Ultraviolet (2006)

DJ Nik and Keith Bliss review "Ultraviolet" !!! Enjoy ! If you would like to come on and discuss YOUR favourite movie send us a email with your movie of choice to : [e-mail] . Check out our great tiers on Patreon : patreon.com/happinessindarkness !!!

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
They made her a weapon.

Speaker 2 (00:03):
Killing is what I do, That's what I'm good at.

Speaker 1 (00:05):
They made her a target in humans, you jeopardize everything
by coming here. I don't have any place left to
go guard. Besides, you have all my guns, and in
the final days of mankind's greatest war, this is pure suicide.
In the one materio. I put this up, she will

(00:26):
decide their fate. Are you mental? Come and get it protection?
Why are you doing this? Because I hate humans? Used
to be human, but not anymore.

Speaker 2 (00:39):
Right.

Speaker 1 (00:39):
I got sick and now on something worthy of extermination
you might make get out of its complex alive. Watch me.
My name is Violet. I was born into the world.
You may not understand all true.

Speaker 2 (00:52):
Violet shall people and welcome to our three hundred and
thirteenth episode of Happiness and Darkness, the Superior Movie Podcast,
where we discuss superhio movies, Marvel, DC, dark Horse, Image
and Beyond. Naturally, there will be spoilers, folks, so you
have been warned. I am one of your co hosts,

(01:13):
dijinek there's always joining me as my superhero partner in Ker.
I'm the one and only Eith Bliss. Hey, Keith, how
are you today.

Speaker 1 (01:22):
Oh, can't complain too much. It's now officially fall in
North Carolina. It went from second summer to fall, so
it's like a brisk sixty out. I've actually had to
turn on the heat and bust at the long clothed
because it's freaking cold. Otherwise I can't complain too much. Well,
glad that.

Speaker 2 (01:40):
These the temperature has gone down some for sure, And
of course it is spooky season folks, So we are
of course continuing with our spooky themed movies and today
we are discussing Ultraviolet from two thousand and six. This
was directed and written by Kurt Wimmer, while the score
was by Klaus Bedelt. Our estimate put in today's money
adjuted for inflation. This movie cost forty eight million dollars

(02:03):
to make and it made fifty million at the box office,
so at least it did make its money back. So
getting to a general impressions here, Keith, I know this
is once again the first time you've seen this film,
So what did what did you make? And what is
your take on Ultraviolet?

Speaker 1 (02:20):
This is one of those movies that I recommended to
you as like a joke because it's spooky season and
we needed some sort of monster ish movie and this
is vampires. But at the same time, if you watch
the intro, it's very much comic book inspired. If you
look at the opening credits, that you would have thought
this was from a combook. And I had to check
myself because I was like, I don't remember any comic

(02:41):
book this being based on it, Like I literally looked
into it and no. They just were very much inspired
by that genre of film and type of characters. And
that's why you have very much a superhero vibe through
this whole thing. All of that nice stuff being said,
when you watch the movie, it is just pure chaos,

(03:02):
and I understand why it barely made any money or
barely broke even, I should say, because it doesn't know
what it wants to do with itself. You have one
scene where she's being all like, oh, I'm a mother
and I should love this being creature thing that's been
created to I will murder you right now if you
don't sit down and shut up. And I'm like, what

(03:23):
the bipolar is going on here? So I think this
was a movie that just again didn't know what to do.
It's a really interesting concept, but the concept gets lost
for those of you who have not seen it. This
is almost like an Outbreak style movie where there's a
plague unleased in the world and everybody be sorry. A

(03:45):
good portion of the population becomes vampires, which is a
really interesting take. All of that being said, that is
in the five minute intro of the movie, and then
just all the craziness happens from that point forward. I
don't blame any of the actors in this movie, because
just actors, the writing is what really let them down.
They could have picked a lane and stuck to it,

(04:06):
and this would have been a very interesting movie if
they had gone with more of say like an underworld vibe,
where you see this whole battle progressing through the movie,
opposed to we pick up right before everything is concluded
and the vampires have fallen. You're like, okay, but this
has been going on for I believe a decade, but

(04:26):
you don't see any of that. It's just all like
an opening monologue and then we're just right into the
heat of the situation and it's just like, oh, okay,
I guess that's going to be a thing. And then
what got me was when they're doing the flashbat sequence
for her character and the big bad guy. They're not
the same actors. If you look at it, it's not

(04:48):
her and it's not him. It's two other random ass people,
and you're like, wait, this is supposed to be her
and that is supposed to be him. Yep, Nope. Would
never have known that in a million years. Actually, when
he does his whole little monologue at the end where
he explains what's going on, and you flip back to
the beginning flashback sequence, you like, it's not even you,

(05:09):
it's some other dude. It literally could have been like
Joe from accounting, did you know pricked his finger? Nope,
it's this big bad guy, and you would never have
known that unless he specifically told you. And I feel
like that was one of those they filmed the original
ending and then realized it sucked, so we're going to
go back and redo it, and then didn't bother to

(05:30):
fix the other stuff, and they were just like, Ah,
nobody will care, It'll be fine. And then we got
what we got.

