*Note: This review pertains to the Director’s Cut*

[7.0/10] I don’t know what it is about the nineties that gave us this type of film. Whether it’s *Dark City*, or *City of Lost Children*, or even *The Matrix*, it seems like that decade provided unique opportunities for reality-challenging, green-tinted art deco, chosen one stories about breaking through an oppressive, kafkaesque system. There’s the same grimy trippiness, the same sort of heady themes wrapped in a quasi-blockbuster package, and the same sense of dreamlike, steampunk meets futurism designs at play.

*Dark City* is a solid rendition of the form, leaning a bit more into the noir aspects before diving headlong into science fiction, but I couldn’t help seeing the bits and pieces other films borrowed from it, or the way that later works played in the same space. If you take *Dark City* and subtract *City of Lost Children*, you basically end up with *Memento* and the same sort of “Who are we really?”-questioning, cinematic identity crisis. If you throw in some secret identities and take away a bit of sci-fi, you get what comes off like a spiritual successor to the Tim Burton Batman films. If you want to focus more on the normal guy stuck in an abnormal world, you can default to *Brazil*.

And if you’re interested in another work featuring maze-like imagery, individuals having their identities swapped out and tampered with, growing realizations about that ethically-questionable walled garden, co-written by one of the screenwriters of *The Dark Knight*, you can even pop over to HBO and watch *Westworld*.

With all that shared DNA, what makes *Dark City* memorable and distinctive? The production design and special effects for one. Even twenty years later, where CGI is omnipresent and representing just about anything on screen is within the realm of the possible, there’s a fair amount of “how did they do that?” at play here. The titular metropolis morphs and shifts and transmografies itself as the film’s villains rearrange and reorchestrate it in a wild, urban ballet. Nothing sells the otherworldliness of this place better than those dramatic visual flourishes amid the film’s big reveal.

But even when the movie isn’t wowing you with its effects, the look and feel of this peculiar city grabs you from the earliest moments of the film. There too, there’s touches of outsized design and decor that Tim Burton would popularize in the 1990s and that successors like *Sin City* would pick up. But the quasi-futuristic noir aesthetic, the brutalist intricacies of the Strangers’ home base, the occasional lurid greens and other flashes of color buried in the sturm und drang give the film a particular character even if you were to watch it on mute.

There’s also plenty of interesting thoughts going on under the hood. At base, the film asks probing questions about how we define who we are, the extent to which our identities are mutable, and how we make meaning in a world constructed without it. The notion of extraterrestrial beings toying with our minds and our environment as one grand study of the human soul, something they claim to lack, creates plenty of opportunities to dramatize those queries in a fashion that only science fiction can achieve.

And yet, the film slowly but surely breaks down after its big reveal. The times when John Murdock and others grapple with the senselessness of their existence captures a certain sense of existentialist ennui and anxiety. Once the truth is unveiled, there’s plenty of faux-portentous dialogue trying to unpack it. But from there on out, the film becomes more and more a mere vehicle for those ideas and an ambitious but familiar actioner than a propulsive and original story.

In the end, John Murdock is the chosen one. He breaks free from his oppressors and uses his powers to defeat them, and a new day dawns. Sure, at a certain level of generality you can break down pretty much every film into broad tropes. But *Dark City* mixes fairly standard noir and chosen one story beats, and hopes you won’t notice because you’re too wrapped up in the movie’s exquisite texture. That texture is fantastic, but at a certain point it’s hard to discern why we should care about these people.

Aside from the costuming, the styling, and the world they inhabit, none of the film’s central personalities are particularly memorable. Rufus Sewell’s John Murdoch is the standard issue nineties film protagonist, with little beyond his superpowers to distinguish him. Jennifer Connelly is the usual femme fatale; William Hurt is the usual gumshoe, and the cadre of bald, creepy-looking alien inhabitants are memorable for their look and demeanor, but not for any particular sort of internal life, even the one who steals John’s memories. Only Keifer Sutherland really stands out, and that’s mostly because he goes full ham as the quisling human assisting his alien oppressors. It’s a choice, but not necessarily a good one.

That’s the major problem with *Dark City*. For all that outstanding design-work and all the intriguing ideas the film’s infused with, it struggles to tie any of it to characters worth investing in. The dialogue is leaden; the performances are broad and unconvincing, and the story is a big ball of mush rolling down a grassy hill rather than a clear, building narrative. Part of that sludge-y story sense helps contribute to the intentionally disorienting qualities of the film, putting the audience in the same shoes as its protagonist. But it doesn't stop when all of the screenwriters’ cards are on the table, suggesting it was an accidental result rather than a deliberate choice, or at least something they didn’t know when to stop.

