While I enjoyed this movie, a couple reservations held me back:
1) The "writing" we're exposed to via V.O. is distinctly average. If I'm feeling even moderately unkind, I'd call it mediocre. To me, this is not something to overlook when the entire plot revolves around the supposed brilliance of the author, including the fact that her novel was apparently so important to literary canon that it is worth a human (however he might have come into being) life. Which brings me to point two...
2) The professor is a psychopath. The assistant, Penny, isn't much better. The professor not only makes the argument that Crick has to die for literature (notice he isn't arguing that the boy needs to be saved, and even if he did, there's no inexorable or inarguable reason the story has to put the boy in danger in order for Harold to die) but he actively tries to convince Harold that his life is worthless compared to the ending of some novel (that, as I noted above, wasn't particularly well-written.) Hilbert demonstrates absolutely no sympathy toward Harold's situation at the end. He doesn't even pretend to care about Harold's desire to live. Penny, while not as vociferously psychopathic as Hilbert, also demonstrates a certain amount of lack of sympathy. Her only concern is that the book be finished and that her bosses at the publishers be pleased. And Harold himself gives up far too easily. Sure, he sees it as saving the boy, but is he really too stupid to explore alternatives that don't require an either/or self-sacrifice?
Eiffel is the only one in that group that acts like a normal, sane human being. She understands the full potential horror and the awful implications that the news of Harold's existence raises. She agonizes not only over Harold's death, but over the possibility that she might have already killed at least 8 other living, self-aware and decent human beings. That, to me, was the most compelling aspect of this movie. I mean, yeah, Harold and Ana made a nice couple and I could get behind that. But the mental trial of Karen Eiffel were by far the most fascinating plot thread.
All in all, though, if you don't think too deeply, it's a mild, unoffensive movie to kill a couple hours. Just try your best to keep your mind in autopilot, because once you start paying close attention, it's hard to ignore the unexplained processes for how the narrator/character dynamic works, and the borderline psychopathic moral of the story toward the end.
1) The "writing" we're exposed to via V.O. is distinctly average. If I'm feeling even moderately unkind, I'd call it mediocre. To me, this is not something to overlook when the entire plot revolves around the supposed brilliance of the author, including the fact that her novel was apparently so important to literary canon that it is worth a human (however he might have come into being) life. Which brings me to point two...
2) The professor is a psychopath. The assistant, Penny, isn't much better. The professor not only makes the argument that Crick has to die for literature (notice he isn't arguing that the boy needs to be saved, and even if he did, there's no inexorable or inarguable reason the story has to put the boy in danger in order for Harold to die) but he actively tries to convince Harold that his life is worthless compared to the ending of some novel (that, as I noted above, wasn't particularly well-written.) Hilbert demonstrates absolutely no sympathy toward Harold's situation at the end. He doesn't even pretend to care about Harold's desire to live. Penny, while not as vociferously psychopathic as Hilbert, also demonstrates a certain amount of lack of sympathy. Her only concern is that the book be finished and that her bosses at the publishers be pleased. And Harold himself gives up far too easily. Sure, he sees it as saving the boy, but is he really too stupid to explore alternatives that don't require an either/or self-sacrifice?
Eiffel is the only one in that group that acts like a normal, sane human being. She understands the full potential horror and the awful implications that the news of Harold's existence raises. She agonizes not only over Harold's death, but over the possibility that she might have already killed at least 8 other living, self-aware and decent human beings. That, to me, was the most compelling aspect of this movie. I mean, yeah, Harold and Ana made a nice couple and I could get behind that. But the mental trial of Karen Eiffel were by far the most fascinating plot thread.
All in all, though, if you don't think too deeply, it's a mild, unoffensive movie to kill a couple hours. Just try your best to keep your mind in autopilot, because once you start paying close attention, it's hard to ignore the unexplained processes for how the narrator/character dynamic works, and the borderline psychopathic moral of the story toward the end.