Speaker 2 (05:37):
We most certainly did, And I was almost thinking to myself,
you know, obviously this was way way before COVID happened,
and I did kind of get COVID vibes while I
was watching this because you know, wear your mosk and
there's a pandemic and all this kind of thing. So
I'm like, I guess somebody who you know? I mentioned
last week that I had seen this but in the raw,

(05:57):
the altered states. I'm going to put that right out there.
I was drunk many many years ago when I watched this.
It was the early tew thousands, so I had barely
any recollection. This movie does maybe work a little bit
if you are if you are enjoying adult beverages, I
think actually works better. But the o The first thing
that brought to my mind was COVID seeing the way
it was because you think that I guess we watched it. Now,

(06:18):
like did this movie come out during COVID or a
couple week or recently? Is that? Is this what they're
trying to do? Not really, but that's the vibeit I got. Obviously,
you and I both having experienced COVID. I'm sure a
lot of our listeners out there knowing what we're talking
about and have seen this movie. This is one of
those films that I think looks like it should be

(06:38):
cooler than it actually is, and it's a neon soaked
film that promises this sleek violence, this high style, and
the world of viral mutations and government control. But I
agree with you what it ultimately delivers is very much
a messy collage of half baked ideas, very much wrapped
in an early two thousands CGI loss. Like you said,

(07:01):
the setup is simple enough, dystopian future, a virus that's created,
a race of enhanced humans persecuted by the state. You
have your protagonist who is one of the infected, who
turns rogue and becomes a courier for this mysterious package
that could change everything. So on paper, I would say
it's a very solid premise. It kind of gave me
an idea of being a mix of films like Equilibrium

(07:23):
or Blade or even The Matrix. But the problem, to
your point, Keith, is the execution. It feels like watching
the cut scenes of a video game stitch together with
zero context. And visually, the film goes all in on
style and the palette shifts from these deep purples to

(07:44):
these electric blues, with every frame digitally airbrushed within inch
of its life. Some shots look like concept art brought
to life, and others look like a PlayStation two cinematic
is it ambitious, Sure, but if it's also very sterile.
Everything feels like it's happening inside a computer simulation that

(08:05):
forgot to load textures. But I think the biggest problem
is pacing and coherence. It literally races through its world
without stopping to make any of it make sense. The virus,
the government, the boy that Violet protects, AKA six, they're
all introduced and they're explained just enough to keep the

(08:28):
plot moving, and then it's all dropped. So I think
what could have been very much this rich layered sci
fi world very much becomes just background noise, I think
is the best way to describe it. Still, there is
a strike at the same time. I did find there
is charm buried in the chaos of this film, because
I think the word chaotic Keith is very apt when

(08:49):
it comes to this, because our director's commitment to his
vision is very flawed, but it has a kind of
fearless there I say sincerity, because you can see what
he's aiming for this, you know, quasi graphic novel come alive,
very slick and mythic. But it just doesn't work. But
it's hard, I think not to respect the attempt, So

(09:11):
I would ultimately say this is an ambitious mish fuck misfire.
It's gorgeous in flashes, but it's very hollow at its core,
and I think it's very much a time capsule of
mid two thousands digital excess, which I think is also
a reminder of when filmmakers were still figuring out how
fast style could carry a movie without substance, because we

(09:33):
had this at of new CGI technology and we're just
going to go to town and use as much as
we can, and it makes a movie very hollow to me.
And you know, fans of Miliyovich or styleized sci fi
might find some guilty pleasure in it, but for most viewers,
I would say it's more curiosity than cult classic style film.
So very very uneven indeed. So I guess getting to

(09:58):
our characters on the board, let's kick off with our
herowin and the child who possibly saved the world. We
have the aforementioned Miljovich as Violets, sang Jack Sharif and
Cameron Bright as six. So keith your thoughts on Violets
and Six.

Speaker 1 (10:15):
I mean, they're okay, I'm just kidding. What I thought
it was interesting is, you know, they spent all this
time doing her set up her background, like, Okay, I
was one of the first infected, I had a child,
I had a miscarriage. Everything they tell you is very
much plot armor, and they're like, the reason why we're

(10:35):
telling you this fact is because at some point down
the line, this is going to come into play. And
watching it the first time, you don't, you know, pay
much attention to you. You're like, oh, let's just throw
away information. But once you've seen it and you realize
them pointing out the fact that she was a mother
that lost her child for a reason or another. That's
why she is so protective of six. And what I

(11:00):
thought was interesting about his character is the fact that
she finds out, just like we all do, that the
kid can speak, he can articulate his thoughts very well,
and he knows what's going on. He's still kind of
detached from social cues because he has lived in a
essentially a Petri dish his entire life. But what kind

(11:24):
of annoyed me is the fact that you know, she
saves his life and she becomes again very much a
mother figure, and I can understand why the maternal instinct
would kick in. She sees a helpless child, and she
wants to save him, even though he is technically supposed
to be the extinction event for her people, although we

(11:45):
come to find out that it's literally the other way around,
and he's the extinction event for the human race and
the vampires will eventually die off. Why we don't know,
because it's just a reason for or another. Because again
that's the point that they never act explained in this movie.
There's a lot of things are happening. We don't know why,
but they are, and just suck it up a deal.

