subtle than most films in this genre do. First and foremost, Advantageous focus on what defines the parent/child-relationship through portrayals of emotions and behavior that feel real. Not overly dramatic, not "scripted" like in most movies, but like the breathing dialectics of how those mechanics do work in real life.

The stage is set in a dystopian future. There are elements of class conflict, and philosophical approaches to defining the Id and the Ego. But these are still all secondary to the parental element. I didn't feel that the topics were rushed, too complicated, pretentious or superficially presented in any way, but that might be a matter of my approach as a viewer; my focus on the movie while it ran, and my general interest in the subjects in my own life.

I also found Advantageous to be stylistically excellent. From the general designs, locations, wardrobe, make-up, CGI. The lead actors did a great job, and the directing was superbly executed. Same goes for both editing and the atmospheric soundtrack; technical elements that I find myself often annoyed at in many a modern movie.

I'd put Advantageous under the same banner as Her and Ex Machina, for comparison. Although it should be noted that the melancholic joyfulness from Her, and the enigmatic suspense from Ex Machina are both lacking completely here as Advantageous is a lot more of a subtle epic, with a focus on the humane interrelationships much more than what both those movies do. And to me, that was exactly what made Advantageous such a brilliant, unique gem, although I dearly love both Her and Ex Machina as well.

An interesting story, but slow and so boastfully indie

[siderite · 7/10 · 25 February 2021]

I am tired and dismissive of movies that manipulate the viewer with music for what they are supposed to feel, formulaic plots and archetypal characters to appeal to as many people as possible, big actor names that don't really have to act and silly little stories that bring nothing new to the table. Well, Advantageous is the opposite of that, but in such a showy way that it also felt a bit annoying. It started with the indie badges of honor being displayed more prominently than the actors' names, it had a story that was full of meaning and intellectual richness but actors were all slow acting and depressed and everything was implied and for most of the film, if not all, it had no soundtrack. And that ending that brings no closure at all, screaming "Think it for yourself!!"

But the story is cool and there were some truly brilliant moments in it, like the homeless person one and some at the end with the mother-daughter connection that you had to think a little about to realize what they meant. Difficult to discuss the plot without spoiling it and all I can say is this: the general idea of the film is obvious after about 15 minutes, but the details are important and there is more coming, so watch the whole thing.

Bottom line: with a little bit of moderation, this could have been both an intelligent indie film and an entertaining popular one, but it felt like the authors opted hard for the first half only. Therefore it is unlikely to become either a success or a cult film. However, it has many merits and I do not regret watching it. I recommend it, but one has to be in a certain cerebral mood to enjoy it.

I'm sure there's an audience for it, but it isn't me.

[vithiet · 3/10 · 8 July 2022]

I watched half of it and had to stop. Giving some stars for what (I think) they're trying to communicate and the actors doing a fairly good job. Otherwise it's slow, not really making a compelling point about... anything really. I can appreciate subtle, more cerebral type of sci-fi but I don't think it's well done here.

A well writen and acted sci-fi film for thinking people...

[Mikel3 · 6 October 2018]

'Advantageous' is a well written rather unique, in some ways, science fiction film for those of us who prefer a thoughtful story over nonstop action and million dollar special effects. This is a thinking person's film. The story is about a not too distant future where high paying jobs are scarce unless you're under 30 and beautiful. Some might say that future is already here. A new technology has been developed that allows people to transfer their minds into younger healthier bodies that can be customized to look any way you'd like. This technology is still untested on humans. The lead character in the film, Gwen, is faced with losing her corporate spokeswoman job even though she is still smart , young and beautiful, perhaps she's 35 or 40 years old, unfortunately Gwen is not young enough for what her company wants in their spokesperson so she is let go. Gwen needs to see to it that her teen daughter, about to enter a costly prep school, is provided for. She tries her best but can't find a decent paying job to support herself and her daughter. It's obvious that her daughter means everything to Gwen and she would do anything for her. Gwen has an idea, in order to keep her high paying corporate spokeswoman job she will volunteer herself to be the first human to go through the body transfer process. She is, after all, the ideal candidate to be her own younger replacement since she already has the knowledge needed for the job. The corporate execs like Gwen's offer, perhaps this is what they had in mind all along, to force Gwen into changing her body or be jobless. There is a significant sacrifice required for this transformation that's kept from Gwen by the corporation, they obviously only care about the money to be made. Gwen is secretly made aware of this price by a friend she has within the company. The true nature of the transformation is hidden from other potential clients for good reason. I won't reveal the details here and ruin the surprises. The story is thoughtful, heartfelt, and intriguing; the acting is good by all those involved. There are some futuristic special effects that are well done, that's impressive since I suspect this film did not have a huge budget. I felt there were some slow sections in the story, my wife disagreed. Overall this is a very good, thinking person's sci-fi film, for me most of the best are like that. This is the sort of film you might want to discuss with other viewers afterwards. I also like the clear satisfying ending. I'm fed up with ambiguous endings that leave too much up for interpretation by the viewer, to me that's the invention of lazy writers. This ending is good and the film is well worth seeing.

