One Of The Coolest Dystopian Films Ever: How Did Equilibrium Not Explode At The Box Office?!

The Good: Decent character arc, Good acting, Good plot, Most of the special effects
The Bad: Moments of predictability, Lack of realism for special effects in the combat scenes.
The Basics: The natural extension to Brazil, Equilibrium is a stylish, cool, story of one man who turns against his emotionless existence to free the enslaved humanity.


When it comes to truly great films, there are few that hold a candle to Brazil (reviewed here!). That said, even I have to admit that cinematic storytelling has come a long way since Terry Gilliam created his movie masterpiece. There is something rather amusing to me about the fact that it took until today for me to find one of the films that actually gives Brazil a thematic run-for-its-money: Equilibrium.

Equilibrium is a dystopian action film that is incredibly close to perfect. In fact, were it not for what I thought initially was poor acting from Angus Macfadyen actually telegraphs the film’s climax in a troubling way. Between that and a lack of realistic blood spray, of a magnitude not seen since 28 Days Later (reviewed later!) where blood was everywhere but somehow does not infect the protagonists, Equilibrium is taken down just a notch . . . but it is still very much worth watching. While writer and director Kurt Wimmer deserves a lot of credit for all he accomplished with an impressive cast in Equilibrium, had Quentin Tarantino directed Equilibrium with his characteristic penchant for blood, it might well have been perfect. Indeed, there are a number of stylistic similarities between Equilibrium and Kill Bill, Volume 1 (reviewed here!) and The Matrix (reviewed here!).

Decades after World War III has devastated Earth, the survivors of the nuclear holocaust live in Libria, a walled-up city where they have renounced all emotion. The society that has been produced seeks to eliminate anger and other emotions by regulating the citizens through the drug Prozium II. Enforcing the laws are Grammaton Clerics, emotionless police officers responsible for destroying the last remaining vestiges of art and culture from before the War . . . and the offenders who have been rescuing them for years. John Preston is one of the best, most efficient, Grammaton Clerics and after he and his partner, Partridge, destroy a cache of artwork in the Nethers (outside the walls), Preston realizes that his partner is experiencing emotions. Killing him, Preston is brought to his superior, Dupont. Dupont charges Preston with hunting down the last remaining rebels against ordered society.

Now paired with Brandt, an ambitious young Cleric, Preston goes hunting for rebels. He captures Mary O’Brien, whom he learns actually had a connection with Partridge. After Preston misses a single dose of his emotion-inhibiting drug, he begins to question his place in society. He starts to feel emotions and becomes protective of Mary. He plays a hunch and manages to find the rebel hideout. Exposed to the controller of Libria and menaced by his own son, Preston must choose to become the agent of change or enforce the unnatural laws of the new society.

Equilibrium is very much like V For Vendetta (reviewed here!) but it does not make its rhetoric as explicit. The world created by Kurt Wimmer is dark and starts with an essential premise that is audacious, but not entirely improbable. For sure, one might think that if a drug was being used to control human emotion and society that it would be one that would build-up in one’s system so if they missed a single injection they would not lose all their control.

Despite the main character reversal surrounding the identity of Father, the controller of Libria, Equilibrium is actually unpredictable and rendered in an impressive way. The film slowly erodes the control of John Preston, making him a compelling protagonist that one truly empathizes with. Preston lives in fear of his own son and he has to keep even that emotion in check. The film hinges on Preston’s ability to appear unemotional while his control breaks down and he finds something compelling in emotions. That Preston does not suddenly turn against all that he has built makes for a realistic story that fits within the world in which he is trapped.

In fact, all that is not terribly realistic about the dark, controlled world of Equilibrium is how bloodless the combats are. As well, the combat and human endurance represented by the characters’ continued participation in such exerting exercises is more stylish than realistic. That keeps Equilibrium entertaining at the very least. The film has a good flow and some of the reversals are truly surprising. The final combat scene, which is essentially a sword fight with pistols is exceptionally entertaining and well-paced.