(12:06):
Like she is uber sick but also better than literally
everybody else she comes across. Why, I don't know, because
and it's crazy because she was a nurse that turns
into this badass which is awesome. I'm not discounting that.
It's just there's no character growth. It just goes from

(12:27):
like badass science experiment or I'm sorry, nurse science experiment
badass And then you're like, Okay, we're just gonna go
with this, and she shows some crazy abilities that none
of the other vampires have. Why again, we don't know.
But then you kind of flip back to her and
him six and the initial maternal instincts kick in and

(12:50):
she's like, oh, I'm gonna save this child, and she
starts to and then there's the next scene where they're
sitting on the subway where she's like, oh, will work
your throat out if you don't sit down, And you're like, uh, oh, oh, okay,
you just went from I'm going to save you too,
I will kill you right now where you stand. I'm
like that that's a bit of a tonal change, but
it is what it is. And then as the movie progresses,

(13:12):
they kind of do become more of a pseudo family,
mother and son, which I can appreciate because once you
see those two characters, you understand how this dynamic is
going to work. Eventually, she is going to again become
a pseudo parent and he's going to latch onto her.
What I thought was a little weird about the character

(13:33):
is the big bad guy builds in a essentially a
self destruct timer for this child, and they only have
nine hours or eight hours, or whatever the case may
be to bring him from point A to point B.
My whole thing is, why would you have a point
A and a point B just do her all in
the same location and literally this entire story is moot

(13:55):
or better yet, have her destroy the container that the
child was carried in, and again all moot because either
one of these two story points happen, nothing else matters,
Like literally, none of this is relevant. I do like her. Initially,
when I saw this years ago, I didn't quite understand

(14:16):
the twist where she accidentally converts them into a vampire
or or what the heck they're called the mages heem
of ages, chemo phages, thank you out a lack of
words there for a minute, the hem of phage, she
accidentally converts them into one. But now watching it again today,
I'm like, oh, that makes perfect sense. She did it
by accident, But when you see it the second time,

(14:39):
you're like, oh, I understand. But if you can do
the hem of phage by blood any other type of
bodily fluid with theoretically work and her crying over his body,
what I'm impressed is the fact that he was I
believe dead when she does this, and yet the writers
still works and transfer formed him into one of these

(15:03):
human ages he vampire people. So I mean, I get it. It
was lazy writing a little bit, but they wanted to
have a happy ending. I mean, my problem. My other
problem was she gets shot in the stomach at one
point and you're like, oh, she's dead, and then literally
the next scene is she's like, all right, I'm watching TV, like, wait,
you got a bolt of the stomach and you're like,

(15:26):
I don't know, hours away from being dead and now
you're fine. Why reasons?

Speaker 2 (15:34):
Reasons is the best way to describe it. And I
was almost one you you and I were actually talking
about this when we when you mentioned that's about to
want to review this film. That's Mina was in the
middle of the Resident Evil franchise, and I think this
very much shows in this film as well, because I
think with Kurt Wimmer probably saw what she was doing

(15:55):
as Alice in the Resident Evil franchise and what Paul W.
Sanderson did with the first film, which was four years
prior to this, and so it's like, yeah, I think
we're going to cast Miela again because she has the
makings of an action hero and she very much is
very I think in a lot of ways, is very
similar to Alice in the Resident Evil movies. At the

(16:17):
same time, though, when it comes to this character, I
think she's very much defined by loss and reinvention because
she's like once human and she's transformed into a hem
of age, you know, this virus enhanced being with superhuman
abilities and a death sentence built into her DNA the
infection from what I gathered, that raises her old life,
her family, her body, and even her place in the world,

(16:37):
and I think she becomes something between human and machine,
living in a society that wants her erased. At the
same time, you know, she's the central character in this film,
and it's very much a study in contradictions because she's
an action icon built from these striking visuals and tragic backstory,
but she's very much constrained to your point by thin

(16:58):
writing and the film that never quite lets her humanity breathe.
Yet at the same time, I think beneath the surface,
she does represent an intriguing attempt to day Dare I
say postmodern sci fi heroine because she's part warrior, she's
part martyr, and she's part digital ghost. And her transformation
I think reflects a core theme of the film, as

(17:21):
in identity is something manufactured and unstable, because she isn't
just a person, she is very much a construct both
in the universe, so she's this bioengineered hybrid and cinematically
very much a digitally enhanced figure in the artificial world.
So and her constant costume changes, which the film of

