The
greatest modern science fiction film...
John Murdoch
(Rufus Sewell) awakens in a cheap hotel room. He
doesn't know who he is, why he is here, or why
there is a viciously mutilated woman lying in
the adjacent bedroom. He doesn't know why she is
dead, why the police are pursuing him
constantly, and even why a group of mysterious
"Strangers" are stalking him. Nor does he know
who the mysterious Dr. Daniel Schreber (Keifer
Sutherland), but he claims he can help him. Thus
is the premise of "Dark City," one of the
oddest, intriguing, and beautiful films ever to
appear on the screen.
The first thing that grabs you about "Dark City"
is the production design. A metropolis of huge
buildings, billboards, clashing architecture,
and time periods. No light seems to shine above
dim, the roads are wet and slick, alleys are
dark, and the sun never shines. This is the
perfect location for a action/thriller/film
noir/science fiction film.
The next thing you notice about "Dark City" is
the pace. Once it starts, it never lets up. This
has been said about many films, but I think it
has only truly applies here. From the opening
frame, scenes are short and sweet. The music
rarely stops and only for brief intervals. Why
should these people sit down when so much is
going one. It's going so fast, that we are not
told what is going on, and it requires a good
ear a good eye to pick up the pieces of the
puzzle and put it together.
This pace leaves little room for character
development, and while this may seem to be a
hindrance, it actually works for the film. Like
Murdoch, we don't know who anyone is or what
they think like. We're on the ride with him,
discovering things as he discovers them.
The next thing you may notice, is how insanely
creepy the villains of the film are. "The
Strangers" are mysterious, bald, pale-faced men
in trenchcoats and fedoras. They wield knives,
can make anyone fall asleep on command, and have
the ability to alter reality. Who are they? What
do they want? Why are they after Murdoch and why
do they seem to have unlimited powers?
"Dark City" is simply one of the most unique and
exciting films of all time. From the fabulous
production design, to the sweeping
cinematography, this film is a masterpiece and
firmly establishes Alex Proyas as a visionary
director (whether or not he'll ruin that with
"I, Robot" is yet to be seen). The look and feel
of "Dark City" is so original and exciting, it's
inevitable that many films have already ripped
it off. "The Matrix," for one. That movie was
filmed on many of the same sets as "Dark City,"
and the similarities in atmosphere, lighting,
camerawork and editing is obvious...so obvious
that it extends beyond homage or accident and
becomes rip-off. One can argue which is the
better film, but that's another debate for
another day.
I'll take this moment to mention the actors.
Sewell, Jennifer Connelly and William Hurt get
the job done, and Sutherland plays an
off-the-wall nutcase in a simply strange take.
This is not an actor's film, though, but a
director's film, and Proyas shows he's got the
talent.
Okay, are there plot holes in "Dark City"? Yes.
But like the actors, plot is not important here.
Visuals and STORY are, and throughout most of
the film, visuals tell the story.
As the film reaches it's climax (and the
rip-offs "The Matrix" took become even more
obvious), "Dark City" becomes a film that
belongs in no genre. It can't be classified.
It's far too complex to be just a science
fiction, or an action film. It's probably not a
perfect film, but it fills every requirement
that I look for when I view a film. Many will
hate it, many will love it, but what is really
boils down to, is that this is an overlooked
and important film. Important not only because
of it's theme, but for it's attempt to
make pure cinema.
©
Written by Jacob Hall
TC Candler's Comment
A
truly engaging and beautifully shot
sci-fi/mystery/thriller. This film-noir is
reminiscent of "Metropolis" and "Blade Runner".
"Dark City" is a film that has improved on every
viewing. I have seen it 5 times and it has
risen from a C+ to an A. My only gripe is
that the final battle sequence disappoints as
it resorts to simple clichés. Still, this film
lingers long in the memory and I offer a very strong
recommendation. It ranked as Roger Ebert's #1
film of 1998... high praise indeed!
Richard
Propes' Comment
In light of
the ratings that surround me, I'm going to
choose to revisit this film again in the near
future. Until then, I withhold comment.
