One Point O

Ms. Unger told us that she was drawn to the script, which reminded her of freaky directors she's worked with before.

in an nutshell, this movie is a freaky tale.

on one hand it's computer programer meets the neighbors on another hand it's a virtual sex machine on another hand it's about corporations, product placement, the dangers of commercialism.

the acting is incredible, the story will keep you glued, the cinematography is full of colors, moods, atmospheres, emotions.

this was my #2 pick for a flick at sundance this year behind the woodsman. go see it when it comes out near you.

"Paranoia will destroy ya…" wrote the Kinks many years ago. The paranoia in this film…well, you'll have to watch the film yourself to see what happens. Step into a grim, surrealistic world (think Dada does Kafka) where strange, unexplained things are going on. A mysteriously empty box that keeps appearing on the doorstep of Simon (played by Jeremy Sisto, people dying under odd circumstances. Simon's world is dreary, dark, depressing and confusing. It is peopled by others who are as confused and zombie-like as he has become—Trish, the cancer ward nurse (played by Deborah Unger), who uses kinky sex to make herself feel alive after being around so much death, the inventor (played by Udo Keir) of a weird robot head, the peculiar custodian played by Lance Hendricksen. Their souls are being sucked dry by a culture that demands that they perform, conform, consume. The only character with energy in this soulless atmosphere is the Neighbor, a sleazy director of S&M porn games, played by Bruce Payne with his customary intensity and nuance.( Why is he left out of the DVD credits?! His is the most memorable character. I second Brittmatt2005's excellent comments on the message board.).

Though unrelentingly grim, it is worth seeing more than once. This Kafkaesque film is textured, with many levels of meaning woven into the surrealistic package. There are many messages to be extracted---the dangers of amoral corporations out to control and out of control, the deadening effects of a conformist society, questioning of the extreme measures people will go to to feel alive in a dreary world (TV "Reality" shows, anyone?). By the end of the film, the mystery of the box is revealed. It is a trick that is, as Max Headroom once said, only "20 minutes into the future," a science fiction about to turn into science fact. Is this all a metaphor for what is going on now in our culture? See for yourself. This film, unlike the majority of sorry excuses for entertainment out there, will make you think.

The film is often compared to Darren Aronofsky's "Pi" and it's actually similarly intelligent and visually creative, yet "Pi" is more consistent and logical. So what we have great about "1.0"? First and foremost is its message, which is very relevant for the consumer society of today; the very discovery of that message while watching the movie is a rather exciting thing, yet it's a common thing for intelligent movies; but that's not the point, the point is that "1.0" warns you about living to consume products, the corporations will never care much about you, they only want money, more and sooner. That's why they would never care much even about debugging the programs they put into their consumers. Of course, this movie is a sci-fi because I think it's virtually impossible to create a virus for the human brain, even with some kind of microscopic electronic "mites". But doesn't, say, propaganda sounds like someone's trying to put a mind virus into your brain, to make it possess your will and so to control it? Or weren't communism and fascism a real kind of mind plague striking billions of people? May be then even there are demons who possess people and make them do things they wouldn't like to, and they are actually mind viruses, thoughts that have an ability to transmit themselves using verbal channels? We should learn to watch attempts to control our will and to resist them, or we won't be human anymore just like those poor people in this amazing movie. 7 out of 10, because the pace of the story is yet too sluggish and the visuals are overly grotesque which I don't really like, here "Pi" did better.

It is easy to draw parallels between this movie and contemporary science fiction like The Matrix or less astute films like the Thirteenth Floor.

However, there is another level of storytelling in this film, something very akin to the way science fiction was told in the late 50's. Reminiscent of classical Twilight Zone or the more modern Cronenberg tradition of weird but very compelling scifi, One Point O makes a point that very few contemporary science fiction films does: it's not about effects or flashy stunts, convoluted terms or flashy names for characters. It's about the actor, director and the film crew telling a story.

The film is strange, no doubt, and maybe somewhat inaccessible to many viewers. But it delivers everything it promises in the outset, and in my opinion succeeds where so many others fail; Minority Report to name but one.

On the contrary to what many seem to think, I found the film quite clear. I had no trouble following the story and wasn't surprised at the end - but in my opinion there is no attempt made to surprise you.

One Point O is a film I will see many times again, as there are so many little details to be found - in the sets, the dialog and the characters.

Certainly it is NOT a film for the impatient.

Well it's finally been seen in the UK! Others reviewers have gone into vast detail so I'll leave that but stay away from matrix comparisons in terms of overall movie feel. Yes there's a computer programme affecting the lives of human inhabitants or at least so the main character believes but it's gritty and more cerebral. Think 1984 meets dark city on the budget of Pi! (Well OK a bit more cash than that, but not much!) I loved Lance Henrikson and Udo Kier in cameo roles, they introduce some lighter moments in the film and do so to good effect. Overall its not one for the masses but sci-fi and genre fans will appreciate it. Overall I enjoyed it and it was worth braving bank holiday crowds in central London. Finally the comments in regard to frederik Pohl mentioned in another's review are right on the money