(17:42):
course renders through these color shifting suits, I think visually
underlines that instability. That she's a chameleon who can never
fully settle into oneself. And her rebellion, of course, is
driven by personal trauma, like you mentioned, because the government's
campaign to exterminate Heme of Pages took everything from her,
So her fight isn't just political, but I think it's

(18:03):
also existential. So I think she very much much fights
to assert that her kind deserves to live, but also
maybe to reclaim her own sense of worth. And when
she decides to protect six against both humans and humor Pages,
her motivation I think shifts from vengeance to compassion, and

(18:24):
that decision I think rehumanizes her. It's very much the
emotional pivot of the story where Violet has spent the
film killing to survive and she then chooses to nurture
and protect instead. I do think that Wimer, as our
director and writer, he very much frames hers this stylized
embodiment of feminine power. She's hyper competent, She's physically unstoppable

(18:47):
and visually idealized may much maybe an exaggerated image of
liberation and control. Yet the film complicates that power by
placing her in a world that constantly commodify, maybe and
dehumanizes bodies through science and militarization and technology. So I
think in that sense, violet struggle isn't just a corrupt regime,

(19:09):
but against the very system that turns people into products,
herself included. You have her sleek outfits, her digital stylization,
and impossibly choreographed fights that I think all reinforce the
idea that she's both powerful and objectified, liberated and also trapped.
How many ass shots do we get in this film,
by the way. So that said, I think what keeps

(19:31):
Violet from being purely in archetype is her grief, because
beneath the stylization, she is a woman mourning her stolen life.
Her flashbacks, you know, especially those hinting at the lost pregnancy,
I think they anchor her in something deeply human, and
her connection with Six becomes almost a symbolic rebirth, maybe
a chance to give meaning to her survival. Unfortunately, she

(19:53):
also embodies the post human condition, you know, enhanced but diminished,
maybe alive but alian, self aware but maybe synthetic. So
I think she's a product of technology in trauma who
tries to assert agency in a world that treats her
as expendable code. So in that way, she's both the
film's protagonist and its metaphor, humanity, literally trying to survive

(20:15):
its own dehumanization. So I do think she's a fascinating concept,
but executed very unevenly. She's designed as a sci fi
icon of empowered and rebellion, but the film's digital aesthetic
and the shallow writing turn her into an image more
than a person. Still, I think if you look past
the polish, she is a tragic figure. She is a

(20:37):
woman remade by violence, searching for connection in a world
that's forgotten what being human means. When it comes to
six here, I think is the quietest character in the film,
yet it's emotional and thematic anchor, because while the movie
often buries meaning under this insane visual spectacle, he provides

(20:58):
the story's one clear threat of innocence, morality, and existential weight.
So I think he's less a traditional character, more of
a symbol of creation, of control and the possibility of
redemption in a world that's lost its humanity. So, of course,
as we know, like you said, he's not a naturally
born human. He's a laboratory creation. He was designed by
the government as a biological weapon, and his blood courries

(21:21):
the potential to wipe out the Hemophage race or save it,
depending on how it's used. And I think this duality
defines his existence. He's both cure and curse, salvation and annihilation,
and I think that tension makes him a mirror for
the film's larger question is what does it mean to
be human when life itself can be manufactured, programmed, and

(21:43):
weaponized AI anyone, And I think Six's very body embodies
that paradox. He's innocent yet lethal, and he's pure yet engineered.
So the film, I think the film's world is hyper artificial.
You've got these visual settings and even characters that feel
digitally sculpted and within in that sterile environment, Six stands
out because he represents untouched humanity. You have this calm,

(22:07):
emotionless demeanor which may seem detached, but I think it
reflects both his controlled upbringing and his uncorrupted clarity because
he sees the world without the ideological filters that drive
people like Violet or the government, and her bond with him,
I think becomes the story's emotional center because he reawakens
her empathy and she sees in him, like you said,

(22:28):
the child that she lost, the purity she's been stripped of,
and perhaps maybe the last and tainted remnant of what
humanity could still be. So I think his presence shifts
her role from avenger to protector. Like I said earlier
and earlier in the film, she is defined by rage
and survival instinct, yet once she meets six, her mission
becomes moral rather than tactical, So she's no longer fighting

(22:51):
against something but for someone. So you know, in narrative terms,
he functions as the child of Hope, the vulnerable figure
who is to harden worried, to rediscover compassion. And we
know this this isn't new. You think of films like
Terminator two or Children of Men or even Logan have
used similar dynamics, but I think Ultraviolet plays it through

(23:13):
a cyberpunk lens. So the relationship I think humanizes Violet
in a setting that constantly strips people of emotional identity.
So and then also what I saw, anyway, was I
think you have a lot of religious overtones in this film,
especially through six, because he's a child who embodies salvation,
and he's a figure whose blood could deliver redemption to

