Knowing (2009) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
492 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Ok, so Nic Cage may not be the actor of the century but he does do poe faced well, lol. However this movie is highly under-rated. Chandler Canterbury is fantastic and the special Fx are some of the best ive ever seen. The storyline is also thought provoking and new. My only gripe is the ending, which wouldnt have been my choice.
75 out of 84 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Why all the hate?
vserrol29 November 2018
I know it's a bit late for a review but I feel compelled to reply to some of the criticism leveled at this movie. The reviews tend to be based on a few mistaken assumptions.

1) The movie is pro scientology propaganda

If there is any truth to this then the propaganda is very obscure, as a quick reference to scientology symbols does not include the 7 pointed star as per one detractor. To state that the movie uses a numerical based prophesy and that this is indicative of scientology is conspiratorial and nonsensical. Both the bible and koran are full of them. Maybe I am too ingenuous but at no time did I feel I was being led along a path of conscription to scientology.

2) plot holes due to slim chances of a text fortuitously falling into the hands of a person intelligent enough to decipher the meaning and be the father of one of the chosen survivors and have the descendants of the original prophecy play a part in the fruition of the plan.

fair enough, but nobody seems to question as to why the prophesy itself is possible. Surely if the universe was deterministic, as suggested by the very presence of a prophecy, then a sufficiently advanced civilization able to foresee the prophecy would also be able to foresee the path they have subscribed to the resolution they have decided on.

3) The movie doesn't make sense or jumps around too much.

Fortunately there are many straight forward shows and cartoons to watch instead .
80 out of 96 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I really don't get why it's only got 6/10
maayandanino16 September 2020
I just watched it and it leaves you think after the movie, I really recommend this
37 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Sc-fi Classic: A blockbuster for thinking people
roscoe66619 November 2018
Nicholas Cage's son receives a series of numbers from a 1950s time capsule that a psychic girl wrote 50 years earlier, which predict major disasters in the future.

Big budget sci-fi, which must be commended for its consistent downbeat tone and lack of histrionics. Normally, a Hollywood blockbuster would have the hero knowing all the answers and riding in to save the day. Can Nic Cage do it, and how? The lack of predictability is its major strength. His understated performances were made for this film.

If you're in the right mood, you must see this. I've seen this film 8 or 9 times, and it's only been out 9 years, so it must be doing something right. Even when I know every line of the film it still drags you in each time it pops up on tv.

Yes, there are some cheesy moments, with some obvious CGI, and the middle third loses track somewhat, but the relentlessly downbeat tone shows what can be done with the right budget. In earlier viewings I thought it was a bit of a mish mash of genres, although still great, but subsequent viewings reveal the relevance of each plot development.

Overall, highly recommended. What's not to like about a film that is a cross between Final Destination, The Medusa Touch and Arrival?
24 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Anti-Armageddon, as far as Michael Bay goes
revival0516 October 2009
I feel a strange shift of priorities within moviegoers today, when a movie like District 9 can use very familiar content and simply shake it around a little, and then be hailed as a masterwork of originality and become immensely popular - while a movie like Knowing will be heavily questioned and criticized beyond it's proportions despite, or perhaps due to, the fact that it actually takes an actual leap of originality. I wonder when the latest time it was I saw a Hollywood-movie end up where this one ends up. While not being perfect, Knowing still is a proper science-fiction film in the vein of 2001 - A Space Odyssey and Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Certainly not as good, for various reasons, but at least clearly part of the genre.

The storyline of Knowing is kind of a reversed bottle neck, by the end the multitude of the story is as big as it gets but to begin with, we are in a kind of X Files territory where we get a spooky prologue with a mystery note being dug under the ground (I won't go into the details, because it's really not important for me to go over them) and post credits we pick it up 50 years later when the note ends up in the hands of MIT professor John Koestler (Nicholas Cage) who is one of those I-lost-my-wife-so-I-lost-my-faith kind of guys, believing that the universe as we know it is all random and coincidental. Easily cracked, the numbers on the note, written by a little girl and buried for five decades, declare the dates and places of all future disasters to come, including death tolls. Cage sees 9/11 predicted from this little girls hands in 1959, as well as the Katrina and several disasters that haven't taken place yet. Without saying too much, he doesn't like what he sees at the end of the list of numbers.

