I was one of the enthusiasts of the original. It seemed a clever solution to one of filmdoms most persistent challenges: how to stage drama.
Noir is our most basic cinematic model. The core of noir is a universe where capricious fate toys with human destiny in cruel and arbitrary ways. “Cube” cleverly merged a modern noir vision with a solution to the staging problem.
Then along came the sequel which had no understanding of what made the original appearing and important. They turned it into a conventional government plot thriller with all the baggage that carries. Along the way, they introduced some pseudomathematical notions that were bizarre.
If there is anyone on the planet that would know how such a government program would work, it would be me. I wrote a comment about this which triggered a couple dozen messages among the editor of a film magazine, myself and the original author of “Hypercube.”
As it happens, the original script was more true to what made the first one work, but it was coopted and changed by the same hack behind this.
So once again, we have some sort of evil experiment by some agency. In the last one, that was actually a major weapons company. The one clever idea is similar to “Saw,” where we watch watchers watch. This folding is supposed to impute an evil to us that we see in the maniacal Dennis Hopper impersonator.
One of the intermediate watchers draws comics. This is textbook folding. Not clever, not worthy.
Posted in 2005
Ted’s Evaluation — 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.