(23:33):
the infected. So I think you have parallels to Christ's imagery,
and I think they're very hard to miss. Even his
name six, it echoes biblical and symbolic overtone undertones. Six
is the number of imperfection, just short of divine completeness,
and it also suggests that humanity, like six, remains unfinished,
you know, capable of both destruction and grace. And so

(23:54):
through this lens, Violet becomes less of a soldier and
more of a guardian of faith in this godly, technocratic world.
But yet, despite his power, Six is never truly free.
He's defined by other people's intentions, engineered by scientists, hunted
by the government, and ultimately used as a pawn in
this larger ideological war. So his quiet demeanor resignation, I

(24:17):
think carrier sadness. He understands his purpose but not his
place in the world, and so I think his relationship
with Violet offers him something no experiment or military agenda
could genuine care, and in return, I think his trust
and acceptance give Violet back a sense of humanity. In
that sense, I think both characters heal each other. She

(24:38):
saves him physically and he saves her spiritually. So I
think he does represent the film's central and I might
be reading too much into this, but I think he
does represent the film's central moral question. Is humanity a
biological state or a moral one? Because he's not human
by natural birth, yet he displays more empathy, more curiosity,

(25:00):
and more purity than almost any real human in the story.
And so I think the irony is deliberate because this
film uses this artificial child to critique the artificial artificiality
of the world around him, and his existence I think
forces Violet and us to see that being human isn't
about origin, but it's about compassion and the choices we

(25:22):
make when confronted with cruelty. So ultimately, I think that's
that's that's sort of the role that he plays in
this and he's he is a fully developed He's less
of a fully developed character, but more than a living metaphor,
because he stands for innocence in a corrupted world, creation
caught between salvation and control and the fragile spark of

(25:44):
humanity surviving amid technological decay. So the film may not
articulate his significance cleanly, but symbolically, so I would say
he's the soul of this film. And if Violet is
the film's body, action, motion, and rebellion, six is its
conscious consciousness, quiet, steady, and ultimately redemptive. So there are

(26:06):
a lot of great things in this film between these
and the relationship to these two characters have, but it's
so very paper thin. As I mentioned before, so much
could have been done with both of these characters. But
at least that's why I did my best to take
what I could from what we got in this ninety
minute film. So let's get to Violet's biggest Ally, we
have the wonderful William Fickner has Garth. So what did

(26:30):
you make of Garth?

Speaker 1 (26:33):
Oh? Wait? What? Huh? Wow? That was a wax on there, Nick,
That's the most you've ever said about any movie I
think ever that we've reviewed. Everybody write this down Today's day,
Nick on.

Speaker 2 (26:43):
I was particularly inspired today, Keith.

Speaker 1 (26:46):
Clearly, you and I watched two totally different movies. I'm
like Nick's like the Birth of Christ. I'm like, what
what I just write it like stupid man wants to
kill people and you're like, yeah, this means this metaphorm. Like,
oh okay, I'm I'm gonna have to apparently take better
notes next time. Although I will push back on one point
is I thought more of corporate greed in terms of

(27:10):
anything else, because, as he says at the end of
the movie, he's like, well, We've wiped out one plague,
so I'm going to go start another one because I
need to wipe out or keep generating money, because what
am I going to do now once all the vampires
are dead? So I'm gonna say it's more of the
establishment kind of situation. But I agree with you on
everything else. So that that other guy, the the friend, right,

(27:34):
I think that's who we're talking about. Yes, yeah, mister Garth,
I'm kidding. He's an interesting character. I wish they again,
as you had said with you know well said about
all these other characters. There was so much potential. They
showed this character a couple of times and a few
scenes and they just kind of keep going and you

(27:54):
don't understand there's very little context to a lot of
these a lot of everything that's going on, Like he's
working on a cure, well, what's how is he doing
something different than again, what the establishment is trying to do,
either eradicate and do our cure. You don't know the
whole when he does. You see that flashback scene where

(28:16):
he has saved her initially after escaping from the experiments,
where he's like, I saved her life. I've gave you
all this blood and had to restart your heart and
she's mad at him, and he's like, well, it's because
I love you. And they're like, okay, great, and then
just keep going like wait what you're trying to have
this tender moment and they're like now whatever, cool next.

(28:38):
I do like their dynamic, and you do actually get
a little bit of that tension the first time they're
all in a room together. You kind of get like
that vibe like something's up here. But I do appreciate
them not harping on it too much. And then when
they finally do, it's just like a flashback and never mind,
we're never gonna talk about this again. When he goes,

(28:58):
why are you here and she's like, you have all
of my guns? That's kind of the interaction I expected
with her and a lot of these characters, because it's
just like, you're here because I have you have something
I need, Like when she goes and meets all the
other hem of Phages and they're like, well, you were
just given this task and we need the briefcase and
blah blah blah. And that's how it initially starts. And

(29:20):
even when it comes full circle again and he saves
her again after being shot in the stomach, even though
we don't know how she got from being captured to
his operating table, that's just a point we never need
to know about, even though again she was technically dead
them even interacting at the very end where they're driving

