Christian Peterson
Columnist
“The Creator” was released to the American market on Friday, Sept. 29. It was produced, directed and co-written by Garth Edwards. The film follows Joshua (John David Washington), an ex-special forces agent who is grieving the loss of his wife, Maya (Gemma Chan), after she was killed in a bomb strike while he was undercover. The United States is at war with New Asia over the existence of artificial intelligence (AI) in the continent. The United States vowed to destroy all AI after it caused a nuclear bomb to drop on Los Angeles. The military contacts Joshua after five years, making him aware that they have found the creator of the AI, Nirmata. This person, worshipped by the AI as a god, is active in an installation only he knows and has a secret weapon meant to end the war once and for all. The military finally convinces Joshua to join the efforts by showing video of Maya, who is still alive. Eventually, Joshua finds the secret weapon, which turns out to be a robot child named Alphie (Madeleine Yuna Voyles). Joshua, being the only surviving member of his military strike team to his knowledge, has Alphie lead to him to where Maya is. What ensues is an action packed adventure through enemy territory that brings up questions about humanity, the cost of war and what family really is. Beware, there are SPOILERS in the following review.
The good:
There is a lot to like about this movie, with the first being that it is an original concept; that immediately puts this movie in its own league. In a world of sequels, reboots and unnecessary remakes (I'm looking at you Disney) it's always refreshing to see an entirely self-contained story. There are no previous installments to watch to catch you up, no post-credit scene to get you interested in a sequel, and no TV show that prefaces or follows the events of the movie. It is wholly self-contained, and it doesn't even go down the easter egg route by leaving clues throughout the movie about how it is based on something else. Furthermore, the movie itself is just beautiful, especially with a production budget of only $80 million. For example, “The Flash,” a recent superhero flick with disappointing visuals had a budget of $300 million and Disney's “The Little Mermaid” remake had a budget of $265.5 million. “The Creator” blows both of these movies out of the water with visual effects. The backdrops of enormous buildings, or “Blade Runner”-esque metropolitan cities do an excellent job of pulling you into the world that has been created; not to mention the epic final action set piece which has Joshua hanging on for life to a space ship. The gravitas of the world and magnitude of its uniqueness is palpable. I also want to touch on the character design, specifically for the AI robots. I greatly enjoyed a rather unique look to the robots. It didn't make me think of “Star Wars” or “Alien,” it felt original, and that is a statement unto itself.
The bad:
I really wanted to be super into this movie, I wanted to like it; I wanted to walk out saying this is one of the greatest sci-fi flicks in the modern era, but it just wasn't. The first mood killer for me was the script. It was far from an exceptional script with a couple lines, including the line where Joshua names Alphie that felt as if it were written by an AI generator. It just didn't feel real. It is a difficult thing to describe, but there were a few moments that really irked me. Next on the list of mood killers was the disappointment that Alphie and Joshua's relationship entailed. I am not one who shies away from pointing out the now common storyline of a single father taking a young child under his wing on a dangerous adventure. Usually, the pair start out annoyed or with a dislike of each other and, by the end of the film, you feel the fatherly love the pair have created. That was clearly the tone this movie was going for, especially with the twist being that Alphie is literally a robot clone of Joshua's unborn child. However, it failed. The movie became so focused on the action set pieces and the ultimately political undertones (something we will touch on momentarily) that they lost the core of the plot. They weren't able to make me or the people I went to the movie with walk out caring about Alphie and Joshua's relationship. Key beats were missed that convince the audience to care about the two. An example is the key beat where the child, with lack of faith in the father figure, turns to another source for comfort and help only for that source to betray them and attempt to hurt them. However, the father figure arrives to their rescue despite initially accepting their decision. In fact, I would even go so far as to say the writers wrote themselves into a corner by making Alphie the lynchpin to finding Maya. It failed to allow Joshua to leave Alphie's side, failing to show the bond the two are growing.
The ugly:
Alright, let's talk about the clearly political undertones of this film. It is dangerous to make assumptions about what a filmmaker intended to portray, especially in a film such as this. I do not want to go so far and say this is exactly what Edwards intended, however, in our highly politicized world, it is almost impossible to watch a movie without assuming or acknowledging underlying principles in the film itself. The first and most obvious fact is that all of the protagonists are people of color, while the bad guys, also known as the USA, are all white. Like I said, this can easily be explained away, but in our world it is hard not acknowledge such things. I think Washington did an excellent job; I think the supporting cast around him made up of mostly Asian actors did a phenomenal job, and the setting calls for this. But it seems more prevalent and race-baiting when you look on the other side and, instead of the antagonists showing any diversity, they are all white. My second problem is the seemingly call to the USA to disable things such as nuclear weaponry. A massive part of the movie, and later massive set piece, is NOMAD, a space station that is owned by the US that can send missiles down on countries destroying them. Does it feel like the filmmakers are saying the United States has too much firepower and should not haveas much power? Yes, that is what it feels like the filmmakers are saying. Whether you agree with that or not is up to you. However, it feels politically charged, and that is something I just don't care for anymore in films. Hopefully, this was all unintentional and I am just reading too deep into the film. But, something tells me that I am not.
Conclusion:
“The Creator” is original, and that is enough to make it worth watching and supporting. The concept is unique and fun and, at any other time, I would be willing to give it a much higher rating than I am going to. But the decidedly political undertones and the poor script take what could have been an A plus movie down to a C. I hope ideas like this continue to come to fruition, and that studios take a chance on films like this. No matter how they turn out, it is refreshing to get something new, innovative and creative out into the world. Ultimately, it is a recommendation from me if you want to support original ideas in film. If you aren't big into sci-fi or action films, this is not the movie for you. This movie is what I would call, “genius idea, mishandled production.” I give “The Creator” a six out of 10 gator tails.