|
Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/feat/archives/2006/12/29/2003342577 The question of who's who fails to excite With nods to 'Memento' and 'Reservoir Dogs,' 'Unknown' might have been a better film if it knew or cared what is was on about
By Jules Quartly
Much of the action is set in a dilapidated warehouse, in the desert, where Jim Caviezel's character regains consciousness to find one guy strapped to a chair and another, who has been shot, handcuffed to a railing. Two more men appear soon after. Some mysterious gas that causes retrograde amnesia has knocked them all out, so they are able to function but cannot remember who they are or what happened. Conveniently, none of the characters are carrying ID. Or else they forget to look for it. Though they have tools and two phones they are unable to get out of the warehouse. The characters then discover that some of them are kidnappers and responsible for the situation they find themselves in while the others are victims. Since they don't know who's who they cannot trust each other. As an existential problem it's fairly interesting and similar in some aspects to Sartre's No Exit or a play by Samuel Beckett. Since they have no memories, they are clean slates. The situation, however artificially contrived, asks these questions of identity: Is it the product of experience? A result of nature? Or do you choose who you want to be at every moment?
The film borrows heavily from Memento, with nods to Quentin Tarantino and Reservoir Dogs, but whereas the originals engage the imagination and are satisfying on many levels, this anemic imitation is full of cheap frills that fail to please. It's no wonder Unknown played at so few theaters in the US and quickly became a video rental shelf filler. The surprise ending is that other critics have been kinder about the movie.
|