I give this a 7 out of 5 star rating.

Worth a watch

[thomasjones-42917 · 7/10 · 3 February 2021]

It's like handmaides tales but added sci-fi and more realistic. From a poltical view (US) it has a much more right wing view of the future even though here in 2019 - 2021 things seem to be leaning extremely left.

would be advantageous for you to give this a look

[movieman_kev · 7/10 · 12 August 2015]

What a pleasant surprise this film was. While trying not to get too much into detail, as not to spoil any of the intricacies of the movie, I'll say that while this is in the realm of sci-fi, the movie has much more on it's mind than merely that. It conveys as much in it's beautiful nuances and a refreshing subtlety that is sadly missing from many newer films of it's ilk. The film is also wonderfully acted across the board. So that doesn't hurt.

This mini-review was inspired by a haiku that I wrote on twitter, which I shall also include here for the sake of posterity (if for nothing else) Also in revised form as the original was sadly incorrectly in 5 7 6

Character driven

Well crafted slice of sci-fi

Deliberate pace

interesting

[shashrvacai · 6/10 · 4 March 2021]

Interesting Sci-fi, but nothing specific sticks .. but well made.

Tedious and Pretentious

[pegasus3 · 1/10 · 29 June 2015]

This tedious and pretentious film is simply a story about an Upper East Side matron who has lost her job while trying to get her daughter into an elite Manhattan prep school glossed over with half-baked science fiction imagery such as CGI altered urban skylines, minimalist contemporary office entrances, and a lame storyline about transferring consciousness to another, younger body. There are lots of angst ridden shots of the mother with her overly precocious daughter as they banter about with each other in their posh apartment or on the way to school. In the end it's all about money as the new mother Version 2.0 goes about seeking funds to keep her daughter on the fast track in prep school.

Fantastic Film

[locogringo · 10/10 · 3 July 2015]

I ran across Advantageous on Netflix after starting and stopping a couple of big budget movies. I will concede that I am a sucker for sci-fi, but this is more than sci-fi. It is a question about medical science and implications for humanity. It is also a question about the priorities of society and what poorly chosen ones can cost us. I can honestly say a film has not caught my attention and made me think this much in years. The strength of the film is obvious because it did not rely on elaborate special effects and action scenes to have an impact.

As one reviewer described it, the deliberate choice of everything - from color, to music, to lighting was so well thought out, it was truly watching moving artwork.

And yes, I used the word film to describe this work rather than movie. The two have a definite distinction.

Modest sci-fi with things to say

[youngcollind · 7/10 · 6 August 2021]

Presenting a dystopia that's only a small notch away from where society already is (and probably where it's heading) makes it all the more chilling. Primarily an indictment on how capitalism has us painted into a corner, but also making commentary on feminism, ageism, technology and the nature of self, the film has some big things to say and the writing skill to pull it all off. Unfortunately, the budgetary constraints are occasionally evident in some of the effects and performances, though Jacqueline Kim is perfect in the lead. Altogether a slow burn, but very worthwhile to see science fiction being used for such intelligent musings.

mostly social commentary

[jayj-17577 · 3/10 · 10 August 2015]

The heroine, Gwen, is a spokesperson for a company that has invented a way to transfer a person's mind or consciousness into an artificial body. These bodies are, of course, healthy, young-looking, and attractive. The company advertises this as a solution for physical handicaps, and of course people who are getting old and losing their good looks, or who never were that good-looking, can be young and handsome or pretty.

