Alex Proyas has probably directed some of your favorite films, yet you don’t know his name. His filmography is confounding: The cult-hit The Crow (1994), Dark City (1998, the visual forerunner to The Matrix), and the Will Smith blockbuster I, Robot (2004). Proyas also directed Knowing (2009), the Nicolas Cage prophecy/disaster film at which you likely laughed. “Great, another Nicolas Cage feature on the heels of such beloved films as Bangkok Dangerous and that National Treasure sequel.” Yet Cage and Proyas deliver a grounded sci-fi disaster movie unlike anything we’ve seen, and though it isn’t perfect, it’s a refreshing sci-fi narrative.
Nicolas Cage plays the recently widowed John Koestler, an MIT astrophysicist and father of the slightly hearing impaired Caleb Koestler. Caleb is given a letter from a fifty year-old time capsule, which contains a mysterious string of numbers that become an enigma for both father and son.
Surprise, surprise, the numbers offer details on upcoming disasters, and though the prophecy angle seems appropriately silly in most films, Knowing is able to invest you in the numeric mystery by stressing the tragedy of the accidents. When John finds himself at the location of an airplane crash, Proyas, cinematographer Simon Duggan and an extensive special effects team (blending practical and CGI effects adroitly) offer a three-minute long take into hell, as John tries to smother flames consuming burn victims, avoid intermittent explosions, and pull people from the wreckage.
All of Roland Emmerich’s disaster-porn films (Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow, 2012) feature tons of property damage, but little insight into the impact on humans.* Instead they opt for wide far-away shots with the occasional nondescript crowd running away from flames/weather/water. The disasters in Knowing are a reminder that the true horror isn’t in buildings being toppled, but the screams of people crushed or the cries in the rubble. Proyas focuses not on the event, but what the event does to the people, evoking a proper, compassionate, reaction: Horror, grief, and sympathy.
In tapping into the human tragedies of these events, the hokey prophecies suddenly take on enough importance to propel the film, even if the occasional piece of dialogue or acting falters. Proyas’ alternation between traditional camera shots (static tripod, dolly, or steadicam) and handheld adds a compelling visual touch, alongside slight editing maneuvers that give it personality. Topped off by Marc Beltrami’s ominous score of strings and bells (and a dash of Beethoven’s 7th), Knowing is a great dramatic sci-fi/prophecy disaster film.
MAJOR SPOILERS, SKIP PARAGRAPHS
Quite a few people (judging by the film’s imdb message board) found the film’s sci-fi/theology blending in the final act a huge turn off, but I had no complaints. On the atheist end, folks are yelling at Christian viewers that the mystery people were aliens, not angels. For a bunch of viewers who are all about being open minded, seeing aliens as the source of all of human theology is an intriguing premise, especially for a $50 million sci-fi thriller, so I don’t understand the rub. This aspect is indeed one of the film’s weaker points, but it doesn’t put Knowing into a tailspin.
Also worth noting: The final wide shots of Earth being toasted as the sun strikes the planet is given a whole new emotional context with the previous tragedies displayed on the ground and it’s flawlessly executed. This time when buildings crumble and fires swallow city blocks, Roland Emmerich-distanced we are not.
I had few expectations of Knowing, other than being told there was “a cool part at the end.” But even leading up to that ending, it’s a good piece of sci-fi I would recommend to anyone for the way it treats disasters alone. There are several other golden moments not documented here, thanks to the script and mature directing, so check it out.** It may not be the best sci-fi flick you’ll see, but it plays a good hand and it’s not something you’ve seen before.
*Kind of like capitalism’s priorities = property over people.
**The film also thankfully, avoids the annoying “movie logic” that too often has you screaming at the screen for the sake of creating false tension.
RE: “Aliens, Not Angels.”
I have not seen “Knowing,” nor “Dark City.”
To attempt to attain at least an iota of some objectivity, PERHAPS beings depicted should be classified as “entities of unknown origins/intentions.” (e.u.o./i.)
What if the beings are neither angels nor aliens?…
What if they are some other unknown form of advanced beings?
People (choose to) think what they like to think.
People (choose to) believe (or, to not believe) what they like to believe, or, what they like to not believe.
Again, I have not viewed this, and I do not know context of other-worldly characters. …
I feel no insecurity about conceding that I do not know something. …
I feel no “shame” about acknowledging my ignorance.
This…is a surprise. I never would have guessed that .this movie would sit well with you. I loathed it. Every. Goddammed. Minute.
I thought all the on the ground disasters looked horrible. The blending of CGI and real effects (if there were any, I can’t recall any) was miserable and the plane crash had me face-palming at the silliness of it all.
The overall concept was decent. I don’t think the writing or Nic Cage did anything for it (he bugs me, a lot). I barely remember the kid, I believe because he also annoyed me. I had no problem with the aliens at the end.
I prefer Emmerich because those movies are purely pornographic and I have no qualms against jerking off to large pans of huge destruction. I also can turn the movie off after the world shits on everyone in TDAT and not miss anything.
I do know some of the silly parts you’re talking about (some of the CGI fire and the people running around) and when I first hit that scene those parts did take me out of it slightly, but overall the scene still worked for me, and the feeling it prompted lingered enough for me to care about the end of the world.
Whenever I get these reactions to films I enjoyed I wonder if I’m crazy, but if 90% of the time people think I’m on the money with my reviews, the other 10% could be chalked up to random personal quirks we all have when we see a film.