Impostor (Director's Cut)
|
List Price: Our Price: $4.74 You Save: $5.25 (53%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.30 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Canada
Movie Reviews of Impostor (Director's Cut)
Movie Review: one of the best endings all time
Summary: 4 Stars
Bladerunner meets terminator.this is truly 1 of the best films ive seen this year.
great story and cool special effects.
the only thing i missed was more background info of the aleins.
a must see movie if you like sci fi
Movie Review: entertaining
Summary: 4 Stars
i was surprised to not see any reviews on this movie. it is a very entertaining sci-fi movie. and i@?'?...?????...????that@you@see@it@for@sure.Movie Review: Does the android Sinise dream of electric sheep? The world may never know...
Summary: 3 Stars
If someone were to approach me with money and desperately seek out the actor whose body of work impresses me the most, I think they would be surprised to find that the answer is Vincent D'Onofrio. Outside of his "Law and Order" record, the body of work that he represents is outstanding. The characters that he chooses to portray in each of his films continue to be more and more obscure and random, creating a body of work that is nearly untouched by any other actor in Hollywood. For this, I will forever respect this man and his work. I recently had the pleasure of seeing him in the lower budget science fiction Phillip K. Dick cinematic story "Impostor", and must admit, I was impressed. With little money, a decent budget for visuals, and a cast that from the outside seems impressive, this was a little film that fell well under the radar and never quite saw the light of day. This is not to say the film isn't perfect, because it is far from it, but it did provide me with nearly two hours of guessing, wondering, questioning, and inevitably (after the film was done), hoping for more.
For those that are unwilling to give an unknown film a chance, this was the story of Gary Sinise playing the role of Spencer Olham. He is a very happy scientist that loves his wife and job working for the government. It is the future, and a band of violent aliens is trying to destroy the human race, but we have been resilient. We have built walls over our skies and continually send pilots to attempt to bring down their star ships. This story takes place somewhere in the middle of this chaotic war, where fear becomes a bigger enemy than ally. D'Onofrio plays Hathaway, the leader of a government elite unit specializing in locating spies - and he has found a target - Olham. Hathaway believes that Olham is an android of the human he once was, disguised to allow for easy infiltration and destruction. Hathaway's mission is to destroy this clone, and while he wasn't successful in the past, he knows the truth now. Of course, Sinise is Sinise, and for nearly two hours he runs, inspects, and prepares for what should be the truth - but instead we are handed a diabolical twist that will make any childless film buff happy and any anti-Sinise fan jump for joy. We are left with a vision that is as stunning as it is disturbing, yet for me, I was disappointed. I loved the ending, but questioned the value of the preceding hour of stock "running" footage. The DVD itself contains the short film that this film was based on, and I must admit, I liked that a bit more because it cut the center "filler" out, but also eliminated the illusionist-character element that filled the time slot. It was a give or take, but as you watch the ending, you question the need for it.
I can't give the ending away, so I will divert the conversation elsewhere. Loved the introduction to this film. The history lesson coupled with an opening chapter that slowly fed you subliminal clues to the past. The John Hooker song got my feet bouncing and my juxtaposed mind in gear. Even in the future they listen to great music. The relationship between Sinise and Stowe could have been warmer, the introduction was sensual, but not worth 45 minutes of fighting for. I could not believe they were husband and wife for the brief moments that we saw them together. The struggle with the situation that occurs to Nelson Gittes (played by Tony Shalhoub) again seemed very underplayed. I wanted to see a stronger bond, and not just two sentences of dialog that would attempt to bring to the surface a life long relationship. I loved D'Onofrio, but that has already been said. Mekhi Phifer was just filler, the typical stranger that finds that warm patch in his heart to help a total stranger. We have seen that in any other Hollywood puzzler, and for this film it was no different. So, what I am trying to say is that the acting isn't what stands out with this film, it is the story.
We all know that PK Dick can write an amazing story that withstands the vaults of time, and this is no exception. When you begin watching the film, you may assume you have seen the action before, in other films. You will be half right, until you witness the surprising ending. I thought I had it figured out, but what happened continues to keep a smile on my face. What I missed about this story was the war itself, yet eerily, I liked the internal struggle. I was very reminiscent of what is occurring in our world today. The tale of an overprotective government that is too worried about the treat instead of its people. I wish we could have seen more about the "big weapon" that was going to be a turning point to the war, I think that would have explained the choice for Olham to be targeted - but again, with the shabby acting and stronger story, you have a mixed message that gets sent. The focus becomes blurry and this small review found the short story/film to be stronger than the final verdict. A smaller scale sometimes paint a bolder picture.