On the acting front, Equilibrium is a great use of established talents. While Christian Bale has long illustrated the ability to portray characters who are emotionally-restrained, Emily Watson, who usually plays stoic or emotionally-awkward characters represents the emotionally-free Mary O’Brien and she plays the part perfectly. Taye Diggs smiles a bit much for Brandt to be truly realistic in the world of Equilibrium, but Angus Macfadyen’s smarmy Dupont makes for an interesting foil for Bale’s Preston. Matthew Harbour is eerie as Robbie Preston and that he keeps Christian Bale in place is pretty impressive.

Equlibrium is a smart, fast-paced film that accomplishes what most dystopian science fiction films today fail to do. It is worth hunting down and sharing.

For other works with Sean Bean, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Mirror Mirror
Game Of Thrones - Season 1
Silent Hill
The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy

9/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Film Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2014 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Nothing Ultra Here, Except Suck. Is Ultrasuck A Legitimate Classification? Ultraviolet

The Good: There are moments that Milla Jovovich looks good
The Bad: Every line Jovovich says is terrible, Acting, Character, Continuity, Plot, EVERYTHING!
The Basics: Ultraviolet is a special effects-driven movie is not special. It sucks. Unspeakably lame.


When I write reviews, I tend to go to the IMDB to get the correct spellings of character names and actors names and for the information involving any crew members (director, costume designer, writers, etc.) that I need to cite. Occasionally, I accidentally see a review of a movie there (I say "accidentally" because I try not to let other people's opinions influence my opinions on such things). In the case of Ultraviolet, when I was doing my fact-checking, there was a review that was whining about how Ultraviolet was unfairly being compared to other special effects-heavy movies like The Matrix and, well, whatever else. I say "whining" because the special effects in Ultraviolet were nothing to write home about - more on that in moments - and the reviewer seemed infatuated with this movie beyond any sense of reason. But more than that, the assertion that Ultraviolet was somehow unfairly compared to other special effects movies is a lame argument. The moment a movie pushed forth the envelope on special effects, every other special effects-driven movie becomes judged by or against that standard. So, for example, Star Wars: A New Hope revolutionized special effects in the late-70s and from that moment on, it was a standard by which effects were judged. Make a movie with A New Hope effects now, it's camp; the envelope has been pushed. And there has been a series of leaps since: Jurassic Park, The Phantom Menace, The Matrix, Return Of The King, each moved forward effects and pushed the envelope to create a higher standard of special effects for special effects movie. Trading on spectacle means playing in the field as it stands. If you can't create the new best thing, you're not going to have the biggest special effects movie of the year. And if you're behind on the special effects and you're creating a special effects-driven movie you're going to have a lemon. It's unfair to compare non-special effects movies to a special effects standard (i.e. complaining that Magnolia's special effects aren't up to The Matrix is an unfair comparison because Magnolia is not a special effects movie).

That said . . .

Violet is a hemophage who was experimented on, died and was essentially brought back to life. Now, she is acting as a courier for a weapon that is supposed to be able to wipe out all hemophages, who are a nearly extinct race of infected humans who have some vampiric qualities. Violet, despite all of the orders she is given, opens the case to the weapon and discovers in it a child, Six. Six is somehow related to the industrialist leader Daxus who is determined to recover the child and bury Violet with his army of utterly incompetent soldiers.

Every now and then I watch a movie like Ultraviolet and I wonder if there are movies that are sent overseas to entertain our troops in their barracks that they just get pissed off watching. If I was a soldier and I watched Milla Jovovich cutting down a virtual army, I think I could get annoyed enough to go kick some ass. I mean, soldiers who have any pride in their ability to kill other human beings ought to be offended by seeing legions of their numbers - especially with adequate amounts of body armor - cut down by a half-dressed chick with no real superhuman abilities.

There is one cool thing about Ultraviolet and I'll just write what it is. Near the end of the movie, Violet and Daxus fight with swords with the lights off. The battle is remotely interesting only for the fact that they put a flammable liquid on their swords and do battle by flaming sword. It's a pretty cool concept and it's the sole well-executed moment of the movie.

