Excellent, Without a doubt!!

brilliant actors, brilliant editing

Best movie of this year hands down!

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

This is one of the most thought provoking movies I have ever watched. After watching it, it leaves you with a feeling that something isn't right, so many questions, you may have to watch it a few time to really see it's beautiful genius. And no offense to anyone else who wrote a review, but did you really watch the movie? It's a very well thought out script, everything said and shown is there for a reason. This movie is crafted to perfection. I've never written a review before, but having read all these other reviews I feel most people are missing the true beauty of this movie. Watch it again and really think about it, it is not a popcorn spoon fed movie, it's designed to make you think, make you question. That is it's genius. SPOILER ALERT: Plot summery: The movie seems to be about a Turning test, much like Ex Machina, Joy is brought in to write a report for a high tech magazine. Where she is introduced to Adam, she makes a Rainman joke at him, personally I thought this was really rude. What is with Joy why is she so unprofessional, anyway having talked with Adam for a few minutes David laughs OMG you didn't spot he is an AI, you an expert in the field couldn't tell he is an AI and her week long report starts, shown all the gadgets they have been working on, skin, bone, eye, etc. How David has been locked away from the world working on this project since he was 19, given unlimited funding and loves that he has been given the opportunity to contribute something truly amazing to humankind. He loves his work. As the movie progresses we get the sense all is not right with Adam, he does some quirky things for a machine, and Joy goes from being impressed with the technology to a growing dislike of Adam, but does start to fall in love with David. He's sweet kind and caring and she respects his vast intelligence. This is where the relationships between the characters really comes into play. On the last day Joy and David become sexual, and this really effects Adam. So much so that it results in a fight with David running away with Joy. Adam then knocks them out and they gain consciousness in the lab, David on the table and Joy tied to a chair. This is where Adam reveals that he is a real human and it is David that is the AI. SPOILER ALERT: SPOILER ALERT: Watch the movie before reading this, but it will make you watch the movie again. Most people in the reviews comment that the twist was so easy to spot, but I strongly disagree, it is there but did anyone else really see it? It's not like 6th Sense of oh he is a ghost, now all that other stuff makes sense, wow cool twist. The twist in this movie seems to say oh Adam is not really the AI it was David. Most people think this is sloppy, there were loads of clues. But this is the beauty of this movie and also explains the extra end scene of Joy in her flat. Why is she so shocked she is pregnant? I'm not going to give away the twist, but will tell you after watching this movie carefully a few times, it is far more complex that it appears. I will however give you a clue. Rule 101 for any science is to not blindly believe anything you are told, look at the evidence. David laughs at Joy for not recognizing that Adam is an AI, they fooled her, and she spends a week writing her report. Only to be told no in fact they fooled her into believing Adam was an AI when in fact he is a human. You have to question what kind of expert in robotics can't tell if someone is machine or human for a whole week. Could anyone present a human as AI and they would pass the Turning test, it's like they have intelligence and emotion wouldn't be front page news for a tech magazine, yet she really believed Adam was an AI. This is what really got me questioning this movie. If you think that Adam revealing he is not an AI is the twist ending you would be very much mistaken. The twist is revealed in Castle's office, it's subtle, but it is there. Anyway I highly recommend this movie, it seems seriously underrated and should be viewed as a work of genius.

Is my car faster than yours? Is your phone newer than mine? Is your wife better than mine? One of those questions is not only out of line and insensible, but makes the questioner a bit of a psycho. Equally complex and beautiful entities should not be compared. "Uncanny" starts off with two guys playing chess. Dialogue, acting, cut and soundtrack instantly create the atmosphere and draw one in. If a sci-fi can do that without fancy concepts explained in words, big motherships and fasers it's worth watching. They manage to do this with the same tools throughout the movie. Yes, you know it's a movie about an AI, and you kind of expect it to go berzerk, as they tend to go since Space Odyssey; but then again, the robots in Interstellar did not. So will this one? The plot twists, turns and evolves while there are several occasions you expect the robot to snap. It's probably the main source of maintaining a sense of suspense besides the soundtrack, which fits in perfectly. At the same time it lets You keep enough distance to remain relaxed and consciously digest the concepts and thought-seeds presented. I love this aspect, and few movies manage this magic act of balance. My rating is 9/10 because the ending is flawed. It's flawed not because it's bad. It's actually quite good. Uuhm... at least one of them. The movie has 3 endings. The last one even comes in after the credits start. I will never understand why great movies sometimes feel the need to throw in all ending ideas the scriptwriter scribbled on a paper towel in the first draft. "Coffe or Tea?" "Both, and please mix them in the same cup!" :)

