'Transcendence' could have been a great film. It has great ideas and as a film about philosophical questions it is fascinating. The problem with 'Transcendence' is that unfortunately it lacks a coherence between an actual plot and these great sci-fi concepts and the conundrums it proposes.

'Transcendence' is very much in the shadow of Christopher Nolan. Wally Pfister, Nolan's brilliant cinematographer, is making his directorial debut here and there are no complaints on what he does here from me. 'Transcendence' looks beautiful and has moments of great epic scope. Pfister does a great job in staging thematic progression in his film. The movie becomes much larger as our main character Dr.Will Caster loses his humanity. The finale in the lab is incredible to look at and compare with the smaller more intimate scenes when Caster is suffering from his fatal illness.

The acting is top notch too and that was my worry going into the film. Depp is particularly good. He does a very good job in engaging the audience. Of course the major question the audience has is "Is this being Will Caster? Or just a program?" Depp never lets you know and plays it very close to the chest. He can be extremely artificial and frightening but his initial warmness in the beginning of the film makes us want to believe that his character is still alive in there. Rebecca Hall is very good too. Her character is integral to the film and makes up for some of the shortcomings. Evelyn Caster's love for her husband is what makes the film a human story instead of just a philosophical allegory. Hall has a sincerity and warmth that a movie like this needs. These qualities in her performance make the tragedy of losing humanity all the more poignant

While Pfister's direction is brilliant even as I feel as though the script is pretty lackluster in actually creating a plot. Here is another Nolan comparison I feel is inevitable. I thought a lot about 'Inception' as I watched 'Transcendence'. Both are films about the human consciousness and both relay their ideas through the trappings of an action film. 'Inception' has momentum and the action comes from character and driving the plot forward. 'Transcendence' doesn't have that. The action sequences and thrills feel completely out of place. The grand finale consists of a battle between Caster's sentient being and anti-technology terrorists and I feel as though the film doesn't quite earn this. The movie could have done a great deal more in developing these antagonists. Their motivations are strong and certainly understandable but these terrorists aren't characters. They merely serve as a living breathing antagonistic idea serving as a character. One character I felt was particularly weak was Paul Bettany's Max Waters who sort of serves as the middle piece between Caster and the anti-technology line. He initially helps Caster plug himself into the computer but immediately regrets his actions. This character and his convictions could have been a catalyst in creating a meaningful final conflict. He's just too underdeveloped as a human being. Ideas aren't characters. 'Transcendence' has some very interesting ideas but the script doesn't quite create human beings who deliver them.

'Transcendence' is a very good movie. It could have been a great one. The characters and plot suffer from the same artificiality the characters in the film fear. The ideas though are interesting enough to sustain and make the film a worth while experience. Don't believe all the bad reviews.

The movie is obviously not everyones cup of tea. It's very subtle and its very understated performances leave room for speculation most of the time, which when resolved might disappoint some viewers. It doesn't make this less appealing for those who like to have food for thought, rather than just some flashy action scenes and thrilling set pieces/scenes with no substance.

There is a thrilling aspect here and things do happen. But it might not be what people expect and therefor the result will probably disappoint. Nevertheless, the movie itself is more than a great ride. It's an experience, which asks and answers question. Not all of them, but enough to make you think (if you want to) and wonder how you'd react in a similar situation ... and would that be the "right" choice?

I'm glad that some of the reviews that I had read, even from fairly reputable and reliable sources like Bluray.com, were ultimately not accurate in their description of this film. For example, that site made it seem like this was a rather shallow movie that basically was about an Artificial Intelligence that typically goes amok. That is not true at all and completely misses the point.

Now that I've just seen it, I can understand why they named it as they did; this wasn't just some usual commercially catchy phrase to sell a film, but after all is said and done (and viewed) that SPECIFICALLY was actually the primary theme of the film. It will be a little difficult to 'talk' about this aspect of it without entering Spoiler territory, which I do not wish to do.

There are deeper themes running through this film than one may think at first. Without being specific, the final few scenes reveal that 'Transcendence' is indeed what is going on here. So, first and foremost, PLEASE do not be put off by those who say that this is just a shallow Sci Fi film about a machine taking over; if you like serious Science fiction that is done very well, then you should like this film.

One caution though... My impression is that this movie is the moral antithesis of a film like, say, 'CHILDREN OF MEN', which I also just watched recently before this one. That film too is very beautifully shot and technically well done; AND, it also would be considered very serious, adult Science Fiction. But, I personally ***ENJOYED*** this one quite a bit more; the themes and mood of it resonated a LOT more with me personally than the other film. I just mention these particular films as a comparison of two well done, modern Sci Fi films, but with almost TOTALLY opposite philosophies behind them. Whereas 'CoM' is what I would call much more gritty and 'Realistic' and even quite Nihilistic in it's tone, where basically just about bloody EVERYONE dies, Mankind is shown to be nasty, selfish, and brutal, and with the supposed exception of it's last minute ending, completely without any hope at all. This film though, in my lowly and wretched opinion, is MUCH more subtle and enlightened in the themes that it is emphasizing, and it may not be until the very end when you fully realize what the point actually is (I'll give you a hint... It has to do with one of the last things Rebecca Hall says) Don't get me wrong, BOTH films are very well done, but I just wanted to show the extreme contrast in tone, so that it might help you to choose whether you would want to watch this one.

Also, quite frankly, it is just a great film. It's a lot of fun, there is excellent suspense where you do NOT know what is going to happen next or whether what is going on is truly Good or Evil...

So, as I mention in a lot of my reviews: If you are a bit on the cynical side and are the kind of person who likes their entertainment, whatever the Genre, to be of the more brutally 'Realistic' type, and you don't care for more imaginative or Idealistic films, then this one may not do much for you. BUT... IF you do appreciate films where the underlying themes may cause you to question your own attitudes towards Hope and Faith (and I DON'T mean anything Religious at all - Just Faith or Hope in things or people in general) THEN you might, as I did, really find this film quite refreshing and entertaining.