Overall, I thought this was a decent film for the small amount of screen time it was given. It kept my attention, while using techinques that are overused in Hollywood, but with "Impostor" it didn't feel used. Something felt fresh about this film, and while I know it wasn't the small actors giving less than 100%, or the overly sweaty Sinise, I think it was the voice and power behind D'Onofrio's character. Honestly, I am not drooling here, but he was great in this film. He was fun, angry, poised, and yet seemingly disturbed all at the right moments. "Impostor" is not a film that I think is a staple of the genre in any way, but it is a sinful delight that surprised me through the end. I would recommend this to friends, but only good friends. Alas, it won't be making my collection, but wouldn't mind catching it on network television one late night. Could I be any more vague?
Oh well, I am reopening "Do Android's Dream of Electric Sheep?"
Grade: *** ˝ out of *****
Movie Review: In the Future, not everyone is who they seem to be.
Summary: 3 Stars
Inspired by a short story written by Phillip K. Dick, the author who inspired one of the greatest sci-fi films of all time in Blade Runner (1982), Impostor (2002), directed by Gary Felder (Kiss the Girls, Don't Say a Word), stars a pretty impressive cast in Gary Sinise, Madeleine Stowe, and Vincent D'Onofrio. It's odd that I hadn't even really heard of this film other than on here, but it could be it wasn't promoted enough to garner a larger audience or it may have gotten lost among the other releases that year...either way, I enjoyed it despite a number of perceived flaws.The film takes place sometime in the not so distance future, as the Earth is involved in a galactic battle with a mysterious alien force (All your base bewrong to us!) for the last ten years. Seems these aliens want our planet in a bad way, even if it means destroying most of it in order to wipe the humans from the surface. Dr. Spencer Olham (Sinise), a patriot and a scientist working for the global government, is in charge of research developing a super sophisticated new weapon to battle the hostile inter-planetary creeps, but soon finds himself as public enemy number one as he is accused of being a cybernetic construct, a living/mechanical thing created by aliens, replacing the real Dr. Olham, with the intent of carrying out a terrorist attack on an unknown target. You see the method of the attack involves a highly explosive, yet virtually undetectable device implanted within Dr. Olham, one that activates when the carrier comes in proximity of its' target...at least this is what Major D.H. Hathaway (D'Onofrio), officer of the ESA (Earth Security Agency) claims, based on sketchy evidence collected through intercepted alien transmissions. Oh yeah, the only way to distinguish a human from an impostor is by vivisection, something which Dr. Olham isn't too keen on for obvious reasons, so he manages to escape custody for the purpose of not only clearing his name, but staying alive.
While I did enjoy the film, which is touted as a futuristic Fugitive, it does have a number of negatives working against it...but I will talk about those later. As far as the positive aspects, the production values are really good throughout, even though I noticed things used in other films like scenes and props from other films like Starship Troopers (1997), Gattaca (1997), and Armageddon (1998). I really did feel like I transported to a future environment, as the level of quality and detail was maintained throughout the film. I thought the special effects were quite good and fairly realistic, even though some of the more grand scenes like ships flying through the air were painfully obvious as CGI work. Gary Sinise, who always seems to put forth an exception effort even despite the film (okay, Reindeer Games was a pretty lame flick, but he was still pretty fun to watch), and I could feel the elements of Phillip K. Dick's story come through, although it was pretty obvious, since the film was based on a short story, that the plot had been stretched out rather than fleshed out. The level of tension within the story was kept pretty tight, as the pacing rarely slowed down. Madeleine Stowe, who plays the character of Dr. Maya Olham, Spencer's wife, is very good, but she seemed under used as her character suffered form lack of screen time and character development. I did enjoy the twist at the end, as it really screws with your mind, and you may not pick up on it until moments before it is revealed, as I did, providing a memorable finish.