I have heard the movie be called predictable. Looking back, I must admit there's a lot of places where I could have seen a lot of things coming. Many quite blatant clues are placed right in the very first couple of scenes and if you know your plot and character mechanics, you would spot some obligatory scenes to come. However, I didn't. It seems I was in on the ride. The plot of the movie, I think, expands in such a methodical way that as long as you get sucked in to begin with, you don't ask any more questions. The mystery is intriguing enough to have you focus on the next shot, not the overall story. I was fairly annoyed by the story device that was seemingly on the side of the plot, dealing with Cage's kid being stalked by a couple of evil, albino trench-coat-guys looking like a bunch German electro-goths. I found that they distracted the viewer from the more interesting, down-to-earth kind of story going on with Cage. But come the ending of the movie, nothing is really earthbound and they seem kind of forgivable in retrospect. Just like in Close Encounters, Knowing is a movie that starts out cryptic but ends out in big scale cathartic satisfaction and harmony, as if it all (*all*) makes sense in the end.

As for the flaws, I didn't mind the story or any of the plot holes (which mostly are arguable anyway). What did bother me probably more than anything else about the movie, though, was it's unfortunate big-time flirt with the melodrama. Take the score for instance, by Marco Beltrami, not really king of the subtle, and it's unfortunate for a movie which deals with this unusual hypothesis to have such operatic and stereotypical acting. And why, WHY, do Hollywood-movies nowadays feel the need to use those HORRIBLE matte paintings? They look like a 50's parody! As for plot, Knowing certainly bites off a lot more than it can chew. I quickly noted in the credits, with fear, that while the story credit went to one person there were like three or four guys behind the actual script. That usually means what we also get in Knowing. Messy conflicts within the narrative and sudden "moronic behavior as plot device" from characters. Also, not every mystery thread thrown up on the floor ends up with a sensible conclusion. But despite a lot ends up as fairly arbitrary anyway, I think a lot of the questions are meant to be left unanswered. Knowing picks up a lot of ancient SF-ideas, that probably would seem tired if this genre had been over-represented in any way, and at the end of the day, you didn't ask the monkey in 2001 how he figured out how to use that piece of bone, right? In all fairness, the movie is partly a thriller so it needs certain plot devices in order for the it to have a good spook value which, I might add, it surely delivers. This is the kind of movie that creeps you out just by having a character flip a bed on to it's side. I'm not sure if these abandoned mysteries is a giant flaw or just one of those things you can roll with, but I know that it makes sure it doesn't reach the top. Knowing is a movie made I'd say for 80% entertainment, and I could say I was 80% entertained. The remaining 20% is sci-fi fodder and that made me happy too. No masterpiece then, but a good ride that I certainly will recommend.

Also. I get the feeling that a lot of people who dismissed Knowing this summer were the same guys who were angry at the Bay bashers of Transformers 2. I wonder, why on Earth are the flaws of Transformers 2 forgivable, whereas the strengths of Knowing dismissible?
101 out of 140 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The Good, The Bad and the Ugly
pugmahorn26 March 2009
The good: Strong start to the movie, the plot hooks you in, excellent sound, confronting disaster scenes, haunting images, Rose Byrne, at times quite freaky, The Bad: Special effects looked like they were from a video game, ripped off basically every science fiction movie ever made, poor acting from Nic Cage, very predictable.

The Ugly: Last third of movie was shamefully ridiculous.

Summary: If you are a science fiction fan, you will probably not be able to resist seeing this movie. Be warned, you will think you are seeing the sci-fi great that you have been waiting for but mid way the film gets lost. You may very well groan out loud at the ending. This had the makings of a great movie but unfortunately it couldn't come up with the goods.
474 out of 717 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
This is one excellent. Imaginative movie. Which could happen
michaelthompsonmcgill27 November 2011
I have read a lot of totally negative views about this film, and so I can only say that some people simply have no imagination.

"Knowing" works at every level. It is a brilliantly executed film. And the final is breathtaking.

I watched this film with my wife and we are not easily pleased movie watchers.

I find myself being critical of the negative reviews, because I am astounded at their lack of imagination.

Without imagination, we would never have had The Time Machine thanks to Herbert George Wells. This is just one example.

Another is Steven Spielberg's "Close Encounters". Imagination is the key word here, and so many reviewers did not have any whatsoever.

Knowing kept my wife and I on the edge of our seats, it was clever, it was imaginative, it was first class.
117 out of 169 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I don't understand the negativity behind this movie
AngieeeBabayy11 February 2010
I thought this was arguably one of the best movies of our time. With that said, I've gotta admit I'm a scifi movie lover and these movies are my kinda thing.

