"Simone" might certainly be enough to give those within the industry who are unreasonably fond of CGI some ponderment. (Sommers can perhaps still be saved; but alas it seems Lucas is 'lost' forever!) It's also enough to be a lightweight piece of fluff for 2 hours; but a blistering, serious critique? Nope - I'm afraid that technology hasn't gotten THAT good at papering over the cracks, just yet... ! As a stablemate of "Gattaca" and "The Truman Show", comparatively "Simone" is one of many 'supermodel' clones that are decidedly 'undernourished' in the ideas department!
The humour isn't so cleverly witty and snide as it perhaps should be, rendering it an alarming possibility that this is taken as a 'blueprint', by some! (Want proof? See the Trivia... ) I'm sure it's untrue that normal, everyday Americans are incapable of properly digesting satire/irony; 'studio executives', however, is a 'grey' area I'm unhappily less sure about... You can just picture one watching somewhere thinking "What a great idea!"; and a HUGE problem with the movie is its apparent refusal to condemn this ideology with any sort of unequivocal force...
Another fatal nail in the career coffin is the implausibility of people being fooled for so long. Yes, I know the idea is that people will believe in the dreams they are sold; but don't try to tell me this includes a mannequin in a car from mere YARDS away and expect me to swallow it hook, line and sinker. I always thought Marx was full of it. Why, then, should we expect characters to play make-believe about the illusion for far longer than the audience watching? 'It would destroy the movie at a stroke', is I believe, the most fitting answer.
Nice idea in theory, maybe, but ultimately a pipe-dream with too many gaps in 'logic' and 'knowledge'. Bracket with 'GM foods' and 'cloning'!
6/10.
("Godsend's" horror gets away with it easier, because of what I call 'The Frankenstein Tradition'... !!)
The humour isn't so cleverly witty and snide as it perhaps should be, rendering it an alarming possibility that this is taken as a 'blueprint', by some! (Want proof? See the Trivia... ) I'm sure it's untrue that normal, everyday Americans are incapable of properly digesting satire/irony; 'studio executives', however, is a 'grey' area I'm unhappily less sure about... You can just picture one watching somewhere thinking "What a great idea!"; and a HUGE problem with the movie is its apparent refusal to condemn this ideology with any sort of unequivocal force...
Another fatal nail in the career coffin is the implausibility of people being fooled for so long. Yes, I know the idea is that people will believe in the dreams they are sold; but don't try to tell me this includes a mannequin in a car from mere YARDS away and expect me to swallow it hook, line and sinker. I always thought Marx was full of it. Why, then, should we expect characters to play make-believe about the illusion for far longer than the audience watching? 'It would destroy the movie at a stroke', is I believe, the most fitting answer.
Nice idea in theory, maybe, but ultimately a pipe-dream with too many gaps in 'logic' and 'knowledge'. Bracket with 'GM foods' and 'cloning'!
6/10.
("Godsend's" horror gets away with it easier, because of what I call 'The Frankenstein Tradition'... !!)