The negatives...the camera work suffered at many points. The use of angular shots was over used, and gave me flashbacks of the John Travolta travesty/vanity project Battlefield Earth (2003). It wasn't as bad here as it was there, and it's a technique used to heighten tension within a film, but too much can cause a form of motion sickness in viewers, and this film just barely crossed the line in that aspect with one too many of those shots. The worst thing for me was the very regular use of slow motion. Used properly, it can be effective, but here, it seemed like every third scene involved some sort of slow motion shot, and it felt like the director was padding out the running time rather than using it to effectively present a particular shot. And throughout the film locations and military time appeared at the bottom right hand corner of the screen. I can see why the location was given in some instances (it was wholly unnecessary at some points...hey, I can tell we're in a hospital, as all the doctors, nurses and medical equipment conveys that fact), to relay specific locations to the audience, but why was the time displayed regularly? There really wasn't any time-based factor within the story, no countdown of any kind, as in Escape from New York (1981), so it was utterly pointless and annoying. Tony Shaloub makes an appearance, but his role is basically pointless, and adds little to the story, effectively wasting his talents. As far as Mekhi Phifer's character, well, it was just so very shallow it's hardly worth mentioning. And Vincent D'Onofrio's character...I normally enjoy his work, especially on Law and Order: Criminal Intent, but here I felt the character was a bit overdone, like when John Travolta plays villains on the screen (if you've seen Swordfish (2001), you'll know what I mean).
The wide screen anamorphic picture looks good here, and special features include a lame 12-minute featurette titled The Impostor Files, the original Impostor short film, and theatrical trailers for this film along with a number of others. My recommendation is to rent this film first, as once the twist ending is revealed, there isn't much replay value.
Cookieman108
Movie Review: Torture and terrorism -- sound familiar?
Summary: 3 Stars
Philip K. Dick practically crafted the modern science fiction movie, many of them important foundational works: Blade Runner, Total Recall, Screamers, Minority Report, A Scanner Darkly, Next, and the upcoming Adjustment Bureau. If you're a sci-fi fan, chances are you've seen at least one of the movies inspired by his stories. There's still plenty of material to be mined that hasn't yet been brought to the screen, often because the technology wasn't up to snuff to portray it faithfully. With the advent of cheap CGI, that all changed. And that's how we ended up with the film adaptation of Dick's 1953 short story, Impostor.
In 2079 the world is at war. Aliens from Alpha Centauri regularly strafe the Earth with missiles, necessitating electromagnetic shielding and a military new world order. Frustrated by the failure of their direct approach, the aliens begin sending replicants that look just like human beings but are actually living bombs. Spencer Olham (a bulked up Gary Sinise) goes from prominent weapon designer to wanted criminal, hunted by ESA chief Hathaway (Vincent D'Onofrio). The story is largely about his dislocation and self-doubt as he questions his own humanity.
Dick was fond of exploring how technology affects our perceptions of self. From Blade Runner to Minority Report, Dick repeatedly took themes of how we define identity (our flesh, our minds, our future) and asked: if you remove a piece, are you still human? Impostor continues that inquiry with a contemporary theme we can relate to. In a world where a human can be mimicked down to their memories, does an unwitting suicide bomber have any rights? On the one hand, someone who doesn't know they're a terrorist pawn is just as human as anyone else - Impostor makes the point of reinforcing that, with the exception of the bomb in their chest, the replicants are human down to their DNA - and they have all the hopes, fear, dreams, and emotions of a "real" human being. On the other hand, a terrorist who can blow up thousands is still a terrorist, which excuses every brutal method necessary to stop him, including torture and murder. Sound familiar?
Impostor is intent on showing Olham's humanity but does so with jittery flashbacks, odd camera angles, and frequent scenes of Olham's beautiful wife (Madeleine Stowe). Director Gary Fleder's specialty is television, not movies, and the original version of Impostor was meant to be much shorter. As a result, the many scenes feel like padding, which is a shame - much of Impostor is about the cat-and-mouse game between Olham and Hathaway, but the movie feels top heavy with an additional subplot involving bounty hunter Cale (Mekhi Phifer).
Impostor has lots of plot holes, not the least of which being the double-twist ending that raises more questions than answers. But if you're willing to go along for the admittedly shaky ride, Impostor proves that age old questions about ethics, government, and identity were as relevant in 1953 as they are today.