This movie literally had everything I typically LOVE in a movie, a great beginning, a thriller climax, and a killer ending. There were no plot holes to this film, which initially made me love this movie in the first place. One thing I love about this movie has to be after I watch it a couple of times- I actually notice little hidden things in the climax that ultimately lead up to the ending, things you don't typically notice when you first watch this movie.

Those who love the indie film-type endings, or those who love horror or slasher films, or actually anyone who likes cliff-hanger endings- this might not be for you. But if you love apocalypse type movies, or are a thriller fanatic then you'll hopefully like this movie. This movie also supports the Christian/Catholic faith- so if you are against it in any way- this movie may not suit you. With that said, it's NOT a Jesus loving movie. The ending has a lot to do with the Christian faith and if that's not for you- don't watch it.

All in all, this is a pretty spectacular movie. The music was on cue with everything in the movie and the scenes were incredible. Each scene had you gripping onto your seat in anticipation. Although this is very under-appreciated, I hope you will give this movie a try.
166 out of 246 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Worth Seeing – Before the End!
treadwaywrites19 March 2009
From the trailers of Knowing you'd be convinced that you're going to watch a cheesy, try to save the world picture with a wound tight Nicolas Cage at the center gritting his teeth and ducking his way to the perfect ending. Well, you'd be partially correct. Cage is definitely giving his wound tight hero routine that he's worked so hard to develop over the last half dozen films. As for the cheese factor, that's where you'll be surprised. Director Alex Proyas manages to deliver a rather decent sci-fi flick that has plenty of suspense and intelligence.

The plot turns around John Koestler (Nicolas Cage), an MIT astrophysics nerd turned Indiana Jones when a time capsule is discovered at his young son Caleb's (Chandler Canterbury) school. Inside are drawings from students in 1959 predicting what things would be like in 2009 some 50 years later. The drawing that Caleb comes home with isn't a drawing at all but a series of seemingly random numbers. Koestler becomes obsessed with the numbers and their meaning or what they seem to mean. The whole thing shakes him to his scientific core and a quest has begun.

The film is very lucky to have director Alex Proyas from films such as Dark City which is his true geek film and critical acclaim as well as I, Robot and Garage Days. The visual and special effects are outstanding. It was surprising how much suspense was in the script (Ryan Douglas Pearson and Juliet Snowden) which gave the film a real thriller atmosphere which continues to build in tone as the mystery is unraveled.

I admit I went into this film expecting a rehash of National Treasure on a more global scale. The sci-fi aspect of the premise is very well thought out and told. The acting by co-stars (Chandler Canterbury, Rose Byrne and Lara Robinson) are solid performances and stand in complementary contrast to that of the tightly wound Nicolas Cage. The geek factor of Knowing is rather high with lots of number configurations and what-if scenarios which is great for the sci-fi fans. At times your brain may have to turn on in order to follow the film, but that is what made Knowing such a pleasant surprise to me.*
299 out of 496 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Kudos To Proyas For This Surprisingly Good Flick!
RosenKratz6 March 2009
It may seem improbable, but Knowing actually adds something fresh and inspiring to the disaster genre.

Certainly the action scenes are well staged – they are as grand and tense as the previews would have you expect. But Knowing really stands out from the likes of Next and various Roland Emmerich movies because of its heart (there is a profoundly human element amongst the chaos and destruction), and because of the surprising, riveting turns the story takes. In no way was it a generic "save the world" flick, like I feared going in. It is an original with a memorable ending that should not be spoiled, but it will almost definitely have people talking.

In my mind, director Alex Proyas deserves a lot of the credit for the fact that the film is brave, and does not try to replicate a typical Hollywood blueprint. In fact, he even has Nic Cage back on solid footing, an actor I used to love but have been quite weary of lately. But I think Proyas deserves the main kudos for turning this into something creative and special, and I'd go as far as to say this it is his best movie since Dark City.

There really isn't much to complain about regarding the film, but the one exception might be the middle, where the action sags a bit. Still, I think the captivating final third more than makes up for it.