(29:43):
to the main headquarters, it's very like matter of fact,
like why are you doing this? You know this is
not gonna you know, solve anything, blah blah blah, and
she forgets to tell people like key points like the
whole the eye drop or the tear rather that and
actually turned him into the hem of Phage like you

(30:03):
could have said that and they all want to like, okay,
let's go, and they would have been more behind you
opposed to you're crazy. It's a dead body. It's a
slab of meat, and he's never gonna you know, there's
no reason for this. Two seconds literally two seconds like, Oh,
it's because I drooled on him and he's now gonna
be one of us. Oh okay, let's go makes sense. Nah,

(30:24):
we're not gonna talk about that. I would have liked
him to kind of like explain you six as us,
the individuals that have no idea what's going on in
the universe of Ultra Violet, and have him explain into
detail or sorry, explain it to go into detail with
six as to what's happening, why things are happening, why

(30:48):
he's got to be wearing glasses while she can go
outside and be fine, all these different variables that we
don't know about that they just kind of randomly will
tell you to kind of suit the plot. If he
had set those ground rules with six, then we're like, oh, okay,
this makes sense. Why he's got to be locked in
a room because the slightest bit of light he can't

(31:08):
you know, he give him a headache or whatever the
case may be, his eyes bleed, whatever. Where she is
more malleable because of whatever reason, because she had an
earlier strain or a different variation of the virus. Like
just him doing science crap would have done wonders for
this movie. And I don't mean like having to like

(31:30):
going to like a giant dissertation as to like why
people blue eyes are stronger than the guy's green eyes
or some weird variable, but just the fact that he
could have set the stage four, six, and six. Being
us as the naive individual in the world, we all
would have been like, oh, okay, we're all on the
same page now, and we understand what's going on. Because again,

(31:53):
you see people that are some cases stronger, some cases weaker.
XYZ has you know, wrong with them, And I get it.
It's a plague and it impacts everybody differently. But if
at least gave us like broad strokes as to what
you could potentially see, we'd all be like, oh, okay,

(32:14):
this is why this is happening, or why this isn't happening. Hell,
even the technology they're using where they the giant cannonballs
that they shoot into this building, the beating of the movie,
or her with her hair changing colors as you mentioned,
or the gravity stuff, like all this technology, all this
stuff that's in the universe that they just like, nobody's
gonna care about this stuff. It's just it's plot armor

(32:34):
and we're just gonna go with it. But unfortunately some
of the stuff it kind of like leaves you questioning,
things like her ten thousand guns in the bajillion rounds
of ammle that she has, like okay, why don't you
guys have lasers? Or somehow she manages to go through
all eight hundred million rounds and then still has the
bus out of sword. Again, these are things that his

(32:56):
character as the science guy quote unquote, could have explained
to all of us and not left us scratching our heads.
And then it would have been great to have a
post credit scene where he gives her the injection to
cure her, because that would have been the ultimate resolution,
because they're trying to cure this disease. Again why we

(33:19):
don't know, And that would have been another thing that
he could have explained to six, like we're all dying.
We can't you know, they think we're vampires, but we
don't drink blood for this reason why they didn't even
tell us, but whatever the case may be, And that
again would have set a little bit more ground rules.
So the fact that Six had this cure, gives it
to them purely by accident, and no fans. I did

(33:44):
actually just pause because I'm frustrated at this point. It
gets me is he meets Six, meets them, and does
not give them this cure. He's scribbling this crap on
a piece of paper at a park and it's like
his dying wish is to cure the vampire people. And
you're like, the how was this twenty minutes ago when
we're all together? It is Sorry, that was a rant.

(34:06):
I apologize, but it was just one of those things
I had to bring up because we're talking about this character.
I think if they were to redo this movie, give
him a little bit more runway to kind of develop
and fill in the blanks for us. I like the actor.
I think the actor is a great actor. Is just
he was so underutilized. He could have filled in all
these holes or blanks in the story that we just

(34:30):
had no idea about and would have helped improve the
overall experience instead of this wonky like why her personality
keeps changing or why we're jumping all over the place,
or whatever the case may be. I just think he
was a good second fiddle to her, but just not
utilized very well.