The aesthetics alone are reason enough to stop by *Dark City*. The philosophical underpinnings of its Allegory of the Cave-like tale provide plenty of reasons to chew on the film’s implications. But those ideas often feel unfinished and not fully realized, wrapped up in people and plot points that can’t quite support those lofty themes nor justify the narrative on their own. The great elements of the film -- its look, its feel, and its ideas -- just barely outweigh the nuts and bolts narrative and character choices that leave it as something a little lesser than its influences, contemporaries, or successors.

Alex Proyas, director of 1994's similarly moody action gloomer _The Crow_, brings us this bleak vision of stifling, gothic noir in a bottled city that's never seen the sun. Super stylish and visually ambitious, it's a film with a boatload of high-concept revelations and almost no sense of chill. Even the editing refuses to take breaks, with jump cuts and extreme close-ups roughly every second-and-a-half for the entire duration. That gives the whole picture a feel of frantic energy, which suits the amnesiac protagonist in his confused quest for answers, but can be exhausting for the viewer. Sometimes we just need a few beats to let the message sink in.

Then again, when you've got as much thematic ammunition as Proyas does in _Dark City_, maybe such intellectual force-feedings are preferable to a four-hour running time. It's a motion picture that often transcends the value of its components, succeeding in spite of its missteps and shortcomings. Many key elements take the form of guilty pleasures, far better in practice than they have any right to be, from the _Nosferatu_-esque pale, thin men in long black coats to the wacky, _Akira_-influenced psychokinetic duels near the end. That carries over to the not-quite-polished special effects, too, which occasionally show their seams and stitches but, somehow, feel more honest and appreciable for it.

There's a lot to soak in here, maybe too much for one movie, but I admire the effort and thoroughly enjoyed the end product. Would-be viewers should be ready to think and pay attention, lest they find themselves washed away by the raging torrent of ideas.

Did you enjoy The Matrix? What if I tell you there was another movie which came right about the same time, and it tackles similar themes altogether differently? If that rouses your curiosity then Dark City is for you.

A man wakes up without knowing his past and does not understand the time and place he has just gained consciousness and is a murder suspect. This is pretty much a nice boilerplate but as the story unfolds the rabbit hole goes much deeper. The science-fiction elements come in quite early as we are introduced to a species called the Strangers and their aim to understand humans.

The cast is well done. The protagonist, Rufus Sewell was unknown to me and I almost mistook him for Ray Liotta. Not being very well known works in his favour in this story as his narrative of just another man caught in something he doesn't understand becomes much more believable. Unfortunately, he is not the best in the acting department though. That title goes to William Hurt or Jennifer Connelly. I have always liked her and even in this film, she looks stunning as usual.

Although as I said above, the concept is fairly similar to The Matrix which released one year after, the motives are quite different. The Matrix talks about the war between the man and machine, whereas Dark City tackles a much sinister philosophical curveball.

> "Or are we, in fact, more than the sum of our memories?"

This is going to last with me for some time. [spoiler]We see the manipulation of memories throughout the movie. It is an attempt to see what makes us human. As the doctor puts it, "It is our capacity of individuality".[/spoiler] That is why a farmer's son can be a soldier, a carpenter's daughter can be a musician. As a concept, this could be expanded upon in drama too. For a science-fiction setting, the movie made the best use of these lines. But there could be a lot of more to unravel here and a good director could fashion any genre out of this. These lines were a highlight for me in the film.

Considering the 90's, the CGI towards the end leaves you wanting for more, and that we know was possible just a year later, but at 27M this falls under a modest budget film. The ending sequence could have been cut short a bit considering the budget, but that does not dilute the overall impact of the film.

With all the exposition and a conclusive ending, this doesn't fall in the mindfuck category, but still, it keeps a few lingering thought behind as the credits roll. Recommended.

**_Atmospheric, dark mixture of film noir, comic book horror and sci-fi_**

A man (Rufus Sewell) wakes up one night to great mysteries: There's a dead prostitute nearby that he gets blamed for murdering, but he can't remember much of anything. Several people seek him in the ensuing night hours of the big city: a somewhat mad doctor (Kiefer Sutherland), a detective (William Hurt), his estranged wife (Jennifer Connelly), an alluring woman of the night (Melissa George) and a group of pale bald males in black trench coats. He tries to piece together reality and escape the perpetually dark city.

Alex Proyas' "Dark City" (1998) takes place entirely on elaborate shadowy sets with CGI backgrounds, etc. The first time I tried to watch it I gave up after 20 minutes. But, if you're in the right mode, it's a cool sci-fi flick with elements of film noir and mystery/horror that is thought-provoking and never devolves into predictable blockbuster dreck.

The revelations at the end are well done. In addition, Sewell makes for a top-rate protagonist and William Hurt is effective. Many complain about Kiefer's offbeat performance, but the role called for it. If you don't like it blame the writers.

On the female front you have Jennifer Connelly when she was still curvy and ravishing (by the early 2000s she lost too much weight and thus her alluring appeal). Meanwhile Melissa George is gorgeous in her small role as a call girl.

My interest in "Dark City" was spurred by Roger Ebert's exuberant accolades. He was so impressed by the illusion of the vast scope of the city, which can be attributed to the well-done CGI backgrounds and accouterments beyond the immediate exemplary sets. Of course, this is no big deal today, but at the time it was still fairly new technology.

Some people compare "Dark City" to the more popular "The Matrix" and for good reason since they have similar themes and "The Matrix" was actually shot on some of the same sets, but that one came out over a year later in 1999. There are also similarities to "Gattaca," which debuted 4.5 months earlier in late 1997.

"The Matrix" went on to mega-success at the box office while "Dark City" floundered despite its brilliant bits. Why? For me, the characters needed fleshed-out more with increased human interest. There's some, for sure, but not enough. As such, audiences in general found the film odd, perplexing and uncompelling. However, sci-fi aficionados should eat it up.

It's superior to "Gattaca," but not as as good as "The Matrix."

The film runs 1 hour, 40 minutes, and the Director's Cut 1 minute longer; it was shot on sets in Sydney, Australia.

GRADE: B-/B

This review is of the Director's Cut.

Welcome To Shell Beach.

Dark City is directed by Alex Proyas who also co-writes the screenplay with Leon Dobbs and David S. Goyer. It stars Rufus Sewell, William Hurt, Jennifer Connelly, Kiefer Sutherland, Richard O'Brien and Ian Richardson. Music is by Trevor Jones and cinematography by Dariusz Wolski.

A man wakes up in a grotty hotel bathroom and upon finding a dead girl in another room he realises he has no recollection of who he is or how he got there...

There's a lot of Blade Runner fans still out there waiting for that film's sexual partner to happen along. What many of them don't realise is that Alex Proyas has already made that movie. More than a cult film yet still criminally ignored in certain circles, Dark City, by way of poor box office and studio interference, never got off to the best of starts. The problems were compounded with the release of The Matrix the following year, where that film's popularity, and its sci-fi linkage to Dark City, led many to think that Proyas' movie was a Matrix rip-off; pushing it further (unjustly) back in the sci-fi noir pantheon. Fact is is that Dark City homages much great cinema from previous years, but it has influenced much that followed, with Inception fans asked to note that Nolan himself was taking notes...

Stolen Memories.

Dark City is a feverish film noir dressed up in stunning sci-fi clothes. The amazing visuals have led many to state that it's a film with much style and little substance, something which Proyas has fiercely argued against; and he's right to do so, especially once his own preferred director's cut became available to view. The story is a complex one, pulsing with human characters living in a world where there is no daylight, with their respective memories scratchy to say the least, it quickly becomes evident that a creepy alien race are overseeing things. The aliens, wonderfully attired in black trench-coats and hats to match, and aided by Kiefer Sutherland's shifty - stammer affected - doctor, have special powers and their reasons for being here unfold in deftly constructed stages. One man stands in their way, John Murdoch (Sewell), but he is an olde noir amnesia sufferer supreme and his battle to unravel what is going on is our task as well.

Do you think about the past much Mrs. Murdoch?

The search for identity and the truth is what propels the picture forward. Murdoch in his confused state is not only at the center of an existential dilemma, he's also the focal point for a serial killer murder investigation. This also as he tries to come to terms with matters of the heart, it seems he has a beautiful wife (Connelly), and that she may have cheated on him? And why is he drawn to the place known as Shell Beach? A simple narrative hidden by visual splendours? Don't make me laugh! But hell you have to say the visual look and atmosphere of the design is very much attention grabbing.

I have become the monster you were intended to be.

With the film noir characters in place; Hurt's dour sleuth, Sewell's amnesiac and Connelly's sultry torch singer, Proyas brings German expressionism in abundance whilst overseeing an eye splintering neo-noir colour palette. Greens and reds often ping from the screen, while the murky browns and golds down on the angular city streets pave the way for changed perceptions and revelations of plotting. There are reoccurring motifs throughout, with swirls and circles integral to mood and meanings, while at the mid-point we then get to see Proyas' tricks of the trade, where the city shifts and moves to create a meeting of Metropolis and Gotham, all as the humans slumber away. Watch those clocks folks...

You know how I was supposed to feel. That person isn't me... never was. You wanted to know what it was about us that made us human. Well, you're not going to find it...

Acting performances are hardly top of the line (Sutherland especially irritates more than he impresses), but they actually don't need to be, and they all look terrific in their respective dressage. The story is of course bonkers and one which I myself found was much better whilst consuming mucho alcohol! (I watched it three times in 48 hours!) While Proyas himself is on record as saying it's a far from flawless picture. Again he is right, but he also knows that his film is still under valued and in need of more to seek out his director's cut. The late Roger Ebert championed Dark City with much gusto, and he provides very good input on the DVD, much like Roger I have to say, this is a unique and fabulous sci-fi noir experience. A film in fact fit to watch alongside Blade Runner; And I do not say that lightly. 9/10