I definitely recommend the film - you will be pleasantly surprised!
515 out of 890 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Better, and different than expected
Zulu4225 April 2009
First off, Nicolas Cage was pretty good as a science teacher who's initial skepticism over a batch of numbers (scribbled on a piece of paper found in a school's time capsule from the 1950s) is tested and eventually worn away by a quest to find out what they mean. Cage runs hot and cold when it comes to the characters he plays; he's awesome in films like "Raising Arizona", "Con Air", or "National Treasure", while not so believable in stuff like "The Family Man". He's maturing as an actor and getting better, it seems, with every role. Another standout is Rose Byrne, as the daughter of the odd little girl who wrote out the bizarre number sequences that Cage's character is analyzing. Byrne's always good at playing pensive women with something mysterious in their back stories. Yet as good as the actors were, the special effects and the twists in the storyline are what make this movie really entertaining. The writers didn't take the easy, obvious route with the story which was refreshing. The plot continues to surprise throughout taking some very different turns with the outcome of the story which made it even more unpredictable and better for it. I like movies that keep me guessing and this is one of those. See it if you like the unexpected.
137 out of 228 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Simply wonderful... a great surprise.
dhalterm12 September 2020
When I started watching this movie, I had no idea what it was about. I've always liked Nick Cage, although I didn't like some of his later choices to act in, but he was doing just fine here, right from the start. Soon, I realized this was some sort of science fiction tale, and I was very glad, as it's been my favorite type of movie since the 1950s. My favorite movie is still Close Encounters, so you can imagine my delight near the end when we learn who the dark strangers are. I was watching this movie all alone, but I couldn't help clapping when I saw their vehicle. I'm trying hard here, to avoid dropping any spoilers, but this just might be my second favorite movie of all time. I'll have to sit and think about that before I decide, but it's up there close to the top, so I rate it a ten!
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
There's nothing like Knowing!
chodebalm-115 March 2009
First of all, yes I did see this movie, and no I'm not much of a talker when it comes to discussing and reviewing movies. Therefore, I will keep it short and simple.

Nicholas Cage's movies have lately been a lot of action flicks that may or may not seem like movies we've all seen before. This one, however, brings a new fresh feeling to this genre.

I think we've all seen the whole "I see it coming" type of movie where the main character has to prevent something from happening. This is one of those, and yet it isn't. It doesn't bore you, it doesn't make you feel like you've seen it before, and yet you have a comfortability with it that intrigues you throughout.

I found myself quite entertained and the movie didn't lose my attention or have me checking my watch. Good direction and acting. Nicholas Cage does a good job.

I believe anyone who sees this movie will enjoy it for what it is. Go see it, it's a fun flick!
427 out of 765 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Clever and well done.
dskauai_bunch3 January 2012
This movie was a nice surprise. I usually don't like Nicholas Cage movies. Any of them. But he was perfectly cast for this science fiction piece and delivered a solid, believable performance.

The story itself was brand new, not a rehash of any tale that I can recall.

The directing allowed you to see the film without knowing until the very end what was happening - which was great. I usually enjoy figuring out the end before it gets there, because it usually seems that if I CAN'T figure it out... the movie is poor. That has been my experience. But Knowing delivered a solid mystery up to the end, with the type of finale where one thinks, "Oh, I should have seen it coming, those 100 things that happened all make sense!" Really, all the little details came together in a flash of a solid closing.

I also appreciated that there were no loose ends. Everything was tied together in a neat bow with nothing hanging out.

The only negative that I have will sound humorous to you if you don't see the movie, but I won't spoil it for you except to say that the metaphor of a pair of bunnies wasn't necessary.

Catch this movie when you can, it's definitely worth it.
17 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Wow! Outstanding in every way.
williamzim200020 March 2009
I went to see this because Roger Ebert gave this a 4/4 stars. I completely agree. This is an amazing science fiction movie, with some fresh twists on the genre that makes it amazing.

An MIT science teacher (Nick Cage) disillusioned by his wife's death, now believes in randomness. One day, he is confronted by mysterious events. A document found by his son in a time capsule seems to predict the dates of catastrophes. In his struggle to interpret the meanings and magnitude of the events and warn society of them, he comes across a profound and terrifying insight into what may lie in the future. His effort to save his son and loved ones becomes his desperate objective. I won't give away the ending, but trust me, this is one well made, sophisticated picture.

This story is filled with suspense, great terror, and frighting scenes that have deep emotional impact. The sound effects are awesome. There are some crashes in here that rocked the theater, and filled every expectation I have of well filmed disasters. The visual effects are superb and emotionally powerful.