Speaker 2 (34:51):
I think on the utilized is the correct word when
it comes to when you have somebody like William Fickner
in your film. And and yeah, you know, as we
mentioned that the this review, there's so many great ideas
which were just so unrealized. They just never came to fruition.
It's all wrapped up in this cgi fest of look
what we can do now with this new technology. And yeah,

(35:12):
I mean he is Garth, I think is one of
the most understated yet I think a very meaningful character,
because while the movie is dominated by this stylized action
and these fast paced visual visuals, I think Garth provides
this rare note of stability and maybe even introspection, because
he's not just Violet's ally, but I think he's also
her moral counterbalance. He's very much her teather to reason

(35:36):
in the world that's lost all sense of it and
the movie doesn't make much sense of it either. And
in this world of chaos, he stands out. He has
this almost calm intelligence about him. He is a course
of fellow, heem of age, so he understands the futility
of their situation, and unlike Violet who acts out of
anger and emotion. Garth is very pragmatic because he very

(35:57):
much operates from caution and survival in st think and
quiet acceptance of their doomed reality. So I think he
might represent the logical side of the rebellion, the part
that recognizes that the limits of resistance, because when you
have Violet charging into conflict into conflict with that with defiance,
Garth is very hesitant and he questions and he tries

(36:18):
to protect what little they have left. And I think
his skepticism often clashes with violet passion, which which is
obviously a big big deal in that and that I
think is a big part of the movie. And also
he's he very much. They have that friction, but it
makes their relationship more real, and it's this tension almost

(36:40):
between despair and hope. So you know, we have, like
you said, his background as a scientist or a researcher,
depending on how one reads his role. He has this
It gives him a due identity because he's both a
victim and an analyst of the situation. So he understands
the science behind the virus that change them, and the
knowledge I think weighs him down with perspective, because Violet,

(37:02):
once again, she channels her pain into action, and he
intellectualizes it, so he knows the systems and mechanics and
the futility of fighting it head on. So I think
this scientific detachment allows him to act as our film's conscience,
someone who sees the moral complexity in a war that's
turning both sides into monsters. And his bond I think

(37:22):
with Violet grounds her emotionally because their relationship isn't romantic,
but it's built on trust and on history and mutual
loss because one of the few people who truly understands
her suffering, and she in turn trusts him when she
literally trusts almost nobody. He doesn't always agree with her choices,
which I liked, especially when she risks everything for six,

(37:45):
but his loyalty never wavers, and he has this calm
support which gives Violet arc I think, some emotional weight,
because without Garth, her rebellion might seem very reactionary and
very reactive. With him, I think we get some dimension
because she's not just fighting for vengeance, but for the
fragments of connection that still exists in her ruined world.

(38:06):
So I think he's her moral mirror. Ultimately, because Violet
is emotion, she's impulse, and she's faith in the possibility
of redemption. He is reason. He's restrained in his resignation
to the system's corruption. And I think their philosophical divide
embodies the film's internal conflict, whether to accept a broken
world or risk everything to change it. So Violet choose

(38:28):
to protect six, and Garth's initial disapproval underscores how radical
her compassion is because his eventual support, I think Marks'
own small act of faith. He has this belief that
hope might still matter. And ultimately, I think on a
thematic level, he represents acceptance. He's the counterpoint to violence

(38:49):
defiance because together they formed the duality at the heart
of this film's post human world. He survives by adapting,
she survives by refusing to adapt. So I think this
suggests that survival alone isn't enough. Garth's logic keeps him alive,
but it's violet emotional rebellion that gives life meaning again.

(39:10):
So I think this I appreciate this contrast because it
argues once again that reason without compassion leads to stasis,
while compassion without reason risks destruction. So I think both
are needed to reclaim humanity. So he might not have
much screen time, which is very sad, but I think
his presence shapes how Violet evolves. He's the voice she

(39:31):
measures herself against. He's the friend who shows her what's
at stake, and in many ways, he's the embodiment of
the film's what if scenario, because what if Violet had
chosen survival over defiance? And so I think that's what
makes him essential, because he personifies the road less traveled,
the path not taken. So he's once again, I think
he's just the conscience of this film. He's a man

(39:54):
caught between intellect and despair. He watches this world collapse
and he clings to reason as his last defense. So
he's the bad balance to violence fire. He's the thinker
to her fighter, and I think the movie, I agree,
doesn't give him much depth in dialogue or backstory, but
I think William's performance fills those gaps with some presence
in gravity. So where once again she burns bright and

(40:15):
I think he endures them Together, they represent the two
halves of the same fractured humanity. You have the will
to survive and the courage to hope. So it's a
very good counterbalance, sadly very poorly written once again, but
once again, as I said, I applaud William for filling
in what gaps, what major gaps we have in this film.
So let's round off our characters with our big bad.

(40:36):
We have Nick Chinlund as Vice Cardinal Ferdinand Daxus. So
keith your thoughts on our big religious bad.

Speaker 1 (40:47):
That's bad, end of story, No kidding. He's an interesting character. Again,
you think he is this holier than now individual because
the way they portray these individuals is more of a
religious type of organization opposed to a corporation, which didn't

(41:08):
make a lot of sense because they kept calling him
this and they're like, okay, but it's a dude in
a suit and there's guys with guns. So I'm very
confused as to what's going on here in the story. Again,
it's another case of underutilized actors. He is always, or
in my mind, he's known as being a big bad guy.

(41:28):
So anytime I see him, I know he's going to
be the villain. So for him to actually be the villain,
it's not a huge stretch. I just think that there
was again another instance where a lot of meat was
left on this bone. He comes out, he's all about,
you know, slay these hema phages, you know, destroy them.
We have to wipe them off the face of the planet.

