Moviepro (www.moviepro.net)

We have taken some photos of "Knowing". They represent actual movie quality.

• would anyone agree with me posted on 31 Aug 2009

  this film to me was way better than expected as far fetched a it may seem to me it oculd of passed for many things to me part of this movie could o been good for the film Happening" happening had alot of freake otu people but all yous ee is winds from no where and people dying this one you see alo of things and the story was way deeper htan expected it was 2 hrs long and i enjooyed it so much i couldnt beliv it was over when it was over i heard some people in the theater say "i had to clsoe my eyes" on soem of the seeens. to me the ending was disturbing yet the story was intresting again part of this could of been good for the film happening it had suff tha would of made happening better
  the way people wer reacting and talking near the end kidn of reminde me of stephen kign mist people all ove town frightne not knwoing waht to expect do, claiming it was going to be the end of th e world
  i know we still have over half a year left but so far i think this has the best special affects so far this year i loved the acting, the story the back round of making it look like the 1950s, teh mysterious men talking to the kids to me was something youd se in twilight zone or maybe something on x files. it was way better than i even thought or expected i walke in hopign to msyelf tha this would be better than some of nicoles cages last few films and it to me wa one of his better ones
  part of it int he prviews mad it look like a possible national treasure 3 someone else said all them numbers reminded them of jim carrey's number 23, and when you acually watch the film to me it has a lot mroe lot deper than what youd think and most previews show allthe good parts the preview i seen he keep saying " 81 people willdie and hwen yous ee it it was way way, way deper than just 81
  does anyone at all agree with me?

• Outstanding and powerful. posted on 31 Aug 2009

  I wasn't expecting much, but this movie blew me away. I am a senior who love movies, especially sci-fi, and adventure films, so I have seen more then most people over the years, but rarely would I ever give one 5 stars, but that is what I give this one. Very intense, and kept me on the edge of my seat. The disaster scenes were so realistic and powerful I just sat there with my mouth hanging open. It was at times disturbing and intense, but loved the special effects, and the cool sci-fi ending. This movie is what "The Day The Earth Stood Still" should have been.

• Fair thriller posted on 31 Aug 2009

  I see why the critics panned this, and why viewers left so much of their money at theaters seeing it. Boy, am I glad I'm not a critic. Set your expectations for an omens'n'chases movie, and you'll do pretty well. Within that genre, this stands out for clear lack of religious grounding, except in the vaguest of ways. Although it drags a bit during the buildup, the ending really pulls all the stops for effects, emotional string-pulling, and possible sequel-baiting.
  
  A lot has already been said about the movie's premise, so I won't go there. Even more would spoil crucial plot surprises (and there are a bunch), so I won't go there either. That leaves me talked out faster than this enjoyable movie deserves. It successfully combines elements of the creepy thriller, omens-unrolling, supernatural, and catastrophe genres. Even if credibility hits a slick spot now and then, the over-all experience is what a movie-goer pays for: good entertainment.
  
  
  -- wiredweird

• Knowing through Numbers posted on 31 Aug 2009

  I saw this one in the movies. Nicholas Cage plays an excellent part in this 2009 movie release as the single father of a young boy who begins to get messages in numbers. But, let's start at the beginning.
  
  It is 1959 in a small Massachusetts town. Lucinda Embry (age 10-ish) is staring at the sun in a strange way. The brand new school has decided on a special project. They are going to fill a time capsule with stuff, to be dug up in 50 years. In the classroom, the students are all tasked to draw a picture for the time capsule. Each picture is folded and sealed in an envelope. Each envelope has the name of the child who drew the picture written on it.
  
  
  As the other children are busy drawing pictures, Lucinda is writing numbers. The flow from her pencil is very intense, very fast--It appears to be automatic writing. But time is up, so the teacher, Ms. Priscilla Taylor, grabs all the papers for the capsule, including Lucinda's. Lucinda was not finished writing her numbers. Later, you find the police and everyone else scouring the school grounds looking for Lucinda. She has disappeared, but is found in a closed, unharmed, but scratching on the door until her fingers are bloody. She says "Make them stop, please."
  