If you are a picky film goer like me, you'll be delighted with this. Not only worth your money, but worth your time. This moved along with speed and excitement, and I got lost in it. Everyone in the theater was gasping in exhilaration when the credits rolled. Amazing! Don't miss it!
126 out of 223 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
And in the end...
MaxBorg8911 July 2009
What has happened to Alex Proyas? Back in the '90s, he directed dark, edgy pieces of sci-fi/horror, like The Crow and Dark City, that didn't necessarily pander to studio or audience expectations. Nowadays, he's gone in exactly the opposite direction, first with the fun but uneven Will Smith vehicle I, Robot (which doesn't have much in common with Asimov, despite the title) and now with the Nicolas Cage-starring Knowing. Entirely bad it ain't, but boy, does it struggle from time to time.

Cage plays a physics professor at MIT, named John Koestler, who teaches students about the notion of determinism, i.e. the theory that everything is part of a precise, already established plan. The irony is that he doesn't believe any of that stuff since his wife died in a tragic accident, leaving him alone with his young son Caleb (Chandler Canterbury). One day, something special occurs at Caleb's school: a time capsule, which was buried fifty years earlier, is unearthed so that the new generation can see what kids thought the future would look like back then. Instead of a drawing, Caleb ends up with a page containing a bizarre sequence of numbers. John takes a look at the sequence, and quickly (?) realizes that the numbers represent the dates and body count of every major disaster of the last five decades, including 9/11, Katrina and - big surprise - the death of the missus. Three of the predictions, however, have yet to come true, so John must find a way to prevent them from happening. Additionally, he has to deal with a group of weird-looking people who are interested in Caleb.

If it all sounds a bit familiar, that's because it is: while the story develops on its own terms, the premise alone, coupled with the creepy atmosphere, could come from an episode of The X-Files. In case the similarities weren't clear enough, the writers have even replicated the Mulder-Scully dynamic in the shape of John and his reluctant partner Diana (Rose Byrne) and added the inevitable religious subtext, which is hinted at from the very beginning (John's dad is a preacher). Also, the Strangers look kind of... In short, it's the sense of déjà vu that brings down most of Knowing: the third act is very easy to guess, the father/son relationship is sketchy, yada yada yada.

And yet Proyas manages to get some things admirably right: the tension is actually pretty consistent, with a few professionally delivered jump-scares along the way, and the visual effects are state-of-the-art, most notably in the impressive central set-piece which - a true stroke of genius, this one - is depicted in a single, continuous shot. Additionally, Cage's performance is one of his most convincing in quite some time. Okay, so it's not that difficult given his recent body of work includes the likes of The Wicker Man, Ghost Rider and Next, but his portrayal of a man who questions his beliefs (there we go again) adds some emotional weight to the picture. And that's without mentioning the refreshingly merciless conclusion...

Knowing is nothing new, meaning that the few unexpected elements it contains are rapidly sidelined by textbook scripting. Still, even on an off-day Proyas manages to pull off a collection of oddly compelling images (Cage's hair not included). Not quite enough, but we already sort of knew that, right?
52 out of 88 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't let Nic Cage scare you, Alex Proyas is a genius and this is his best work yet......
nick-graham20 March 2009
Don't let Nicolas Cage's name on the marquee scare you away, this is the director of The Crow and Dark City given free reign, and it is amazing, assuming you accept a revelation about 2/3 of the way in. The ambition here is pretty staggering by the end.

Having just seen this, I predict viewers of it will fall into two camps: unabashed love or extreme dislike save for a few scenes (the plane and subway scenes come to mind). How you accept the final third will determine which camp you are placed in. I was confused by Ebert giving it four stars and then hearing others whose opinions I also often agree with eviscerate it, but after seeing it this makes total sense.

