Home > Drama >

Transcendence

Watch Now

Transcendence (2014)

April. 17,2014
|
6.2
|
PG-13
| Drama Thriller Science Fiction Mystery
Watch Now

Two leading computer scientists work toward their goal of Technological Singularity, as a radical anti-technology organization fights to prevent them from creating a world where computers can transcend the abilities of the human brain.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Linkshoch
2014/04/17

Wonderful Movie

More
Contentar
2014/04/18

Best movie of this year hands down!

More
Jenna Walter
2014/04/19

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

More
Keeley Coleman
2014/04/20

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

More
peterjacman
2014/04/21

Watched it after a while and still a very very good movie, definitely must watch if you like science fiction films

More
shimok
2014/04/22

35+ years writing software code ... starting w/ Cobol and ending w/ C#. Watched Neural Networks and "AI" all through my career. "Colossus: The Forbin Project", "The Matrix", etc, have tried to get people to think about what's coming. Until now the tools weren't up to the task that Jonny Depp's character and his Wife envisioned. The next step to human evolution is thru AI period. Face it, I was coding with a 1953 OS that had a pitiful upgrade process. All human coders are faced with the same limitation. However, now with the internet and all the computer scientist, bio-engineers, and human genome decoders out there publishing their results it's only a matter of time before someone releases some type of viable AI into the wild. THIS IS WHAT THIS MOVIE IS ABOUT !!!!! Wake up, we need to start thinking & talking hard about how we want this AI to behave, This movie was couched in the EVIL AI GENRA, I suspect that AI had to be the bad guy before it could make it to the big screen as a third rate movie at best. Sheeple don't like change, it scares them and according to this movie they would rather destroy all the wonderful things we've developed over the last 50 years just to keep radical change from happening. Dr. Will Caster (Johnny Depp) could have simply cured people and foregone networking them and giving them super powers but the networking and super powers was the functional cinematic reason he had to be stopped. The point is he cured people that currently have incurable disabilities. The Authorities could have chosen to talk first BEFORE shooting. Ah, but again AI and Change have to be the bad guys. But bad guys that cure Smog, Clean our Water, Recharge our depleted soil, Breakdown our garbage to useful elements, etc. What's bad about THAT !!! Yes there are risks to change, there are ALWAYS risks to change. However, the Authorities could have said to Dr. Caster, "Dude it's cool to heal all these people, it's even cool if you ask them and they choose to be enhanced. BUT we're NOT OK with all the people you fix being automatically networked. They should be asked if they want to be BORG and they should be given a Network OFF Switch. Isaac Asimov wrote the "3 laws" in 1950. It's not like we haven't been thinking about this stuff. I couldn't give a hoot about whether the movie was great or sucked (I realize this IS IMDB - but for me this is too great a movie message to reduce to cinematic chat.) P.S. you can bet the Weapons development people restarted the site immediately after it was under Authoritarian control. The point of all this - CHANGE WILL HAPPEN - GET USED TO IT - GET A HANDLE ON IT.

More
HooplaTec
2014/04/23

Greetings,With so many great production values and the overall "what if" scenario the script is about, I wanted to comment a little. A few of many moments that could have been written better. Lots of ending spoilers if you haven't seen it. Don't read further etc if you happen to come across my post first. Go for it after seeing the movie. You smile maybe.Martin the contractor (Clifton Collins Jr) gets shot in the tunnel after they trapped him behind the metal screen, AKA a Faraday Cage to prevent RF/WIFI communications, thus the naans could not regenerate him. So why not TASER him instead of shooting eventually leading to his death? More dramatic I suppose making the 'good guys' look really bad for fear of the unknown. Maybe that anything at all costs mentality was what they were going for. But that's for a '50s B movie which a lot of the reviewers went for. A TASER then a drug to keep him unconscious would have said, "OK, we've got a big problem but will save humans when we can". That would have added a little more humanity to the good guys making their cause more understandable as well as believable.Bree the terrorist girl (Kate Mera) threatens to kill the virus guy Max (Paul Bettany) unless Will (Johnny Depp) took the virus. Later Evelyn (Rebecca Hall) says to Will, "We can't let him die for what we did". I get it but really detracted from an outstanding ending. The whole point was all the knowledge of an exceptional human combined with the unlimited resources of worldwide computer capabilities could not understand the abstracts of love, emotions and human frailties thus will take over the planet and pretty much make us all Borgs! So shoot first and ask questions later! We're back to a B movie with great state-of-the art visuals. Heck, Data (Brent Spiner) with his emotions chip had to suffer through this with ST:TNG for years! They are doing great in syndication!What made the ending outstanding was the relationship between Will and Evelyn. Why did Will (the computer version) touch the blood of Evelyn thus the virus knowing it would end him? It certainly wasn't about Bree. The writers also went for a later explanation Will wanting to be together forever with Evelyn in a garden. Evelyn felt in her final moments that the live Will she knew and loved was there. Not a bad way to go.Thus it leaves the audience hanging and thinking. Can a computer in our future ever learn to love? Would it know the difference for regenerating the planet for all our human failures and still allow humans find their way? Would humans at our current level take advantage of these new technologies for their own goals? This is great writing and Isaac Asimov, Robert Henlein and a few others would be proud.Someone once said there are only 200 scripts in Hollywood. They just keep doing them over. Too many producers today are more about a political or social point they want to make wanting you to pay big money to see them. Ever seen a great positive movie about a Republican President in Hollywood? Won't happen today. What is a great movie? I think the 1947 movie "Miracle on 34th Street" by 20th Century Fox which won several Academy awards should have won for best picture but didn't. Some trivial a Hollywood company it was their second movie ever filmed in NYC. They did well. Still it is played every Christmas and you'll have to look up the movie that won!I love 'what if' movies. Done right they are entertaining, give us the magic being immersed in the movie for two hours (versus our real lives), touch the emotions of hopefully ALL the audience and gives us something to wonder about leaving the theater. The more movies you see the more you add to this personal list. 'Transencence' while having flaws many have already posted about is one of these...but then that is me. You decide.Hope that I got all the actors right trying my best. One could rob a store I was in and if you weren't my mother I couldn't identify you! :)Regards

More
Mihai Toma
2014/04/24

Will, a brilliant mind in artificial intelligence, who invented the smartest computer known to man has only a couple of weeks to live after being shot with a poisoned bullet. His wife decides that the best thing she can do is to upload his conscience into such a computer. Miraculously, it works, but the new Will evolves too quick and requires more and more power. At the same time, a group of people try to develop a virus that can stop virtual Will's lust for knowledge before he becomes too powerful to be stopped.It's a brilliant idea which wasn't exploited to its fullest, as it had much more potential, rather than seeming superficial in some important aspects. I find it hard to believe that someone can create a colossal sum of money into one's account without the government or someone to realize this fraud and do something about it. I find it even harder to believe that this entity can rebuild a whole city with a huge laboratory underneath without somebody authorized asking any questions. His wife's attitude is also to be questioned as she does almost anything she can to support her "husband" without even thinking for a second what consequences her acts may have.Besides these, I have to say that it is mostly interesting, with unbelievable experiments and future science. It's impressive how an AI can evolve so fast and do such great acts in a relatively short time. Unfortunately, its simplistic finale is expected as the most of the plot and leaves a sense of superficiality which you cannot ignore. It starts very well but it isn't able to keep the good pace till the end, oscillating from interesting to boring like a sine. I am somewhat disappointed by it but that's life, you can't be right all the time.

More