Rating: 
Summary: I loved this film
Review: When I first saw this, I was confused partly by the main character's responses to his awareness of his life being a fraud. Because in the movie, he discovers that all his life is a series of memories that are not real, and the physical world itself is not even real, being capable of change just through sheer willpower and mind. Thinking back, however, I see what they were trying to do (the movie-makers). The big problem with this movie was that the technology of film was not good enough to communicate what was being said. The film was supposed to make you question the screen you were looking at (the computer, TV, or movie screen) and use that as a basis for meditation on what was real or not.Also, the main character's internal emotional experience could not be justified on the basis of him and one other character alone. In the movie he is the good guy, and another guy played by Kiefer Sutherland is the bad guy. These are supposed to be motifs of the good guy, but it turns out looking like they were both equal in strength and stature. This severly dampens our understanding of Proyas's intense and ugly view of reality--how little we question it.
Rating: 
Summary: Didn't like it.
Review: I didn't like 'Dark City'. I liked the dark setting and mood of the film, but towards the end it got stupid.
Rating:
Summary: A question-your-existence dark fantasy that works.
Review: Dark City is the equivalent of taking a train through a tunnel with the proverbial light at the end being either an oncoming train or the end of the tunnel - except the tunnel is a nasty horror film roller coaster loop without the majority of the gore and bad plot. (The light analogy is apt; Dark City is one of only two films I know of where no scene takes place in daylight, at least until the end of the film.) If you've never seen this, the plot is a man (Rufus Sewell with an American accent reminscent of Damian Lewis in Band of Brothers) accused of murder being forced to explore the underside of his city - and realizing something is very, very wrong in the very structure of the universe when memories don't add up. Feared and then supported by his wife (Jennifer Connelly as she just started becoming a superstar), helped at times by an amoral 'psychatrist' who has a lot more up his sleeve than therapy (Kiefer Sutherland acting for a change!), he is pursued by a droll detective (William Hurt) as they question the reality and realize the horror of their lives. The plot works here for several reasons, unlike much in this genre. The heroes are worth rooting for and clearly delineated against the real bad guys, and the explore-the-world theme that often overcomplicates plotlines this gets pulled along at a quick pace by at first the murder charge and then later the pursuit by the real baddies. Give the writers credit too - unlike the Matrix, the world created here doesn't borrow extensively from myth and religion and you don't need to watch five times to get the point. Cinematography is out of this world - and one of the reasons this picked up comparisons to Lang's Metropolis - and the sound track featuring a ton of brass, bass, drums and weeping violins fits. The DVD transfer has good blacks (important given that whole never see the sun thing) and I happened to actually learn things about films in general from the Ebert commentary. A good chaser of this genre after watching the last couple of Matrix films. Recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Hollywood junk
Review: This movie is pure junk. The only good thing about it is the dolby surround. After the first 5 minutes you think you are going to watch a very good sci-fi film, but minute after minute you realize this is the n-th bad, useless, meaningless Hollywood movie. Dialogues are trivial and stupid, actors are at their worst (Sutherland in particular), the plot is filled with tons of inconsistencies. The last 20 minutes are just embarassing, not to speak about the final scene, which is, well, pure happy ending Hollywood junk. It is hard to understand how anyone could compare this one with Blade Runner. Comparing this movie to Blade Runner is like comparing a McDonalds cheeseburger to a perfectly prepared Lasagna... Blade Runner is a masterpiece, this one is pure Hollywood triviality...
Rating:
Summary: Cool . . wow, like really . . . cool
Review: cool. Sorry i can't type because I have no teeth!
Rating:
Summary: Ahem...
Review: Well, where do I start...? The drop-down menu asked me how I rate the DVD... and the truth is that THE DVD SUCKS!!!! Don't get me wrong now, the movie is amazing, and I wholly agree with Roger Ebert when he says that this is one of the few original sci-fi movies of the past 2-3 decades. However, as may be inferred from the title, it is also a very dark movie - and I don't mean the storyline or the action. So what does New Line Cinema do with it? Ah! they make it even darker in the transfer, so that most of the scenes consist of a disembodied face or faces floating on a uniformly BLACK background! Thanks! Also thanks for the idiotic cardboard case! I simply refuse to believe that it is easier or cheaper to make them than the standard-issue plastic cases; the only difference is that cardboard _feels_ cheap, and is easily ruined so that in 3-5 months of use you end up with a spongy piece of junk, which has GOT to be the reason why they decided to package this brilliant movie that way! Way to treat your "Platinum Series", New Line Cinema. I'm waiting for the Special Edition, where you may consider packaging the disc in a paper sleeve and throw in a few bugs and transfer artifacts. P.S. And would anyone care to enlighten me as to why is it a double-sided DVD with ALL THE SAME THINGS on each side?
Rating:
Summary: Would make a great double feature with "The Truman Show"
Review: This is a near-great movie, with fantastic production values and decent acting. What keeps it from being among the truly greats is its somewhat trite mind-control storyline. The consensus rating of 4.5 stars is about right; l gave it five because Amazon does not allow half-star ratings. "Dark City" would make a great double-feature with "The Truman Show," also released in 1998. Both movies deal with manipulated realities, and Dark City's Shell Beach, which John Murdoch is so eager to find, is a dead ringer for the idealized town that Truman Burbank is trying to escape from! PS: Amazon's listing for "Dark City" notes that people who bought it also bought 12 Monkeys, Donnie Darko and Blade Runner. I am one of those people (I own all three, although I didn't buy them from Amazon) and "Dark City" is definitely in the same general quadrant!