The film's title is appropriate, since that is the feeling you are getting from the movie. Somehow, something is wrong with it, but you can't put your finger on it. The twist at the end was pretty predictable as well, but somehow they botched it up with the very last scenes. If they change the ending - not in its idea, but its handling - the movie gains an instant extra rating point.However the biggest harm that anything can do to this film is that it was released soon after Ex Machina when they are approaching similar subjects. It is not the same thing, but close enough, and clearly not as good. I have to think, would I have liked the film in 2014, let's say? And the answer is probably yes. Change the ending scenes, make the pace a little more alert, maybe remove some of the slow scenes or some of the bad ones (because there are some that are just stupid) and you get an instant winner.Bottom line: interesting concept, not bad yet mediocre implementation, badly written ending scenes. Uncannily close to a good movie.P.S. Why do movies try to seem smart with chess analogies, and then really botch them completely? Even the weakest chess player in the world would instantly see that the people doing the scenes had no idea how the game is played.

That Matthew Leutwyler's sci-fi chamber piece "Uncanny" was made 3 years before Alex Garland's "Ex Machina" is interesting. That Leutwyler made his film for a fraction of Garland's budget is admirable. That Leutwyler's plot doesn't make a lick of sense is a shame.Seriously, what was the point?"Uncanny" and "Ex Machina" share similar story lines: an outsider is invited into the high-security lair of a reclusive genius in order to interact with and evaluate a new form of artificial intelligence. In each case, the outsider and the AI are of different genders and the reclusive genius has an agenda. Predictable consequences ensue. But where "Ex Machina" follows these events to their logical conclusion, "Uncanny" gives up on logic entirely for the sake of a surprise ending that a) isn't much of a surprise and b) negates almost everything that happened over the preceding 80 minutes.On paper, the movie was probably conceived to be an insightful meditation on what makes humans humane and robots less so. Thrown in for good measure are some thoughts on what can and can't be controlled in sentient beings and whether we as a race are innovating and engineering ourselves right into obsolescence. There's also a bit about masters and servants and which are which. All big, important ideas that Garland's film handles with much more style and intelligence. Still, it wasn't "Ex Machina" I thought about as I watched the film. What came to mind more was "Frankenstein." The book, not the movie. In the book, there's a relationship between the creator and his creation. They're in this together in the name of science and discovery. But that relationship sours when Dr. Frankenstein rejects the monster to be with his fiancée. I'm paraphrasing here, but that's the gist. "Uncanny" seemed to be moving in a similar direction. Actually, the movie was moving in exactly that direction. There was even the interesting possibility that roles were being reversed.Then came the final cryptic ten minutes and it all turned out to be a huge waste of time. Adding insult to injury, there's an end-credits scene so nonsensical it's laugh-out-loud funny. Not, I'm guessing, what the filmmakers intended."Uncanny" isn't a bad movie, it's a bad story. The cinematography is fine (though the lingering shots of Shiva, the Destroyer, are a bit overly), the acting is adequate (if you don't mind watching Rainn Wilson, in a mercifully short cameo, chew scenery), and events move along at a fairly brisk pace. It's just that those events simply don't add up when you get to the end. Note: One question bothered me as I watched both "Uncanny" and "Ex Machina". Why, why, why—if you're going to build a creature and make it both smarter and stronger than yourself—why wouldn't you include an "off" switch?