The problem is, it's the only well-executed moment of the movie. There are shots that make absolutely no sense, save to present Jovovich and accent her looks. I swear, the soldiers in this movie are so ridiculous that director Kurt Wimmer presents a shot of Jovovich as Violet swishing her hair, as in a Revlon commercial, before she slaughters a bunch of them. Why don't the soldier's shoot? I don't know. Are they dazzled by her looks? I suppose it's possible . . .

Milla Jovovich is terrible as Violet, but to her credit, the part is absolutely abysmal. Violet, as presented by lines delivered, is either multiple personalitied, the most abrupt shifter of moods or just has no idea what is coming out of her mouth. One moment, she will say someone is trying to kill Six and he needs to trust her and then when she runs into an obstacle with the boy, she threatens to kill him, then she implores him to trust her again. It's ridiculous and lacks any continuity, not only from scene to scene, but line to line.

None of the characters are interesting, believable or compelling. The whole cast of characters could be wiped out and it would not appreciably change the emotional resonance of the movie. Sadly, the performances all suffer as a result of the terrible characters. One of my favorites, William Fichtner, appears in Ultraviolet and even his appearance cannot help the movie. Fichtner plays Garth, an ally to Violet who interacts with her infrequently in her bloody run away from both the hemophages and Daxus. Fichtner is responsible - via Garth - for a great deal of plot exposition to make sense of what essentially is the prior forty-five minutes of Milla Jovovich on the run. Fichtner gets around the dull as dirt explanations and is then subjected to injecting one of the most hackneyed romantic subplots in recent movie memory. The leads in Scary Movie 4 had more reasonable emotional resonance and reason to hook up than Garth and Violet in Ultraviolet.

And the special effects are nothing to scream about. In fact, for a movie from 2006, the effects are pathetic. What makes the effects so insulting is that the movie tries to be clever and interesting with the effects, but creates entire sequences that look animated. So, for example, as Violet is fleeing someone (at this point, I don't even care to stretch my memory to remember who she was running away from at the time) on her motorcycle, she is driving up the side of skyscrapers and the image is so overdone with computer animation that the entire sequence looks like it is computer generated. It is so overdone and poorly done that the texture and lighting of the sequence devolves from live action into CGI cartoon for the duration of the sequence. It's insulting and it's bad. Just bad.

What is worse - and go ahead armies of Christian soldiers, lambaste me for calling the film on this! - is the overt subtext (not as much of an oxymoron as it might sound) of modern day Paulist-Christian propaganda peppered throughout the movie. Violet implores her fellow hemophages not to destroy the container carrying Six because of the importance of the life of a child. And while it might be a stretch to some to read Ultraviolet as a subtle doctrine on wiping out homosexuals (The Other!, "the infected") and the desperation of the modern Paulist Christians to demonize anyone who is different, the prevalence of cross imagery and associations with such strong Christian imagery is undeniable. One of the last shots of the movie involves a giant cross-shaped building that has domes conspicuously at the stigmata points. One needs to be either in denial or oblivious to ignore the Paulist-Christian proselytizing in Ultraviolet.

Fortunately for me, for those who wish to complain about any sort of anti-Christian bias on my part, Ultraviolet is such a homogeneously terrible movie before getting into any deeper readings or associations that it's impossible to say I'm rating the movie even lower because of the overt Christian doctrines being pushed on the audience. From Violet's opening assertions that this is "a world you may not understand" to the string of nonsensical events that follow throughout the movie, this is so bad that it doesn't even have camp value.

Thirty minutes into Ultraviolet, Violet asks, "What am I doing?" which is right around the time the viewer is so baffled by the inane content of the movie that they are asking the same question. This movie is PG-13, though I can't imagine even a 13 year-old being entertained by it.

For other works with William Fitchner, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Date Night
The Dark Knight
Invasion
Crash

.5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |