IMDb user comments for
S1m0ne (2002) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 22:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

215 reviews in total

---

39 out of 54 people found the following review useful:
Uneven, but worth a good thoughtful viewing, 30 April 2005

Author: mstomaso from Vulcan

Victor Taransky is having a bad day... week... life.

A depressed visionary film director who can't compete with hype and egotism and whose obsession with his own artistic integrity has lead his career down a dead-end street, Taransky, with his career on the ropes, is contacted by a man offering salvation in the form of the perfect actor - a computer generated woman named S1m0n3. Simone's success propels Taransky's career into the limelight, permitting him to simultaneously lampoon all that he has come to despise in Hollywood and to vicariously gain acceptance in it for himself. Taransky's invented discovery successfully brings a few of his most cherished cinematic visions to the screen and eventually overshadows him completely. Yet Taransky finds himself even less happy, more lonely, and less satisfied than he was before Simone. Taransky discovers that he, in fact, has an ego of his own, and also discovers that success is meaningless without his estranged wife and daughter. Since admitting Simone was never real would jeopardize his own integrity, he embarks on a campaign to destroy his own creation.

Winona Rider is typically superb in her relatively brief role, and the performances in this film are generally good, but Pacino's acting is just a hair under his usual perfection in this one. I am not sure why I feel this way, but I'm not certain that Pacino enjoyed making this film. Part of the problem here may be the fact that the script does not allow for any obvious representation of self discovery for Pacino's character. Since this film is, for both Taransky and his family, a story of hard lessons learned about themselves, at least one epiphany scene might have been appropriate. Another minor problem I had with the script was the fact that it was hard for me to find any reason why Taransky would want to reconnect with his ex-wife. She is one of the most superficial and irritating characters in the film, most of the time. However, these are rather personal gripes and may well be part of some interpretive point which I missed. Perhaps, as in many other exercises in Hollywood reflexivity such as the excellent "The Player", the writer and director really did want to suggest that all that really matters IS performance, and the quality of the act.

The pace of the first half of the film will likely turn off many viewers, as might the sudden mood swings and the rather prolonged, steeply descending and deep denouement after Taransky discovers that career success does not guarantee satisfaction, and learns that to have integrity one must act with integrity. But, just as the film begins its long but rapid descent from irony and satiric comedy into dark drama, the pace picks up and the film grabs your attention, holding fast until the strong finish. This is a good film for a thoughtful, critical audience, offering critique of Hollywood, commercial film, celebrity worship and pop culture, but doing so without insulting its own audience's intelligence.

---

30 out of 40 people found the following review useful:
Interesting and Entertaining, 9 February 2003

Author: dromasca from Herzlya, Israel

Director and writer Andrew Nicol has only a few scripts and movies in his record, but all are memorable. He wrote and directed 'Gattaca', wrote 'The Truman Show' script, and here he is again both writing and directing with 'S1m0ne'. It is seldom that one director chooses his films in such a focused manner, and in his case it certainly pays back.

'S1m0ne' is another story about Hollywood, but a really original one. Since the film was released the first completely virtual film became reality, and some of the best movies of 2002 combine real actors and fantastic computer generated characters. Is this a threat to the big star system? This is the main theme of the movie. The second, and maybe even more important is the cult for icons, the morbid fascination of the public with the life of celebrities. The two themes play well together, combined with the excellent portrait that Al Pacino creates for his Faustian director.

I liked the movie. It has enough interesting material to keep the interest. The weaker points are the length - yet another film which would have benefit if it was 10-15 minutes shorter - and the final which is too conventional relative to the originality of the rest of the script.

8/10 on my personal scale - go and see or rent it, you will not be disappointed.

---

28 out of 38 people found the following review useful:
One of the Best Films of 2002, 25 August 2002

Author: DTL (dtlfl@aol.com)

SIMONE written and directed by Andrew McNichol who also wrote THE TRUMAN SHOW, which in the opinion of this writer was one of the best films of 1998, opened this week starring incomparable Al Pacino.

THE TRUMAN SHOW was a brilliant send up of television and those of us who will watch whatever is on. SIMONE does the same for movies and Hollywood. It will certainly make my list of the Ten Best Films of 2002. Put quiet simply McNichol has once again hit one out of the park.

SIMONE is a beautiful actress that is made up of pixels. A series ones and zeros put together in a computer and placed into the film. Even her name is an abbreviation for the computer program that has made her possible: Simulation One.

When Hollywood diva Wynona Ryder walks off director Viktor Taransky's (Pacino) film unfinished for nothing but silly reasons, his career is finally in the dumpster. He is offered salvation when a computer whiz, played in a fabulous cameo turn by Elias Koteas, offers him the solution.

Taransky with the aid of the computer creates SIMONE the perfect actress. She doesn't talk back, does what she's told and doesn't make trouble. Made up from parts of the very best that Hollywood has to offer she is breathtakingly beautiful. She becomes bigger than life itself which McNicholl cleverly shows by placing Simone's picture on the sides of three story buildings and has Pacino or other mortals walk by in front the portraits. As an actress Simone is less than brilliant, but no one seems to notice. In fact, that is the point, nothing this woman does is wrong. The public as McNicholl's character Christoff in the TRUMAN SHOW says `accepts whatever Universe that is presented to them as real.'

McNichol tell us in both SIMONE and TRUMAN SHOW that people believe what they want to believe; what they feel comfortable believing. SIMONE says that your eyes will lie to you. That what you see is only true if that is what you want it to be. It is a warning to a complacent society to be on guard. The media is capable of creating their reality, one that will make us happy, warm and fuzzy, in order to control what we see, think and feel. That they in fact all ready do this through advertisement and slanted, controlled news. It warns us not to blindly trust what we are shown by the media. SIMONE reminds us of elements in WAG THE DOG where a fictious war is created and since it is shown on TV we will believe it.

SIMONE is both hilarious and thought provoking. Pacino's performance as the washed up film director takes on a rather Dr. Frankenstein feel when his creation becomes uncontrollable, not for what she does but for the way that the public reacts to her. After she becomes big he can't admit to the fraud because no believes him and he can't kill her off because the public refuses to let her die. Pacino is brilliant. You cannot go wrong with this one, it's a winner.

---

33 out of 49 people found the following review useful:
Sharp Satire, Dull Romance, 26 July 2004

Author: Bob-45 from Savannah, GA

The cult of celebrity is brilliantly examined in Andrew Niccol's `Simone.' Al Pacino plays a washed-up `art film' director who is fed up with the spoiled leading ladies with whom he has to work. After his latest leading lady (Winona Ryder in an excellent performance) walks out before the end of production, Pacino is left with an unreleasable film. He is approached by an adoring fan, a `computer geek' dying from cancer, who offers him a solution to his difficulties. Pacino rejects the offer, but the geek sends him a computer disk containing `Simulation One.' When Pacino activates the disk, up pops a stunningly beautiful female,' who is a programmable simulation. Pacino adds personality ingredients from famous actresses of the past, and, viola, `Simone' is created.

Inserting Simone's image and voice into Ryder's footage, Pacino completes his film. However, Pacino's work is overshadowed by his creation. Simone becomes a world famous celebrity, a cult goddess.

Combining the cult celebrity of Garbo, Princess Di, Farrah Fawcett and Pamela Anderson, with maybe a little Britney Spears thrown in, Andrew Niccol has created a sharp satire of hero worship. Lacking an ego, Simone is the projection of everyone's desires; men want her and women want to be like her. Even more fascinating is Pacino's revelation that he is jealous of his creation, even when he has no need to be. Niccol sustains his sharp satire of celebrity until the very end of the movie.

Where `Simone' stumbles is its flat romance between Pacino and his former wife, Christine Keener. I'm sorry, but for me Keener lacks anything resembling sex appeal. Had this role been given to Kim Basinger, Rita Wilson, Cybil Shepherd, Ellen Barkin or Lauren Hutton, the `younger beauty/aging beauty pathos could have been examined. As it stands, `Simone' lacks the kind of conflict which could have given it real spark. Nonetheless, `Simone' is a fun, funny movie and is definitely worth seeing. I give `Simone' a `7'.

---

19 out of 26 people found the following review useful:
Uneven, but definitely worth watching, 16 June 2005

Author: Grann-Bach (Grann-Bach@jubii.dk) from Denmark

Ever since I first saw Gattaca, I've been looking for other films directed by Andrew Niccol. This being one of them, and so far, one of the only ones(but I certainly hope he makes more films in the future... he has some very interesting ideas), I simply had to watch. I was not disappointed. Like Gattaca, this is science fiction; however, Gattaca is more of a all-out sci-fi film, and S1m0ne only has some elements of science fiction. Before I comment on the sci-fi, I must comment on the great humor in the film. This is the first of Niccol's films(Truman Show, Gattaca and then this) I've seen that has comedy(in the form of satire, that is). Truly great comedy, as well. You know why? Because it's real. It's stuff that we can recognize, stuff that we know from ourselves, from the people around us. The comedy mostly revolves around how easily everyone is tricked, how quick they are to believe in something without any proof. I believe it was Voltaire who said: "If there were no God, it would be necessary to invent one". We want to be deceived, we want to be tricked, we want to have something to hope for and believe in. I mean, let's be honest; that is the very basis for why religion exists, and why people claim to spot UFOs. People need to believe in something... and they believe in Simone. Despite what her maker has her do, despite no one ever having met her in person, people love her. They need to. They need someone, something to believe in. The many scenes of Viktor covering up Simone not being real, creating the illusion of her in various forms to satisfy other people's urge to see her, meet her, talk to her may be somewhat slapstick in their nature, but they only emphasize how ludicrous and easily bought the everyday man is. They want to believe it so badly, they simply can't accept anything else. This seems to be what most critics of this film are missing. Their refusal to accept it is simply them denying human nature. As Pacino's character realizes near the end: "She's indestructible". It is not possible to remove her, because the public won't accept it. She must exist. I noticed a lot of references to the story of Frankenstein in this film. It is basically the 21st century's version of Frankenstein, with some computer-based science fiction elements and set in Hollywood. I have never seen a film that so openly mocks the superficiality of Hollywood, and for that reason alone, anyone should see it. The plot is very good, though it develops at a somewhat uneven pace... in fact, the pacing seems a tad off. The acting is mostly very good. The special effects are top-notch... they were in 2002, and they still are. This could have been better, but it was still very good. I recommend this to anyone who is interested from reading the plot outline, people who enjoyed Gattaca and fans of science fiction as commentary on real issues. 7/10

---

15 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
An excellent comedy of errors., 10 August 2005

Author: shanfloyd from India

Andrew Niccole's relishing and original take on modern celeb worship is a unique cinematic experience. The basic plot is very interesting and the screenplay is awesome. Some of the scenes (like "I am pig" or the second TV interview) carry the actual message of the film quite strongly but the film never denies the fact that it's meant primarily to be a comedy film. It has got a brilliant cast from Al Pacino, Katherine Keener to even Evan Rachel Wood. Winona Ryder is also excellent in her cameo. But what really fascinated me is its ending. One can never predict how it turns out in the end. Highly recommended for everyone who's seeking new concepts in the recent movies.

---

21 out of 31 people found the following review useful:
Brings a whole new meaning to the phrase "Showbiz people are so phony", 12 August 2002
Author: Shiva-11 from Vancouver

By Greg Ursic

Many people bemoan the loss of the Hollywood mystique, when contract actors were essentially owned by the studios and lived glamorous, carefully tailored lives, and were surrounded by an air of mystery. The public however is just as much to blame for this - our insatiable need to know everything - how much the stars earn, who they're dating, what they're addicted to ... - has left them then without any semblance of privacy. It's amazing that today's superstars don't immolate under the spotlight's glare. While the days of discovering the next screen legend in ice cream parlours may be over, they may soon be created over a banana split...

For Viktor Taransky bad things do indeed come in threes, in his case, movies: a former Oscar nominated director, his last three films have been box office dogs. His comeback attempt is apparently dashed when the star ("A supermodel with a SAG card") of his latest film walks out on him citing creative differences. Replacing her seems impossible - as an agent eloquently notes "[For my client] having no credits is better than having a Taransky credit." He also learns that rock bottom can always be adjusted when the studio chief - who also happens to be his ex-wife - lets him know that he's being fired. Distraught and demoralized, Viktor's salvation appears in the guise a seemingly deranged genius who offers him the ultimate software for the director who can't find a star - who says you can't make em like you used to?

For those accustomed to Al Pacino's typical cast of characters -serious, dark and brooding, with an intensity level that never drops below 10, Viktor Taranksy is a refreshing change. As the real (read: flesh and blood) star of the film, Viktor is a man with a quandary - a director with integrity and vision, who actually sees beyond the box office, he must perpetrate a hoax, to get his film made and salvage his career. Pacino is appropriately low key and morose- even when Viktor should be bathing in the glow of success there is a palpable manic undercurrent and sense of foreboding. The supporting cast is a mixed blessing.

Catherine Keener, who plays Elaine, Viktor's ex-wife (her second role as a Hollywood executive in as many months), has suprisingly little presence in the film - her dialogue is light and her character is relatively inconsequential. I can only assume that this was done so as not to detract from the other adult female lead (see below). Evan Rachel Wood, delivers a solid performance as the daughter, supplying maturity and offering sage advice to her self-involved immature parents. Of course the real star is Simone.