I fall into the unabashed love category, and absolutely did not expect to going in. My brother Doug felt the same way. I think Cage actually gives a good performance, and feel like most of the criticism on his part is either residual from other aspects of the movie people don't like or just bandwagon stuff that he admittedly wrought upon himself with multiple disasters such as LaBute's Wicker Man.
183 out of 362 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not as bad as the reviews say
davispittman30 July 2017
Knowing is one of Nicholas Cage's lesser films, that's true, but it's nearly as bad as the majority of the critics reviews. Knowing is a science fiction film starring Nicolas Cage and Rose Byrne. The plot surrounds children who are able to tell when the worlds most horrific disasters and atrocities happened. Figuring out how these kids know these things and what the numbers mean is really what the entire movie is about. The performances are pretty good from the two leads. Byrne and Cage both turn in believable performances. I think that the script was average, the writers did their job, it's nothing spectacular but it suffices. The idea of the movie was very interesting and it's executed well for the most part. There are some parts of the movie that do feel kind of lackluster but they pale in comparison to the ending and how interesting it turns out to be. Some people said they thought the ending was too weird and random but I think it was unexpected and cool. And I think the way in which it ended gave the film a meaning. Overall yes I would recommend Knowing, it's not one I'd go to automatically when recommending films to people but I would say it's a fairly interesting watch. 7/10.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't listen to the Critics, this movie is full of action and meaning, NOT a typical save the world movie!
cherrywild20 March 2009
This movie is full of meaning and action! There are lots of graph/realistic scenes that will have you gripping your seat. There are times that you hold your breath because the suspense has a hold of your chest! This movie is beautiful and not a copy of any other typical movie on the same topic. Nic did great and the kids were really awesome!

I really enjoyed this movie and think that I will need to see it again now! I am sure that there is a lot of symbolism that I did not pick up on. *I know it is a silly thing but kind of chuckled because nobody seemed to shut doors when they got out of a car, I know that might be the last thing on their minds, but it happened a lot. :)

I did jump in my seat, hold my breath, cry and laugh...and I was in awe by the end. See the movie judge for yourself, stick it out till the is worth it.
121 out of 239 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A little hokey but well worth it.
pjames1029 December 2018
Sure, there's a couple of cheesy moments and leaps of faith but so what? Sci-fi meets pseudo religious iconography is bound to require some leaps of faith. Still, Nick Cage does his thing and the movie had me sitting on the edge of my seat for most of the way through. Far better than I expected and the end may very well move you as it did move me a bit.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Alex Proyas's doomsday piece boasts a chock full of interesting concepts and sleek special effects to make up its fundamentally flawed climax
Screen_Blitz27 July 2017
This science-fiction thrill piece starring Nicolas Cage in the protagonist role is a film blooming with brainy concepts on science and religion, while hanging over apocalyptic themes that pay reminiscence of other end-of-the-world flicks like 'Left Behind'. After all, the key figure in the story is revolves around what appears be a biblical prophecy, although the spiritial theme only serves as a small undertone here rather than driving the storyline. Director Alex Proyas, the father of projects such as 'Dark City' and 'I, Robot', exhibits his grandeur of visual stimulating style that manages to triumph over its compelling, if somewhat flawed plot. Proyas is successful at making the thought-provoking ideas work, even if they are occasionally little rocky. The only major flaw is lies in the final act that borders on the line of preposterous. It is not a groundbreaking piece of work for the genre, but it is just enough to warrant for a sweet recommendation. This film opens up in 1959, at an elementary school where children are given the assignment to draw pictures of what society will like fifty years from that time. One girl, Lucinda Embrey (played by Lara Robinson), draws a long series of seemingly random numbers and places the paper in the school's time capsule. Flash forward to fifty years later, a nine-year old Caleb Koestler (played by Chandler Canterbury) and his class open up the time capsule, and Lucinda's paper is found in his hands. When he shows the paper to his widowed father John (played by Nicolas Cage), an astrophysics professor at Massachutes Institute of Technology, John believes the numbers are enigmatic codes to disasters occurring around the globe. Enlisting the help of Lucinda's daughter Diana (played by Rose Byrne) and granddaughter Abby (also played by Lara Robinson), John must encrypt the message of what seems to be a sign of a global catastrophic event.

Some may question whether Alex Proyas is trying to deliver a cautionary tale about an apocalyptic prophecy or is pinning viewers with complex ideas of science and religious theology. Both are more than likely doubtful, especially when the plot shows little respect for the laws of science to begin with. Nonetheless, it keeps things deeply eerie and grim in terms of storytelling and tone, almost bordering the line of a psychological horror thriller. Caleb and Abby are children who are haunted by mysterious entities, resembling the alien creatures from 'Dark City', who introduce them to terrifying visions of the world facing mass destruction, an eerie, yet shocking concept that is placed with sweet visual spark in one scene where the former looks out his window and sees the forest engulfed in flames. The main protagonist in the story however, is John Koestler who is infused with a performance by Nicolas Cage that can only be described as acceptable, but not bad. When Koestler learns of the terrifying secrets behind Lucinda's prophetic message, that is when the story kicks into gear, allowing Proyas to experiment with his engaging concepts. His attempts at breathing life into his ideas are mostly successful and set room for some visually electrifying sequences such as devastating plane crash that leaves several victims flailing in flames and a subway crash that racks up an enormous death toll. However, the third act, which is predictable and sets up with heavy emotional sigma, is a little absurd; especially if how unrealistic the characters behave to such an unnerving situation that is on the horizon. Shouldn't they be more terrified? On the bright side, the audience is blessed with a riveting score by Marco Beltrami to settle the tone.