  Fast forward 50 years, to 2009. Nicholas Cage is Professor Kessler, an astrophysics teacher at MIT. He has a son (age 10-ish?) named Kalum (or something like that). Kalum's mom died and they both still miss her very much. Of course, Kalum goes to the same school that Lucinda went to. The 50 years are up and it's time to open the time capsule. Priscilla Taylor is still around, looking quite elderly, so she is an intregal part of the celebration. Ms. Taylor opens the capsule and each child gets an envelope to open. Well, guess who gets Lucinda's envelope? (Hint-Kalum.) Kalum sees all the numbers and even sees a figure in the distance. He hears voices in his head, too. Kalum takes the paper home even though he is supposed to leave it at the school. Coincidently, his father just happens to start looking at the paper and sees some kind of pattern in the numbers. Intrigued, the Professor begins to research dates on the computer and realizes that these are all dates of disasters around the world, including the numbers of people killed in each and the GIS coordinates of the locations where each happened. There are 3 dates at the end that haven't happened yet. Of course, the plot thickens here and off we go!
  
  I found this a very interesting movie. So far, everyone I know that has seen it has thoroughly enjoyed it. I enjoyed the storyline and Nicholas Cage does a great job with the part. (He always puts his heart and soul into a role. Even when the movie he is in isn't good, Cage is always good.). Anyway, this movie is great!
  
  
  
  
  

• It had potential... posted on 31 Aug 2009

  This movie had potential, but it never quite made it. The first hour and a half was really pretty good, but the last 30 min. was a bomb. It was like the director didn't have the faintest idea how to end it. It had some symbolic images at the end which were pretty stupid. Like I said, it could have been a really good movie if it had had a decent conclusion.

• Knowing that Beethoven was slaughtered . . . posted on 31 Aug 2009

  . . .really destroyed this movie. Generally, I don't review films until after I've purchased the DVD or unless there is something exceptionally good or bad about it. In this case, I've just returned home from the theater and felt compelled to write a review. Overall, the movie was rather exceptional, especially for a "disaster flick." Nicolas Cage was well-cast, the story was certainly compelling (albeit a bit quirky) and had all the qualities one might expect for this type of movie - great (if horrific) special effects, space aliens, articulate characters, sci-fi stuff, suspense, religious undertones, and much more.
  
  The reason I've decided to review this movie now, however, is not because of its overall quality (more than likely 4 or 5 stars) but because of the horrendously interpreted butchering of Beethoven's 7th Symphony, which is one of the greatest works of music of all time. While I always enjoy the use of good (and, in this case, great) music in movies - something that can greatly enhance many movies (for example, I recently watched Master and Commander, on DVD for the zillionth time because the music, which included pieces by Bach, Mozart, Boccherini, etc. is exceptional - the Sydney Studio Orchestra, which played (not performed) Beethoven's 7th for Knowing was literally one of the worst, most hideous butcherings of the piece I've ever been subjected to. While the selection of Beethoven for specific scenes seemed to be somewhat appropriate, the horrendous slaughtering of it distracted so much from the movie that I'm going to have to listen to real performances of it, by real orchestras, before calling it a night in order to detox from the movie. While the second movement of Beethoven's Symphony # 7 is one of most sublime, powerful, and deeply moving masterpieces of all time, the Sydney Studio Orchestra played it so fast that it felt as if it were Rossini's William Tell Overture: need I say more?
  
  
  So, if you're a musician or a music lover, my suggestion would be that you take a bathroom break or get some popcorn the moment you recognize the Beethoven: I promise, you'll be glad you did and the movie will be far more enjoyable.
  

