The Final Cut

November 11, 2004 0 By Fans
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...

Still of Jim Caviezel in The Final CutStill of Mira Sorvino and Robin Williams in The Final CutStill of Robin Williams in The Final CutStill of Thom Bishops in The Final CutStill of Mira Sorvino and Robin Williams in The Final CutStill of Jim Caviezel in The Final Cut

Plot

Set in a world with memory implants, Robin Williams plays a cutter, someone with the power of final edit over people's recorded histories. His latest assignment is one that puts him in danger.

Release Year: 2004

Rating: 6.1/10 (15,047 voted)

Critic's Score: 43/100

Director:
Omar Naim

Stars: Robin Williams, Jim Caviezel, Mira Sorvino

Storyline
The story is set in a world where implanted microchips can record all moments of an individual's life. The chips are removed upon death so the images can be edited into something of a highlight reel for loved ones who want to remember the deceased. Caviezel portrays the leader of the organization that opposes this technology's development.

Cast:

Robin Williams

Alan Hakman


Mira Sorvino

Delila


Jim Caviezel

Fletcher


Mimi Kuzyk

Thelma


Stephanie Romanov

Jennifer Bannister


Thom Bishops

Hasan


Genevieve Buechner

Isabel Bannister


Brendan Fletcher

Michael


Vincent Gale

Simon


Casey Dubois

Young Alan – 9


Liam Ranger

Young Louis – 9


Joely Collins

Legz the Tattoo Artist


Michael St. John Smith

Charles Bannister


Chris Britton

Jason Monroe


Wanda Cannon

Caroline Monroe

Taglines:
Every moment of your life recorded. Would you live it differently?



Details

Official Website:
Metropolitan Filmexport [France] |

Release Date: 11 November 2004

Filming Locations: Berlin, Germany

Opening Weekend: $226,296
(USA)
(17 October 2004)
(117 Screens)

Gross: $548,039
(USA)
(7 November 2004)



Technical Specs

Runtime:

Goofs:

Audio/visual unsynchronized:
When Fletcher is threatening Alan, as we cut to a wide shot, his mouth stops moving but the audio continues.

Quotes:

Delila:
These moments… they belong to me, Alan. The good and the bad. They're mine and his! Who are you to take them away from me?



User Review

A lot of unfulfilled promise, but still worth watching

Rating: 7/10


Set during an unspecified future era, or perhaps an "alternate
universe" present era, The Final Cut posits a world in which "first
person viewpoint" computer chip implants are possible for those who can
afford it. These record a person's entire life from a first person
viewpoint–the "camera" sees what the person sees, hears what they
hear. The intention is to have an accurate, documentary-like record
after the person dies. These are presented as films at their funerals.
Citizens known as "cutters" (just a slang for a film editor) pare down
one's life to a feature length presentation. There are also those who
protest the implants. The Final Cut is the story of the latter days of
a cutter, Alan W. Hakman (Robin Williams).

While The Final Cut is enjoyable enough, it has tremendous squandered
potential. As one would expect, Williams turns in an incredible
performance, but the script, by writer/director Omar Naim, could have
used a lot of work.

The premise is fabulous. It opens many philosophical and psychological
cans of worms. Some are dealt with, but only cursorily. Surely cutters
go through a lot of emotional trauma as they vicariously experience the
lows and the mundanities of other person's lives. Naim shows us this
briefly with a recording of someone who was an abuser. But as soon as
he shows us this material, he drops it. The film is advertised as a
thriller. How much more exciting would it have been to embed Hakman in
the middle of some grand, suspenseful plot, the details of which became
known to him through data from an implant? As one of the opponents of
the implant technology remarks, the implants have changed the way
people relate to each other. That is a good point–it would have a
profound impact on that. So why aren't we shown instances of this in
the film? This could have been another hinge for a very intriguing,
tense plot.

There are also issues of invasion of privacy, surveillance paranoia,
consent (the implants are shown being put into infants and being
permanent), and "misuse" of the data. Most of these are barely touched.
Often they're only broached with a single comment, or a protester's
sign.

Other fascinating issues brought up by the idea of the technology are
not even mentioned. Surely, such technology would prove to be
invaluable as evidence in crimes. And surely many people, especially
victims, would voluntarily offer a "tap" into their implants so they
can be witnesses. Why not comment on these kinds of possibilities? The
Final Cut is also oddly understated with such a far-reaching sci-fi
premise in this era of rubber reality films. A number of plot points,
such as the one involving Louis Hunt, have almost disappointingly
mundane resolutions. For that matter, for a sci-fi film set in the
future or an alternate reality, there isn't much that is different
about the world except for the implants. Probably the lack of
differences was due to budget. It costs a lot of money to build
alternate realities.

This might sound far too negative for the film to warrant a 7 out of 10
from me, which is equivalent to a "C" letter grade. Much of the film is
saved by the performances. In combination with direction that is more
often than not interesting and unusual, it's easy to focus on the
promise of the premise rather than the unfulfilled extensions of the
same.

Hakman, and presumably the other cutters, have odd dispositions. Their
task is to make everyone look good–like a mortician making up a
mangled body so it's "presentable" at a funeral. They spend hour upon
hour as voyeurs. They are something like archivists, but also have to
play detective. It makes them strangely aloof and dour. It's difficult
for them to have relationships. Naim gets in a couple cracks that
portray the cutters and their social relationships as similar to geeky
"Internet addicts". This is all good stuff, and it's excellently played
by Williams.

The flow of the film is a bit odd, and especially the ending (which I
praised for its relative nihilism) is eventually abrupt in a way that
doesn't exactly work (and I usually love abrupt endings). Being
generous, we could take the wonky flow as a "level-removed" kind of
self-reference. Of course Naim was faced with cutting the film to make
it look good, but it's a bit awkward and arbitrary-feeling, just as a
cutter's work would likely be when faced with having to produce a
coherent 90-minute film out of 80 years' worth of material. Being less
generous, Naim simply needs to learn how to better tell a story, and
there was no intention of real-world reflexivity with his fictional
material.

The Final Cut is worth seeing, especially if you're a Robin Williams
fan as I am, but it's a disappointment considering what it could have
been.