Rating: 
Summary: Impressive, Dark Sci-Fi Thriller
Review: If you're into the darker side of sci-fi, you will probably enjoy this foray into pseudo-reality. Directed by Alex Proyas (The Crow), this was somewhat of a sleeper film that encouraged viewers to question their reality a full year before Matrix-mania hit the silver screen. Although the film lacks the action or pizzaz of The Matrix, certain parallels between the two films are inevitable due to the aspect of humans being controlled by an outside force (in this case, a race of aliens inhabiting the bodies of deceased humans) and not even being aware of it. The visual feel of the film is totally different from the Matrix, however, as Proyas takes chooses a low-key, seedy art-deco look for his film as opposed to the Matrix's brighter, monochromatic post-modern aura. Some relatively big names participate in the cast, although curiously, not in the lead role. Relative unknown Rufus Sewell plays the lead role effectively although not spectacularly, while William Hurt, a pre-Beautiful Mind Jennifer Connelly, and a pre-24 Kiefer Sutherland round out the cast in this well-written and directed feature. Although the situations are about as far removed from reality as one can get, the viewer empathizes with the main character's confusion and rejoices in the revelation that he has the ability to liberate captive humanity from its oppressors. A fine film, and one worth a repeat viewing now and again.
Rating:
Summary: A film that was ahead of it's time........
Review: I have always found this movie to be somewhat fascinating. It came out in 1998. Long before Neo ever found out he was "The One". When this film came out, director Alex Proyas was hot on the heels of his first film, The Crow. It was a gigantic hit. Every advertisement for Dark City had "from the director of The Crow" in it. Obviously the suits at New Line wanted people to go see this because they liked The Crow. Well folks, this film is not even in the same ballpark as The Crow. It invented it's own ballpark. Writing a review for a film like this is quite difficult. To praise the movie and tell why I liked it, might give away some key plot points and ruin some twists for you. I will never do that in any review. I will say that after seeing this again, years after 'The Matrix' came out, I can't believe Alex Proyas didn't call the Wochowski brothers and demand some royalties. Basically this film has a simplified Matrix plot with a lot less action and more characterization. John Murdoch (Rufus Sewell) wakes up in a bathtub and can't remember anything. He can't even remember his name. As he is leaving the hotel he is staying at, the desk clerk tells him he left his wallet at a local diner. He goes to pick it up, finds out he has some sort of telekinetic powers and runs into a few creepy, pale looking guys. They try to capture him, but he escapes. He then finds out he has a wife (Jennifer Connelly, my DREAM woman) and is wanted for murdering some prostitutes. A psychiatrist (Kiefer Sutherland) is trying to find him along with a police detective (William Hurt). The city that these people live in, is a very dark city. There is never any sunlight. You rarely see any water, and only indoors. And people can't remember much from their past. You, as a viewer, go along with John Murdoch on his journey do uncover his past, the secrets of the city, and who are these beings that are running the town. That last paragraph really doesn't do the plot justice. It's much more complex and interesting than it sounds. Like I said before, if I told you why then I would give away a lot of the movie. After seeing this film again, I can now look back on it and know it was ahead of it's time. There was a ton of hype surrounding the release of this flick back in '98. Big expectations were placed upon the film due to Proyas' first film, 'The Crow'. And like most movies that are ahead of their time, it didn't do that well. Most people, like myself at the time, didn't really understand it. Now, in 2004, after seeing 'The Matrix' films, you will see MANY similarities and will probably enjoy the picture quite a bit. Just remember, that 'Dark City' came out first. As you are watching this, don't knock it because it seems like a Matrix rip-off. It's actually the other way around. If you like interesting Sci-Fi films in the vein of Blade Runner, you will dig this movie. Since most of the planet has seen The Matrix by now, it might be a kick for some people to look back to 1998 and see where the "great" Wochowski brothers ripped their idea off from. You can probably find this at your local Target for around $10. It's well worth it. Being a older DVD, you won't find many useful special features here. It's got a couple commentaries. One is from Roger Ebert, which I found quite interesting. You rarely hear a film critic do a commentary. There a cast & crew bios, filmographies, and a trailer. There is also a comparison piece where it compares the similarities to this film and Metropolis. Not great supplements but for $10, you can't go wrong.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best modern Sci Fi Films
Review: This 1998 movie starring Keifer Sutherland, Rufus Sewell, Jennifer Conelly and some other people I don't remember is a great movie. It is one of those movies you see where you need to watch it with an open mind. Because that is the best way to enjoy it. It might be hard to grasp for some but for fans of Science Fiction movies this movie is one of the best Sci Fi movies in recent memory. I think this movie will remind some of the Matrix for how it questions reality. Also if you are expecting action galore, then you are in for a suprise because there is very little action but the plot is very rich. The DVD has some nice special features and the menus are nicely animated. This is a DVD that was released in 2001 (doesn't seem that long ago) and it holds up good with its features and the flashy menus of DVD's you see out today. Keifer Sutherland gives a great performance as his portrayal of the doctor and the ending to this movie is one that will not be forgotten. It isn't the Keifer Sutherland you've come to know from 24 as the hard as nails Jack Bauer. But none the less it is a great role for him. The other actors fill in nicely also. My only gripe with this movie is that it didn't really seem too long. To conclude, check out this movie if you are a science fiction fan or a Keifer Sutherland fan. I know it has a decent following but I find it to be very underrated and I think it will be a greater cult classic in time.
| 