• Three Movies In One: None Is Successful posted on 31 Aug 2009

  KNOWING is a film that tries to do too much. It is a numerology film that attempts to impute cosmic significance to long series of numbers that purport to show present and future accidents and calamities--sort of a movie version of THE BIBLE CODE. It is a ET-oriented film that shows space aliens in a manner that Spielberg envisioned in that these aliens have constantly morphing bodies and fly in spaceships that avoid the traditional cigar or saucer shape in favor of a vessel that morphs its physical form as easily as do its occupants. And it is an end-of-the-world actioner that suggests that our tenure on earth is likely to come to a premature close. The problem here is that it never decides definitively in which direction to go. It starts off on a numerology note as Nicholas Cage examines a sheet of numbers written by a little girl fifty years ago and buried in a time capsule. He soon learns that each set of numbers corresponds to a date of a horrific catastrophe and the number of fatalities involved. So far so good. Just this alone is more than enough cinematic grist for the mill. Unfortunately, the movie inexplicably drifts into the realm of alien contact with non-speaking, leather-raincoated strangers attempting to kidnap Cage's son all the while "whispering" to his mind and allowing him to see apocalyptic visions of a near future in which the world is burning. Finally, it drifts into a weirdly blended kaleidescopic mixture of all three that relates to how these numbers connect to a picture of Nostradamus reaching out his hands to touch the sun. There are plenty of special effects thrills along the way including a plane crash and a train derailment that have to be seen to be believed. There are too many questions posed that remain unanswered. This in itself is not always a bad thing but I got the feeling that some--like the ubiquitous little black stones--were inserted merely to emphasize the weirdness of the entire plot mechanism. Then there is the acting of Nicholas Cage. This is the second consecutive film in which he can foretell the future. In both cases, he plays a character who seems overly stunned at his ability to do so and spends the bulk of both roles as one who has a monomaniacal mission to prove his thesis. The result is that we tend to see him as proving a point rather than entertaining an audience. Thus, KNOWING ends as a movie in which we are knowing the plot but not feeling it.

• A Film So Profound I Started Sobbing! posted on 31 Aug 2009

  What a deeply spiritual film about love and trust! Love between parents and children, and the mercy extraterrestrial aliens have for human beings. It's also about trust in a Supreme Being (God). My favorite line in the entire movie is: "This (Life) is not the end! and the reply,"I know!" It's also about the ultimately ridiculous dichotomy between spirituality and science! What a brilliant and cathartic story!
  
  One must be patient while watching Knowing. This is NOT a film for children, the faint of heart or someone looking for a good time! The story does not come together until the very end. There's also a lot of hysterics! How would any us react in such a desperate situation? Knowing, is about making personal sacrifices! It's not a story to make the viewer feel comfortable!
  
  
  I could have done without the graphic violence of one disaster after another! But Knowing makes a point of not taking this life for granted and that one should live in the present as much as possible! The other obvious message is that loving relationships between people is the most important part of being human!
  
  
  I was reminded while watching Knowing of my Astronomy professor, who said, "Human beings would be like ants to an advanced extraterrestrial civilization. Why would they care about us?" Maybe they would care about us! Knowing makes its case that it's certainly plausible!
  
  
  Thank you Hollywood for making a mature Science Fiction film for an adult audience! It took a lot of courage to make a movie so deep in a world so crass and shallow!
  
  SeeCreating Harmonious Relationships: A Practical Guide to the Power of True Empathy and The Empathy Gap: Building Bridges to the Good Life and the Good Society

• The kind of movie M. Night Shyamalan wishes he could still make... posted on 31 Aug 2009

  "Knowing" is in the same genre of "The Sixth Sense" and "Unbreakable" -- a solid, creepy, smart, and ultimately satisfying mix of the supernatural and the seemingly "everyday". Nicolas Cage is at his best, and the ending, while giving no spoilers, was (I believe) extremely satisfying, if a bit predictable. I could have done without the absolute last scene -- it would have been better implied than overt. But nonetheless, "Knowing" is a great moviegoing experience -- a smart, exciting mystery/syfy/thriller roller-coaster ride. Highly recommended viewing (especially for M. Night...).

• RC Tank posted on 31 Aug 2009

  Surprising!! The Graphics are startling and very realistic!The story line moves along smoothly with unanswered questions keeping you on the edge of your seat. The only disappointing thing is it has to end! Great job on Nicole Cage's part. I will buy the DVD when available. Thanks for the adventure. RC Tank

• "Knowing" is excellent! posted on 31 Aug 2009

  "Knowing" is excellent! This is how the story goes: In 1958, as part of the dedication ceremony for a new elementary school, a group of students is asked to draw pictures to be stored in a time capsule. But one mysterious girl fills her sheet of paper with rows of apparently random numbers instead. Fifty years later, a new generation of students examines the capsule's contents and the girl's cryptic message ends up in the hands of young Caleb Koestler. But it is Caleb's father, professor John Koestler, who makes the startling discovery that the encoded message predicts with pinpoint accuracy the dates, death tolls and coordinates of every major disaster of the past 50 years. As John further unravels the document's chilling secrets, he realizes the document foretells three additional events -- the last of which hints at destruction on a global scale and seems to somehow involve John and his son. When John's attempts to alert the authorities fall on deaf ears, he takes it upon himself to try to prevent more destruction from taking place. With the reluctant help of Diana Wayland and Abby Wayland, the daughter and granddaughter of the now-deceased author of the prophecies, John's increasingly desperate efforts take him on a heart-pounding race against time until he finds himself facing the ultimate disaster -- and the ultimate sacrifice.
  