As a synthespian, (or as the designer of S1MøNE software notes "The pc term is "vactor") Simone is happy with every script she receives, never complains about her perks and will never age - a director's dream. Though sultry and seductive, she projects a soothing screen presence, and you feel the symbiosis between her and Viktor. It wasn't until the credits started rolling that I realized Simone really was a computer generated image (this is confirmed by both the press kit and everything I've been able to find on the internet) and is a composite of Hollywood leading ladies from the past (drawn from the "Legends Library").

Although marketed as a comedy, "Simone" highlights the growing impact of technology on how we perceive reality. While moviegoers have come to expect special effects in their films, most don't realize the extent to which they are actually utilized - it is not uncommon for actors to be made thinner, or taller, with the click of a mouse. Several films have already employed synthespians to perform difficult stunts and last year's Final Fantasy showed how far the technology had come (bankrupting a movie company in the process). Simone demonstrates that actors themselves may soon be in jeopardy. Of course there are other issues lurking in the background: will we be faced with the spectre of Jimmy Stewart in Scary Movie 6 or Grace Kelly hawking feminine hygiene products? More disturbing is the possibility that in the near future the news reports we're watching could be wholly fictional and we would have no way of knowing? But that's more than enough paranoia for one review.

The first half of Simone is both fun and engaging as the public's thirst for knowledge about Simone grows: co-stars brag about partying with her, people say that she speaks to something in them because she is so real (irony at its best), and Simone reaches virtual demigoddess status. Unfortunately, the manic pace and almost giddy feel of the film begins to wane in the second half, meandering between different plot elements, and winding up in a too perfect conclusion.

Go for the matinee and stay for the popcorn.

---

15 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Darn funny, 27 May 2004

Author: Charles Herold (cherold) from United States

Very good satire on the cult of celebrity, in which the whole world falls all over itself in praise of a non-existent actress. The movie also deals, to a much lesser extent, with the conflict between wanting to create a perfect artistic vision and wanting to create art that is in the world. It's not the most pointed or savage of satires, but it is quite a funny one. Some people here have criticized it for being predictable, which really misses the point of satire. Satire is based to a great extent on the frightening predictability of people, and it must follow a logical train of escalating events or what's the point. The biggest failing in the movie is near the end where it jumps track from a logical train of events to a dumb plot device, which while not a fatal error is lazy and takes away from the overall effect of the film.

But mainly it's just funny. Consistently so from beginning to end. And also notable as about the only good performance I've seen from Winona Ryder since Mermaids.

---

14 out of 21 people found the following review useful:
It's like a fine wine baby..., 15 August 2002

Author: jdorward from Hollywood, CA

I was fortunate enough to see a screening of this film before its wide release date. I must say that the trailers do not do this film justice; it is a very intelligent satire that provides commentary on many things including Hollywood as an industry, the audience as a questionable (flawed) jury, the personal conflicts of greed and guilt, and what it means to "be in control" - all within the context of a very effective comedy. The film has several genuinely funny moments and I left the screening not only with a sense of satisfaction, but with the feeling that this film will only become more relevant with time. Simone is a very well executed film and raises thought-provoking questions (though nothing new) about the industry and the proverbial "human condition" while being funny. I, too, was pleasantly surprised.

---

9 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
Embarrassingly bad, 6 August 2006

Author: james-1864 from United Kingdom

This film is so utterly naive in its conception, and so dismally executed I'm actually in shock that it classifies as a film at all. Never before have i witnessed such a cringe-inducing 'plot' performed so half-heartedly. Al Pacino aught to know better - I guess he was simply trying to avoid being typecast. Well watch out Al, you'll get typecast as someone with poor taste in scripts. Seriously, WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?

Simone herself is even more soulless and bland that a real computer graphic. In fact Pixars animated characters manage to have 1000% more life that there is in this drone-like performance. The computer effects - where they show Pacino 'editing' Simone - are laughable too - they bely a director who has never used a computer and makes no attempt to make any part of this film even vaguely conceivable.

The plot is dire, the dialogue is coma-inducing, and the twist is so predictable as to surprise only the very feeblest of minds. This is genuinely one of the worst, most flaccid films I have ever seen. I was actually looking around the audience in disbelief to see if they were as flabbergasted at its rubbishness as I was.

Seriously, save yourself some money - wait till it comes out on TV (probably within 6 months).

Then smash your TV.

---

---

Page 1 of 22:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Official site	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user reviews	Your vote history