Knowing is a compelling doomsday-themed piece with a chock of interesting ideas of science and religion put into play, and a surprisingly enthralling execution by Alex Proyas who brings his powerful visual grandeur to the game. It is a flawed picture with an execution may have a few scars, but not enough to make it a sore to sit through. Don't expect it to be anything revolutionary.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Good Flick
raymac02724 February 2017
I really enjoyed this movie. I'm not a huge sci-fi buff but I can enjoy them. I went in to this movie after reading these reviews expecting to like it up until the end because everyone seemed to hate the ending. I didn't mind it. I felt it was a decent sci-fi ending. It had all the emotions, beautiful cinematography, and an otherworldliness! It was great! Come on now people, what were you expecting! Good watch, I recommend.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A rewrite of Arthur C. Clarke's novel
DisMGM13 April 2009
SPOILERS HERE - In very many ways this is a rewrite of "Childhood's End." If you're familiar with the novel, the aliens in the movie are the Overlords, who, as caretakers of a dying Earth, await the final moments of the planet's existence to take the world's children to another place. It is not Eden (definitely not Clarke's intent). And, similar to "2001: A Space Odyssey," also based on Clarke's writings, the children are prepared to master a new home, one they will be able to understand and prosper in. The film can be interpreted in many ways--one of its great strengths--and though wings can be imagined by the wispiness of the aura surrounding the aliens, these individuals are but representatives of a culture intent on, if you will, protecting life and intelligences. That the children are willing to go--and Dad senses the deeper meanings of all of it--points to a pervasive, yet silent communication to humans (or many of them) by the Overlords. Remember, too, that people in many parts of the world were, in one way or another, preparing for the space ships; many of them left Earth at the same time. The non-Eden place featured alien plants, and a tree with nary an apple. The bunnies gave comfort to the children, and, symbolically, pointed to a rapid and gentle population soon to appear. A superb film.
29 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
SeenTooManyMoovies27 March 2009
Sci-fi fans, don't miss this. Although I looked forward to and was disappointed with "The Day the Earth Stood Still" with Keneau Reeves, "Knowing" did not let me down. This movie definitely rivets the senses of your humanity and wakes you up from the take-it-for-granted ease and comfort provided by an American/Western way of life. I could give numerous examples from incidents in the movie that could demonstrate this facet, but nothing could be more telling than the shocked face of the woman sitting a few seats down from us, who at the end credits of the movie could not remove her hand from her mouth neither her eyes from the screen. 10 stars!
28 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Excellent, excellent movie ( Don't trust the critics and reviews)
howruimvu21 March 2009
First off let me say that although I'm a little biased when it comes to Nicholas Cage movies (absolutely loved "Con Air"), he hasn't been coming out with the same types of movies that once blew your mind. That said I must say that after watching this movie in theaters, I walked out and literally said to my friend "That was probably the greatest movie I've ever watched in my life". I understand not everybody is gonna feel the way I feel but I almost didn't watch this movie because I read the review on Yahoo directory. Let me be the first to say those guys don't know the first thing about a good science fiction flick.

The movie itself: The pacing was just right, like a thundering locomotion it started slowly and built itself into an unstoppable juggernaut towards the denouement.I thought the casting of the movie was great. One of the many faults of the movie according to online reviews were that Nicholas Cage only displayed about 2 facial expressions and emotion during the movie. While this is not true, would you really care about how big of an array of emotions you are displaying to your audience if the world was coming to an end? The cinematography and special effects were good albeit not spectacular, it gets the job done, and done with style. The plot twists and turns along with a stellar music score and sound effects makes the movie frighteningly heart-gripping.

I thoroughly, thoroughly enjoyed this movie. I have never written a movie review before but this movie prompted me to spread the word and share with you a sci-fi classic for the the generation. Don't let online reviews deny you from watching this masterpiece. The ending is a real treat, trust me.
37 out of 75 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed