Clones: The Recreator Chronicles

source: Cloned: The Recreator Chronicles

*regarding clones* Cloned Craig: You're here, we're here. I have to rely on faith there's a reason. Original Tracy: But aren't you even curious? I mean, it's not like this happens every day. Cloned Craig: I should hope not. Otherwise, things would get pretty dicey down at the DMV. Cloned: The Recreator Chronicles begins on an island with Frank Miller (John de Lancie, Star Trek: The Next Generation) and his wife Elizabeth (Laura Moss) fixing to call it a night in their beautiful woodland cabin. The raging, midnight thunderstorm in the Adirondack Mountains produces a lightning bolt which strikes the home's septic tank outside. This reignites an old experiment by a scientist who used to live there. We reach the opening titles and are introduced to Tracy (Stella Maeve, The Runaways, Accused at 17), Craig (Alexander Nifong, Pretty Little Liars, Glee), and Derek (J. Mallory McCree, We Need to Talk about Kevin) on their way to the island for a hiking and camping trip the next day. Tracy has to use the bathroom after the long canoe ride to the island and has issues with letting loose outside. Naturally, she finds Mr. and Mrs. Miller's house. What happened the previous night (clones of Mr. and Mrs. Miller killing their originals) is intercut with Tracy making her way inside the empty house. Eventually, Tracy, Craig, and Derek all go to the house to use the bathroom, shower, and hang out, since the Millers seem to be gone. The Millers' clones return, the three teenagers flee, and a chase ensues in the woods. It's there where we learn of the teenagers' clones, which save them during all the madness. Shot in the beautiful Adirondack Mountains, Cloned: The Recreator Chronicles is an independent film with spectacular production quality (you'd think they had Hollywood's vast resources). According to director Gregory Orr, the idea began with the concept of three kids going into the woods and six of them coming out. Where does one take it from there? Any number of directions; and a director of less experience and talent may have failed where Orr succeeded. Where do Orr and his cast and crew succeed? In taking a well-written script and translating it to an interesting movie. It's as simple as that. Yes, the concept of cloning isn't exactly an original one, but it's used effectively here to drive home the movie's underlying theme of "replacement." Like most good sci-fi, it uses a scientific concept (one of which may be completely viable in the future) to assist in telling a story relevant to today's society. While we're not yet being replaced by clones of ourselves (or genetically altered, superior humans in general), you don't have to look far and wide to see people losing their jobs because of faster computers and automated systems. Cloned looks at this from more of a bio-tech perspective than a completely technological one, but its message isn't lost. Stella Maeve, Alexander Nifong, and J. Mallory McCree make for a great ensemble. They also demonstrate good range. It is a pleasure to see John de Lancie again, as well, since I imagine a portion of this movie's fan base will remember him from his iconic role on the various incarnations of Star Trek. Overall, I'd highly recommend the movie, not just for its concept and message, but more importantly because of its entertainment value.

I'm not giving away the complete ending, but Derek clearing wasn't the clone at the end. That was totally made clear in the house and woods after. So then why did he have the bandages on his arm? Obviously, either a case of bad editing or they changed the ending and missed that. If he was really supposed to be the clone, then they screwed up even more because it's anything but obvious, especially at the end at the hardware store. Totally not the clone character, therefore the clone is dead and the bandages are a bad mistake. And what the hell was up with the stuffed beaver with glasses? How many of those things are these on and near Baxter Island? There's a shot of one in the house along with deer. And then there's one in the hardware store by the door. Why? Is that some inside joke that we aren't supposed to pay attention to? The movie wasn't very good. It wasn't scary or even creepy really. It was actually kind of boring and the issue with the bandages just made things worse for me at the end.

Pros: Not boring -- holds your attention throughout - good acting - interesting plot, some insightful questions - great ending which leaves the possibility for more in the future - john de lancie - beautiful location (although at least one shot was green screened i noticed, a shot on the lake that was very obvious, but thats the only one that comes to mind) - septic tanks - overall pretty well written Cons: wish it was a little bit longer - killed off john de lancie too quick (never a good thing; were used to him being immortal) - a few bad jokes or lines or dialogue that made me cringe Overall: If you're a fan of the genre, add it to your collection or rent it.

RECREATOR has potential but turns into a general mish-mash of ideas with way too much of the "teenagers running in the woods" type scenes to recommend it. It's a dimly lit adventure in which a trio of teenagers visit a remote island and take shelter in a mysterious installation when a storm beckons. Pretty soon they find themselves at the mercy of their own clones, which are set to destroy them. Cloning has always been an intriguing idea in cinema but the idea here is workable at best. Indeed so little is made of the originality of the premise that any random monster or human villain could have been the antagonist. Too much of it feels like a teen horror flick while the thought-provoking sci-fi angle of the story is swept aside. It doesn't help that the production values have led to a dim and gloomy looking movie with non-existent special effects. The thinly-written characters are rather trying and despite the best efforts of the actors involved none of them are remotely likable, so you end up having no interest in what happens come the end. It's a pity.

When I watched "Recreator" it was without having heard anything about it prior to watching it. No impressions, no taints, no spoilers. The cover to the movie looked interesting, so it caught my attention. The story is about three friends, Tracy (played by Stella Maeve), Craig (played by Alexander Nifong) and Derek (played by J. Mallory-McCree), who goes camping on an island, when they run into a very mysterious couple that owns a cabin on the island. The island once was the home to a scientist who dabbled in cloning, and things on the island take a turn for the worse. I will say that the story in itself was interesting, although there were some major plot holes here and there. For example, how did the three friends get cloned? And how come the cloning process is that fast? As for the acting, well I think they had some good enough names to the cast list, and the three leading actors were actually doing alright jobs. Most memorable in the movie was Alexander Nifong, in my opinion. The movie was nicely shot though, lots of good camera work. And the dialogue was fair. The movie moved ahead at a good, steady pace, and there weren't really any overly dull moments. However, for a thriller, the movie was sort of anti-climatic, as it didn't really build up much suspense, much less peak in thrilling manners. "Recreator" is good entertainment, although the ending was quite predictable once you are let in on what is really going on. "Recreator" is well worth a watch if you like movies that aren't overly realistic.

When compared to the big budget Hollywood stuff indies just can't compete, they don't have the budget or the names. But it all depends what you're looking for. For me this was a fun movie. Compared to other indies I think the movie is very well done. The actors were good, maybe not award winning but good enough that it was easy to watch. God I've seen some horrible acting in indies and compared to those these guys were Oscar winners! The story was original and so what if things were unbelievable, that's why it's called fiction right? The main thing I will say is it was an enjoyable movie, kept me interested to the end and got me involved in both the story and characters. I think that's pretty good! I give it a 7/10 easily.

Out of the movies I have rented recently this was one I didn't have high hopes for. The kids wanted it, I got it, we watched it, and I was really surprised at how entertaining it was. Its more of a scifi thriller than horror, I think, but it had little horror elements in there too. It definitely wasn't a boring movie and when anyone died, it was at least for a reason rather than the typical knock-one-off-at-a-time for no reason approach. the movie actually brings up some interesting issues with cloning and science and brings the matter to the audience in a fun way. The young actors in the movie did a fantastic job especially considering their roles as themselves and their counter parts. the raange is there and was a pleasure to see. They top it off with a great little twist at the end, one some MIGHT have seen coming but was absolutely appreciated and leaves the door open for more (though the movie stands good on its own too). 8/10

This is one of those movies you watch because you have seen everything else. However, there is some entertainment value to this movie. The bad lines that makes you chuckle, poor acting, and fight scenes that border on comical at times kept me watching. The movie did hold my attention. I kept hoping for an explanation of key events at some point, but it never came, and made the whole thing fall flat for me. I was trying to figure out the direction of the movie because it all seemed so muddled. By the end I felt like the whole point was like one of those Saturday morning cartoon specials, the silly ones that slap you in the face with some kind of moral message. Their was no explanation of main events, and the characters reacted in such unnatural ways, one might mistake them for the clones. I would not watch it again, but I've seen worse.

First of all, I went into this film expecting a b-movie not a major motion picture costing hundreds of millions, and so my high rating reflects the fact that for a b-movie, it exceeded my expectations and I can say that I enjoyed the experience. That's rare. Going over some of the criticisms posted by others on this board, I do agree with some of the points. In fact, one thing I didn't see anyone point out was how the clones would retain the memories of the originals (did I miss something? if it was explained, it must've been a quick throwaway line). I also think that having the real Tracy go from "No, let's negotiate with the clones" to suddenly chasing after her clone with bloodlust was a rather abrupt change in her personality that isn't explained well (it seems to have happened more to serve the purposes of the finale getting us to root for her clone). Now it's ironic that "Q" should be in this movie as I think if people can focus more on the character exploration that happens in the story rather than some of the plot holes, they'd enjoy this movie more. Star Trek TNG often requires its fans to make huge leaps in terms of suspending disbelief (e.g. the ability to speak to a new alien race in perfect English with no learning time for their universal translators, or some babbletech solution that saves the ship from blowing up). There's the scaffolding that sets up the core of the story e.g. crew flies into a wormhole landing them in a parallel universe where they meet their mirror-evil twins; then there's the actual core story e.g. what would Riker do if he found out there was a duplicate of him stranded for years and this version of him is someone he ends up resenting? The scaffolding is often where the plot holes and illogic lie; the core is where I think the story really succeeds or dies. TNG fans are used to putting aside the unbelievability of the "scaffolding" so they can enjoy the focus point of the story and the actions of the characters. I'd ask that people who watch this movie also try to do the same. Even the Twilight Zone had some ludicrous scaffolding let's not forget (man hops onto a train and finds himself transported into his own past when he disembarks)... yet Zone stories are nonetheless classics. I enjoyed seeing these characters confront their twins and the choices that they ultimately make for their own survival, especially Craig, who we see at the end, can be as cold as his clone. I look forward to seeing some more stories in this universe (it was fairly obvious that a sequel was being set up given the missing clone scientist). While I and I'm sure many viewers, could predict the ending when it came to clone-Tracy and Craig ending up together, the rest of the tale did nicely zig-zag here and there and kept me watching.