  The cast led by Nicolas Cage (as John Koestler) is excellent! The directing by Alex Proyas (who did the adaptation to the story) (who also directed "The Crow" (1994), "Dark City" (1998, also story & screenplay) & "I, Robot" (2004) is excellent! The story by Ryne Douglas Pearson & the screenplay by Pearson, Juliet Snowden, Stiles White (both who also did the screenplay to "Boogeyman" (2005) & the upcoming "Poltergeist" (2011) & Stuart Hazeldine is excellent!
  
  The music by Marco Beltrami (who also did the music to Proyas' "I, Robot" & was nominated for an Oscar for his work on "3:10 To Yuma" (2007) & recently did the music to "Max Payne" (2008) & the upcoming "Repossession Mambo" (2009) is excellent! The cinematography by Simon Duggan (who also did the cinematography to Proyas' "I, Robot" & recently did the cinematography to "The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor" (2008) is excellent! The film editing by Richard Learoyd (who also did the film editing to Proyas' "I, Robot" & also did the cinematography to "Jet Li's Fearless" (2006) is excellent! The casting by Gregory Apps & Teresa Redlin is excellent! The production design by Steven Jones-Evans is excellent! The art direction by Sam Lennox is excellent! The costume design by Terry Ryan (who also did the costume design to "King Kong" (2005) is excellent!
  
  This is an excellent thriller that keeps your heart racing and your mind thinking. This is different and more original than one might think. This is one of Nicolas Cage's better movies.

• Strictly By the Numbers posted on 31 Aug 2009

  "Knowing" achieves a level of greatness so few science fiction films ever achieve. It's not merely an engaging mystery--it's a deeply thought-provoking fable that's just as frightening as it is intelligent, and it ultimately makes a statement so profound that I was left completely awestruck. I don't often have an experience like that at the movies, and for that, I'm indebted to director Alex Proyas and writers Ryne Douglas Pearson, Juliet Snowden, Stiles White, and Stewart Hazeldine. They've successfully crafted one of the year's most stimulating films, taking the audience on a suspenseful, emotional, and ultimately (albeit unconventionally) redemptive journey that poses interesting questions on the nature of things. A movie like this could have easily placed technical achievement over character development, and thankfully, that didn't happen; we care just as much about the people as we do about the spectacular special effects.
  
  The story begins in 1959, when an elementary school class is asked to draw pictures of what the world will look like fifty years later. What they draw will be put into a time capsule, which will be reopened in the year 2009. Rather than draw a picture, the quiet, disturbed Lucinda Embry (Lara Robinson) writes out a series of numbers on both the front and the back of a piece of paper.
  
  Flash forward to the present day. We meet an MIT astrophysics professor named John Koestler (Nicholas Cage), who teaches his students that two theories on the nature of the universe have been proposed. On the one side, we have the determinist view, which states that everything happens as the result of a predetermined--and more importantly, a predictable--sequence of events. How, for example, could the Earth be located at just the correct distance from the sun to sustain life? On the other side, we have the random view, which states that absolutely nothing can be predicted, that life, the universe, and everything happened as the result of cosmic coincidences. What exactly does Koestler believe? Here are some clues: His wife died some years earlier, and he's openly stated that the existence of Heaven can't be proven.
  
  As it so happens, John's young son, Caleb (Chandler Canterbury), goes to the same school that Lucinda Embry attended fifty years earlier. The day comes when the time capsule is unearthed and opened, and lo and behold, Caleb gets the envelope containing the numbers Lucinda wrote. He then takes it home, thinking the numbers might mean something. John initially thinks nothing of it ... until he places his wet glass of hard liquor on it and leaves a ring. Was it a predetermined act or a random act that led to a ring being formed around very specific numbers (the significance of which I won't reveal)? More important, was it a predetermined act or a random act that landed Caleb with the page of numbers in the first place? While I won't say what the numbers refer to (and this is in spite of the many ads that give plenty of hints), I will say that what John discovers changes him forever, forcing to consider ideas he never thought he would be able to consider.
  
  To describe more of the plot would do you and the film a great disservice. Much of the story thrives on an engrossing mystery that only gets more unsettling with every passing scene. Visual motifs, such as shiny black pebbles, burning landscapes, and silhouetted figures emerging from the forest add great psychological weight. The same can be said for a house so old and ramshackle that, under different circumstances, it would be mistaken as being haunted. It ties in wonderfully with the psychological states of the characters inhabiting it. John is a solemn, broken man, estranged from his father, often detached from his son, occasionally dependent on a bottle of alcohol to drown his sorrows. Caleb is expectedly precocious but surprisingly fragile, always yearning for that which has been lost somewhere along the way. For the first time in a great while, we have a story that can actually support such characters; were it not for the awesome nature of the final fifteen minutes, John and Caleb would be nothing more than melodramatic clichés.
  
  There are two more characters of great importance. One is Lucinda Embry's daughter, Diana Wayland (Rose Byrne), who enters John's life in a way that reaffirms the notion that nothing happens randomly. The other is Diana's daughter, Abby (also played by Lara Robinson), who, like Caleb, has been contacted by the creepy silhouetted figures, eventually called the Whispering People. Watch John and Diana as they search through Lucinda's abandoned home in the middle of the woods--the fear they express is disturbingly convincing.
  
  Like last summer's "The X-Files: I Want to Believe," "Knowing" is one of the best cinematic surprises of recent memory, a meaningful and absorbing allegory made with intention of challenging the audience in matters of spirituality. It's difficult to say whether or not this film takes a religious stance; that would depend on your own view of the nature of the universe. There are, however, a number of religious implications, the least subtle of which is revealed in the final shot. This might account for some early reviews, where words like "overwrought" and "preposterous" came up. From my perspective, those who feel that way have failed to look any deeper than what was presented in the ads, which only scratched the surface. Contrary to what trailers and TV spots have been promising, this is not your average science fiction thriller. Serious time, effort, and thought went into "Knowing," one of the best films I've seen so far this year.

• Unique movie with an entertaining plot posted on 31 Aug 2009

  Initially I figured that the TV previews for Knowing had pretty much given away the majority of the plot; to summarize briefly what the trailers described, Nicolas Cage comes into possession of a list of numbers which predict the dates and death tolls of worldwide tragedies. I found the movie itself, however, to be surprisingly unpredictable from start to finish aside from already knowing the basic plot. There were very few times where I was able to guess what would happen next, keeping me in suspense and very much entertained by the dramatic and oftentimes quite intense scenes throughout the film. The special effects are stellar, and the storyline was great as well. As far as the acting, it wasn't particularly outstanding but for the most part Knowing had a well-selected cast. I'd give this film four, perhaps four and a half stars... definitely recommended.

• Not As Good As I Thought It Would Be!!! posted on 31 Aug 2009

  It started off pretty good. I liked the beginning when it showed the classic 1950's. It was kinda scary a few times with those 'Whisperers' The things that got to me were seeing the people burn after the plane crash, dying in the subway, and the depressing ending. Nicolas Cage did a really good job, as did everybody else, and thought the special effects were pretty cool, but toward the end seemed silly, involving some kind of alien/angel/demon thing. It was confusing toward the end. I probably wouldn't recommend KNOWING!!!

• Breakneck Tension, Out-a-site Effects, Bummer Ending posted on 31 Aug 2009

  It's 1959 and to celebrate the first year of a Lexington, Mass elementary school the students are asked to draw a picture of what they think the future will look like in fifty years. Most of the kids draw rockets, but not Lucinda Embry. She starts writing down numbers at an alarming rate, but when the teachers tells them times up, she keeps going, trying to get that last number out, but teach takes the paper before she can finish. Lucinda disappears and is found later, fingers bloody scratching on the inside of a closet door.
  
  Flash forward to the present day and we see John Koestler (Nicholas Cage) teaching a class in astrophysics at MIT. During this lesson we learn he believes there is no divine order, everything is random. We later learn his father's a minister, who obviously has different beliefs. They have not spoken in years. Koestler's son Calib hears voices, whispers and guess what elementary school he goes to. Yep, you guessed it.
  
  Now it's time to open that time capsule and each of the kids gets one envelope with a drawing from half a decade ago. Guess what envelope Calib gets. Yep, no drawing for Caleb. He gets those numbers and that night dad figures them out. They've predicted every major disaster over the last fifty years. There are three left. Can John change what Lucinda has predicted.
  
  He's going to try.
  
  Okay, that's a pretty good set up for a story. Had me and Vesta glued to our seats. We were sitting up close and let me tell you the special effects were so doggone good they were scary, but could you expect anything less from the man who directed I Robot. Alex Proyas seems to have been born to direct this kind of movie. Cage was born to play in it. The horror on his face as the plane crashes in front of him is real. He's nailed this roll. But unfortunately he shouldn't have been in it and Alex Proyas shouldn't have directed it. Don't get me wrong, they've done great work, but in my opinion nobody could have saved this movie from the bummer ending.
  
  The first two thirds of this move are simply outstanding. Tension, tension and more tension. And when that plane falls from the sky, you are there like you've never been in any movie plane crash before. And the subway disaster, jeez Marie that was scary stuff. Even the boy meets girl stuff doesn't detract from the excitement, then it all goes away with that bummer ending.

• Numeric nightmares posted on 31 Aug 2009

  Are events random or pre-ordained?
  
  50 years ago, the students of Dawes Elementary created a time capsule for the school's 50th anniversary. The children created drawings depicting what they believed the future to hold.
  
  
  Only one student, Lucinda, seemed almost possessed in her writing of a series of numbers instead.
  
  
  Young Caleb (Chandler Canterbury) is a present day Dawes student who is handed the page with the numbers on it. Thinking it's important, he takes it home. His physicist Dad (Nick Cage) tells him it's just random numbers until he sets his cup down and realizes the date for 9/11 and number of fatalities are listed there. From that one bit of information, he extrapolates all the world's catastrophes, including a few that are yet to come.
  
  
  "Knowing" answers the question I asked above, yet manages to pose more than that. The screenplay, written by Ryne Pearson and Julie Snowden, is a tightly paced science fiction thriller that barely leaves a breath in between action sequences. Effects are reasonably well done.
  
  
  Whether you like or hate this story will well depend on your take of the above question and your personal theology. The film is well worth watching if you are a staunch Nick Cage fan; however, some of the scenes may be too intense for 'young 13's.'
  
  
  Rebecca Kyle, March 2009

• Knowing Movie Review from The Massie Twins posted on 31 Aug 2009

  Even if Knowing didn't divide itself between supernatural thriller and mind-bending sci-fi, there's still the simple fact that the plot is hinged around a predicament so overwhelming that its conclusion can't possibly resolve itself satisfactorily - at least not to those unwilling to accept possibilities far outside the reality presented. The amount of contentment derived by the finale is subjective of course, but the majority of the film feels focused on setting the groundwork for a more linear mystery. At least director Alex Proyas' expert grasp on building suspense and crafting creative tension-filled catastrophes helps to ease the more psychologically jarring bits.
  
  
  During an elementary school "time capsule" project, troubled young girl Lucinda opts to write down a string of seemingly random numbers instead of the expected crayon drawings of flying cars and spaceships. Fifty years later, the capsule is unearthed and Lucinda's cryptic scribbles are given to Caleb (Chandler Canterbury), the son of science professor John Koestler (Nicolas Cage). When Koestler discovers that the numbers are actually a code that pinpoints the exact day, coordinates, and death toll of every major disaster for the last five decades, he begins a desperate hunt for clues to help aid him in his quest to stop the final few numbers' ominous predictions of tragedy from coming true.
  
  Director Alex Proyas certainly has a taste for science-fiction and nightmarish fantasy. Knowing presents itself as a psychological thriller, but early on delves into supernatural terror. If that isn't enough to rattle audiences, the leap to extreme science fiction concepts later on might be too much to handle. Although the ideas are outlandish, it's the mix of genres that is likely to disappoint viewers getting wrapped up in the nail-biting suspense.
  
  
  And suspense is the most plentiful aspect in Knowing - a shocking plane crash, a devastating subway derailment and much more are done with such attention to horrifying detail, fierce white-knuckle thrills, and ear-piercing boisterousness (or the tried-and-true fear of loud noises) that admiring the film for its intensity isn't the least bit difficult. Whether or not the pondering of determinism versus randomness, the creepy occult apparitions, or the religious implications are enough to outweigh the curious path of resolution, the pacing is exceptional and the use of Beethoven's 7th symphony (2nd movement, Allegretto) really hits the spot.
  
  
  - The Massie Twins
  
  
  
  
  

• I knew it would be bad... the aliens telepathically told me! posted on 31 Aug 2009

  Have to agree with Tom Keogh's review of the movie. Very accurate description of the movie. Nothing profound or emotionally charged at all, I think those reviewers should start taking their prozac again. Nicolas Cage presents us with his usual bad acting, not sure how he keeps finding work in big films. The script wasn't all that great either, and was very predictable and full of cliche. Been there, seen that. Maybe think of this as a montage or homage to sci-fi past, a little of everything thrown into the mix. The first time the pale mutes appeared, I knew the ending of the movie, and they appeared very early in the movie. Nicolas Cage's character became very melodramatically obsessed way too early and made the entire leap from suspicion to "knowing" way too quickly, it was very unnatural. For die-hard sci-fi fans, this is about as good as "Next", another Cage psychic phenomenon that also fails to deliver anything new, believable, or worth spending money on. Watch it if you can see it for free and have nothing better to do, otherwise pass on this for something truly original that actually has a creative edge and mysterious unpredictability like "Stay." Maybe this movie will work well for a 14 year old amish boy who has never seen any television or even a movie of any kind before, but anyone who has seen any science fiction will find this trite and contrived, and anyone with a brain will also find it predictable and cliche.

• DETERMINISM VS FREE WILL -- BIG IDEAS AT PLAY HERE posted on 31 Aug 2009

  I loved this movie because it actually dared to toy with some profound ideas -- especially the apparent conflict between Free Will and Determinism. It's amazing how many evangelicals insist on their carved-in-stone conclusions about ancient Biblical prophecy and at the same time hold that God endowed his human creatures with Free Will. Can you have both? Not in my universe.
  
  Maybe life and reality as we perceive it is open-ended. We make it up as we live out our lives. And along the way the Creator explores His own nature in and through us?
  
  This film is sly and brilliant and actually about something. I am amazed at the posted reviews that just don't get it.
  
  SPOILER ALERT:
  
  The other thing that's cool is the visual reference at the climax to the so-called "spaceships of Ezekiel." The 6th Century BC Hebrew prophet who saw descending crafts that looked like rotating "wheels within wheels."
  
  Humanity is rescued for a new beginning. Is the title a clue to the idea that finally, we have hope and that life is not a meaningless existence in a cold, uncaring universe? Is that the other meaning of Knowing that we can safely embrace? what we can safely Know? Is there anything we can actually know besides that we exist? perhaps there is. As someone once said, "Finally, one is left with the notion that the universe is a love story."
  
  Recommended. Unexpected ideas embedded in a popcorn movie. A rare treat.

• Slow but hurried simultaneously posted on 31 Aug 2009

  With a Nicholas Cage film there's supposed to be thrill and suspense. And yes, the film starts that way. There's this building wonder about what the #s ultimately mean, and where the movie--and the world--are heading. The settings are mostly dark, the music ominous. However, over time another sense begins to build--that perhaps the grand meaning will prove disapointing. A little over an hour into the movie that 2nd intuition overtakes the thrill of suspense, and by the end, there is dispair. A movie that a few may find profound (mostly those that believe in childhood innocence and perception vs. the decayed and corrupt worthlessness of the adult world), but many will find disheartening and hopeless.
  
  The acting was fine, and the technical work quite good. It's the plot, the story itself that killed it for me. Perhaps it's the optimist in me, but I left the theater feeling spiritually sullied, and psychologically saddened.
  
  [MINOR SUBPLOT SPOILER ALERT]: Funny afterthought for those that watched: I'm glad the preacher's kid reconciled with his dad, even if it did take a worldchanging event to bring it about. :-)