Closer to God

2014

Action / Horror / Sci-Fi / Thriller

31
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten53%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Spilled30%
IMDb Rating4.6101029

clonegenetic scientist

Plot summary


Uploaded by: FREEMAN

Director

Top cast

John Schuck Photo
John Schuck as Sydney
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
590.54 MB
1280*534
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
1 hr 21 min
P/S ...
1.22 GB
1920*800
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
1 hr 21 min
P/S ...

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by kosmasp4 / 10

Good intentions

Just like the mad man .. sorry I mean our main character in this, the movie itself has very good intentions. I would even aargue that some of the ideas are worth exploring or make the movie even interesting. Not just the premise of the movie. But not just because of the small budget of the movie, but also because it tries and muddles many things together, it probably does not achieve being really good in any of them.

So many at least interesting ideas, but a great whole. Certain things almost feel lackluster too. The effects are good and if you don't mind the "let's keep it dark, because we are low budget and can't afford too many special effects" approach, there are some nice things here. The end is ... well predictable, but also I guess in tone with what this is closest (Frankenstein is not mentioned just in passing).

What you make of this morally will be up to you. It does raise some questions, but I'm not sure if it does them justice ...

Reviewed by parry_na6 / 10

Spoilers follow ...

This is a relentlessly grim and humourless film – understandably, given the subject matter. Another modern day take on Frankenstein (loosely speaking, most horror stories are),this deals with engineered babies and cloning, and the reaction of modern day media and 'normal' people.

Elisabeth is the 'first' of these experiments, and public reaction is exacerbated when one of Doctor Victor's (Jeremy Childs) staff leaks a picture of her to the press: a normal looking child, she nevertheless has an electronic implement injected into her forehead. What follows are various viewpoints presented both for and against Victor's experimentation – for some, it presents hope that certain diseases will be combatted as a result; for others, it represents a violation of their perception of the will of God ('Humans not clones/There's evil among us' they chanted like a mantra).

But Elizabeth is not the first experiment. The rampant and deformed Ethan has that dubious honour. Locked in his room, barely shown to the audience, he has behavioural disorders and continues to grow less manageable. One day, Ethan brutally kills the nanny Mary (Shelean Newman).

Exhausted, Ethan approaches Victor, having killed Elisabeth in another rage, who embraces him fatherly before giving him a fatal injection. The crowd of protesters outside his home falls silent as Victor shows them Elisabeth's corpse, asking 'Is this who you were afraid of?' Incensed, one protester shoots the doctor, killing him.

The subject matter of cloning isn't quite interesting enough to justify its screen time. The characters' reactions to the various developments, Victor's moral dilemma and his belief he is doing positive, progressive work against a whirlwind of protestation and alienation is very well conveyed. But it isn't until Ethan's escape and subsequent blurred violence that things become truly creepy. In the end, when the experiments have presumably come to a shuddering end, will the protesters be happy, or will they simply move on to the next Big Issue and be equally compelled to bring that to an end too?

Reviewed by peterp-450-2987164 / 10

Cloning and the consequences. Perhaps it creates sensation in some circles, but as a movie it's kind of weak.

"This is just the beginning, isn't it ? …."

This being a kind of modern version of "Frankenstein", is the least you can say. Even the name of the doctor in question is identical with that of Frankenstein. The only difference with the classic movie is that new life isn't created by sewing together human body parts, but by making use of modern day technology. Cloning a human being is the central topic in this low-budget sci-fi horror. Don't expect an alien looking creature as in "Splice". This cloned human being looks perfectly normal and healthy.

It's not extremely creepy and intense at all. It's the aspect of cloning and the controversy arising on this subject which are developed the most. The fuss, the media attention and the protest groups who are opposed to these practices and consider this more as a blasphemy than scientific progress, demand the most attention. The angry mob at the immense gate of Dr. Reed's residence, is more terrifying than the additional secret that Victor is hiding on his domain. The movie fades from hight-tech SF to social drama. And ultimately it ends as a kind of psychopathic slasher. At first this surprises you, but eventually it looks rather routinely and not really innovative.

What remains is a not so original low-budget monster story, embellished with high-tech-looking situations. A highly motivated geneticist who puts more energy into his work than in his family life, resulting in a wife who feels abandoned. The secret that painstakingly is separated from the outside world, is hidden from sight for a considerable time or displayed as a hazy shape in the background. It felt like an attempt to keep the suspense alive and postpone the disclosure as long as possible.

Perhaps there should be restrictions and guidelines when it comes to cloning, so that we don't end up with an uncontrollable process where superior specimen are being created. Or an illegal trade is being initiated, producing organs on demand. That a religious aspect also comes with it, is quite evident. Though it's more of a dogmatic religious plea that no one should acquire the authority to create something. God has the exclusive rights for that, so they say. But then one must be able to admit that there are also advantages. Improving the quality of human life and removing those terrible diseases from the world. And there are also disadvantages. What to do with the failures ? And who's going to pass judgment on that matter ? This diversity of views is the heart and essence of this rather modest SF horror story.

The whole movie feels like a creation out of the 70's. The decor and presentation, the style of interactions, the overall atmosphere and the meager horror elements. Eventually, it all feels like a typical movie that you can see on Syfy. In the 80s it would fit in between "The Entity" and "Critters" during a VHS marathon at the weekend. The only similarity between Jeremy Childs and the Frankenstein monster, is his imposing stature. A walking wardrobe with a facial expression that shows no emotion. Not even while handling the cloned baby. It's all done on automatic pilot without much feelings. The subject of this movie and the reaction of the community comes across as being weighty. However, the film on itself, is nothing but a lightweight.

More reviews here : http://bit.ly/1KIdQMT

Read more IMDb reviews