Then the company pressures Gwen to get one of these artificial bodies herself, because (a) she can then present herself as a satisfied customer; and (b) she's middle-aged, and they want a face that is young and pretty. Gwen doesn't want to do this because she feels she would be losing her identity.

I don't think any of what I've just said is a spoiler. This all happens early in the movie and it's the premise for what follows. In fact -- and here's the big problem I have with this movie -- I think it would be almost impossible to write a spoiler for this movie, because nothing really happens. There's only one real "revelation" in the movie, and I thought it was pretty obvious, doesn't really change things that much. And one decision for the heroine to make: will she cave in and get the artificial body or not. And I won't say any more there to avoid spoilers.

What this movie is really about is discussing how society only values women for their physical appearance and how women are pressured to conform. In my opinion, the message is repeated so often and is so heavy-handed that it just got tedious. It's not a story with social commentary. It's social commentary with a thin veneer of a story.

Even the basic point the movie is trying to make gets muddled by side issues. The story starts out with the company's plan apparently being that they will fire her, then spread nasty rumors about her so she can't get a job anywhere else, so she'll have no choice but to come and beg for her old job back, and then they can tell her they'll hire her back only if she agrees to get the new body. This seems to me to be a rather dumb plan. Why didn't they start out by just asking her to do it? Maybe she would have enthusiastically agreed, and they would have gotten what they wanted without alienating their own employee. Why not make demands before firing her? What would they have done if they fired her and, despite their rumor campaign, she had gotten another job? I hate movies where people do something stupid for no apparent reason. They also throw in a side line about how the artificial bodies experience minor but constant pain. This adds a negative that just distracts from the theme of beauty and identity.

Oh, and there's a curious sub-plot about how her mother disapproves of her for having an affair. We're clearly supposed to see the mother as being narrow-minded and judgmental. Then they show us how much unhappiness the affair caused her, the man, and the man's wife. So we as the audience are apparently supposed to see the affair as a bad thing -- but her mother was narrow-minded and judgmental for saying it was a bad thing. I didn't quite get the point there.

The movie DOES raise an interesting question: If you could get a young, healthy, strong, good-looking body, would you do it? Or would you see it as taking away your identity. Personally, as an old man with medical problems, sure I'd do it, assuming I could afford it and there were no side effects. I thought that was a no-brainer, but when I asked my daughter she said she wouldn't. So there might actually be an interesting philosophical question in there.

Really different kind of movie

[jandy-84700 · 10/10 · 24 June 2015]

Imaginative, heart rending, and thought-provoking. The perfect antidote to the same-old same-old that Hollywood offers. A real work of art, but engrossing at the same time.

As with her last film, Half-Life, the director, Jennifer Phang (pronounced pahng not fang) tells a family-driven story set within the context of an unsettling future world. Along the way, there is plenty of commentary not only on the world of the story, but also our own world of today.

Performances are strong, especially from lead Jacqueline Kim, who is so compelling as the protagonist, who will do anything for her daughter but also is very human and flawed. The special effects are terrific for such a low budget indie, and they never go over the top or detract from the story.

This is the kind of movie that reminds you of what originality in the movies is like - such a refreshing change from the formulaic movies that seem to dominate the market these days.

slow but interesting

[Abritathome · 7/10 · 16 March 2018]

There is lots I like about this film , the filming , the cityscape , the interaction between the mother and daughter . Also , the internal struggle with the meaning of life which lot of us identify with . I mainly struggled with her lack of money , despite having a high profile job in a large company , she had actually nothing to survive on and live in a very modest flat . I'm not sure how she could barely survive a month when she lost her job . The realisation of employment reduction in the future will frighten the millenials.also I missed where the replacement bodies come from.

The 23 minute short film of this might be more bearable.

[Its-me-Michelle · 1/10 · 1 December 2021]

I liked Jacqueline Kim (Gwen) in the movie and that there was a connection between mother and daughter and that there was some kind of connection between Gwen and Fisher. Otherwise the movie feels hollow to me. I wanted to watch this entirety, but some parts were so unbearable and way too stretched that I had to press fast forward. I gave this movie a chance and was hoping for some closure in the end, but when it was over I was just mad at myself that I've watched this movie.