Somewhere in a corral, cornered by "Bladerunner" "Lovers of the Arctic Circle" and "Spotless Mind" quietly prances this film in the darkness. Winterbottom has never let me down, his understanding of cinematically defined human currents that pull is deep. His films are centered not on story or place or characters, but the urges that pull them. No, the threads at the edges of those urges. He's never let me down, I say again, because I will forget. This is a bleak film. Oh, I should probably warn you before you look at the special features. DON'T. This is one of those cases where you have to trust the artistry of the participants and not the blather they provide. It may be that everyone involved thought they were making a movie that warned us about big brother or some other terror around the corner. Never mind that and just take what this is as it comes. It is a haunting work, with just the most teasing hint of those edges I mentioned, placed in an otherwise sterile container. And that's the only way to see those edges: briefly, faintly in the periphery with few other distractions. The story has all sorts of science fiction devices that you should simply accept. They aren't there for you to watch, they simply set up the extraordinary confines of the romance. Two people fall in love more or less instantly. (Each may have been exposed to some special substance that has caused this, but we see it inside the groping toward each other. We see it as genuine.) And as the story moves around the posts of its corral, each lover in turn has their memory of the love removed. Its a truly provocative and disturbing notion. There's some fighting of this, but it is incidental, a simple exhale. What makes it disturbing is how seriously and deeply our woman has given herself. He does too, but she gives everything. Everything. I'm not normally a fan of Samantha's approach to eye submission. But she is so small and vulnerable compared to Robbins and he so forward in giving. I won't reveal the development, but it is a triple tragedy, the absolute worst that could possibly happen. Or is it? The final scene focuses on Morton's face. There's a similar scene at the end of "Monster's Ball" where everything we have seen is supposed to be measured in Berry's face, and weighed in all its ambiguities. Berry isn't up to it and that project fails. But Morton is, bless her. You may not long forget that gaze, the knowing, the having traveled. The probability that she would do it all again, knowing. In a way, it recalls a similar loss and position in the remarkably obtuse and deep "Sweet and Lowdown." Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

The film disappointed me for many reasons: first of all the depiction of a future which seemed at first realistic to me was well-built but did only feature a marginal role. Then, the story itself was a weak copy of Lost in Translation. The Middle-Eastern setting, man with family meets new girl overseas, karaoke bar, the camera movements and the imagery - all that was a very bad imitation of the excellent Lost in Translation which had also credibility. This movie tries to be something brilliant and cultural: it is not. I wonder why Tim Robbins even considered doing this film!? The female main actress is awful - did she play the precog in Minority Report? And why do you have to show the * in a movie like this? Lost in Translation didn't have to show excessive love scenes. R-Rated just for this? This movie isn't even worth watching it from a videostore!

This film is just to odd and to perverted to like. It contains three sex scenes, all of which are not a turn on and one is very disturbing. Who ever thought this idea up has something really messed up going on in their head. The basic, very perverted and odd, plot has a man that ends up having a love affair with the genetic twin of his mom! The government, who of course want to put an end to this relationship, tries everything to pull the two apart, from wiping their minds to giving them a disease that makes them sick when they touch one another. So it's these two love birds up against the world and in the end I wanted the world to win. Also you can not feel any pathos for the hero of this film because he's cheating on his wife with his mom and he just doesn't seem to care. If you can live through this plot and the sex then you are still going to have to put up with the slow pace, which is really way to slow, and the crummy ending. I say, avoid at all costs.

They probably did as well as they could and sure the film had some nice aspects (music appropriate all the way through, interesting mix of languages, interesting concept on state restrictions and biotech etc), but overall I ended up really not caring about them very much, and I didn't sympathise with him or his choices, unless he was just so bored with his life that he needed to do something "dangerous" just for the change. I guess they did a good job with the subject, but it doesn't really make any specific points for me, or provide much entertainment - I spent the last 20-30 minutes waiting for it to end (and hoping for something to happen that would surprise/shock/provoke me in some way to justify the relative blandness of the rest of the film).

Pre-rambling, let me just that that I loved this film and it will probably be in my top 5 for the year (along with Fahrenheit, Eternal Sunshine, perhaps Control Room). A few things did annoy me though. Firstly, it should have been 30 or 45 minutes longer, but it actually felt like it was too long for the current script. There were too many awkward moments, both in terms of dialogue and editing. The majority of the ideas were fantastic, but a few scenes and characters needed more exploration. I know that the movie was essentially set over 2 or 3 days, but it still felt like everyone was in too much of a rush. It's not that the movie was confusing, just that too many events were left to the viewer to explain (or excuse). This is all just a roundabout way of saying that the script needed to be fleshed out some more. And, while it was nice to see a few British film & television actors grab cameo roles (ie Benedict Wong from State of Play, Dirty Pretty Things; Nina Sosanya from Teachers [!]), it also woke me up to the fact that it was only a film in a way that seeing for instance Tim Robbins had not. It was weird, and I can't exactly explain it, but seeing them was simultaneously cool (hey good for them) and disappointing (you mean this isn't real?) at the same time. (And don't get my started on Benedict's accent...). Obviously, for people who aren't overly familiar with British TV this is all a moot point but it still freaked me out enough to mention it. Anyway, nearly everything about the movie is great. The music, cinematography, directing, acting (overall), etc.. are all fantastic, and the movie has as much style as Solaris (moreso the remake) or Blade Runner. They even manage to make Coldplay sound non-cheesy towards the end of the film. It just needed a bit more substance. 8/10

I just finished watching this film and think it is one of the worst films I have ever seen. It was so boring that I found myself zooming through it at X2 speed and finished it in less than 30 minutes. I was not just disappointed, but angry that I had wasted my money to rent it. It ranks within the top five of the worst films I have ever seen, and I've seen thousands of movies! The plot was very confusing. Had I not first read the DVD sleeve cover, prior to renting it, I would have been totally lost throughout this film. I would not have thought that Tim Robbins, after having made such good films as "Shawshank Redemption" would have agreed to appear in this film.

source: Code 46

Trailer—Code 46

Code 46