(41:49):
And twist the six is his clone. That's one twist,
and the other twist is he's a hema phage himself.
How he's managed to hide this for I don't know.
I think it's over a decade now. I want to
say it's twelve to fifteen years or so. How he's
managed to hide this for so long. They don't explore.

(42:10):
So if he's able to hide it and function in society,
clearly these other human pages could do the same thing,
but they went the nuclear route and decided to try
to wipe them all off the face of the planet. Again,
they don't explain why. They don't even explain how he
got from being lowly scientists to the head of this

(42:32):
giant organization. We don't find that out until he explains
to Violet via flashback and monologuing that he was patient zero.
He was the first guy to be exposed to this,
and he has all the same issues that she has,
and he's clearly able to adapt to it. He has photosensitivity,

(42:52):
except he's out in daylight and he's not squinting, so
he must have contacts or something in So they don't
playing what makes him so special, like how is he
able to pull this ruse off where everybody else got
hunted into oblivion? And then the twist is that he
has been engineering this plague to wipe out the human race.

(43:15):
But does that mean there's nothing wrong with the Huma phages?
Are they going to be fine? He just explains that, well,
the hum of phages are about to be dead anyway,
so whatever, and we're just gonna you know, impact or
infect rather the rest of the world. Okay, there's play
on that. But we don't know is how much of
the world population is left? Like is that a big deal?

(43:38):
Is that not a big deal? Is it like say
in Eon flux, where there's only say, ten thousand people
left on the planet, Like are we talking that there's
one hundred million people, there's five million, there's two hundred
and fifty six. We don't know in terms of the
severity of that action. He's just like, I'm going to

(43:58):
keep everybody under my thumb. Okay, that's like ten people
that shouldn't be really hard. So again, the it was
a missed opportunity, and it wasn't even like a big
like oh my god, oh no, don't do that. It's
just this child needs to survive, not that the thing
he's going to be doing is wrong, because again he's

(44:19):
already been doing evil stuff. So it's just like evil
guy does more evil stuff. I do like the sword
fighting at the end, and I will give them credit.
The weapons and aesthetics they have in this movie are
on point. But him being the first infected, why is

(44:40):
he not as strong as her? Or why you know what?
Again this hole they needed some sort of guardrails to explain,
like why he is a crappy fighter? And he even
says this, He's like, yeah, in fair fight, you kick
my butt ten out of ten, Like, okay, why you know?
Is it just because she's been fight for so long?

(45:01):
Is it? Because again she got the sort of like
the Alice type of situation going on here where she
is like the perfect creation of human and virus. Again,
these are things that were never discussed and leaves you
scratching your head, and I get it. In the grand
scheme of things, it's not a big deal. He's an

(45:22):
evil guy doing evil crap. End of story. But my
thinking about this after watching it is he engineered six
and he even says, this is the sixth iteration. Somebody
else had to catch this, right, Like some other person
was doing all of this work? Did they nobody else
catch on? Like, hey, wait a minute, this is going

(45:43):
to kill the humans and not the hum of ages
and like are they dead? Like there's just so many
other things going on in this universe that just we're
not going to talk about. We're just going to gloss
over and it again frustrating story points, and this is
one of these could do with a trilogy where they
can really kind of flush out the story, or a
TV show because again, he's another character. It took him

(46:06):
at least twenty ors. I'm gonna say twenty took him
at least the ten years to get from basic scientist
to bad guy and that would have even been a
set of movies in itself, so we can see what happened,
Like was he always a mean guy? Was he always
an ass? Or is it because of the virus and
other things that happened in his life. So there's a

(46:27):
lot going on with this character that we just don't know, like, yes,
some people are born evil, but other people can become evil,
and that's you know, the nature nurture scenario, and that
would have been an interesting dynamic to see with this character. Scenic.
I can get all philosophical and deep too, why you
and my co Hostki right, and you know, sometimes I

(46:51):
get it, you know, black and white and there's no
in between. But this seems like a character that we
could have seen some more of his backstory and would like, Okay,
we see why he's evil. Like, yes, at the end
of the day, he's trying to wipe out everybody, but
at some point he's gonna have to catch on and
be like, well, well shit, if I kill everybody, what
am I gonna do? Like at some point there's got
to be like a count, as you said, a counterbalance

(47:13):
to his madness, and it would have been interesting to
see if there was that counterbalance somewhere. Or is that
he lost his partner due to this virus and that's
why he's gone completely unhinged and just kill everybody and
see what happens.

Speaker 2 (47:30):
I think that that's a big problem with this character,
is just that because it just goes from zero to
one hundred and in five seconds, and we don't really
get to explore who this character is. I rememb much
got almost a present snow kind of vibe when it
came to literal You know, power corrupts absolute, power corrupts
absolutely almost so you don't really start necessarily as a
bad person, but ultimately as you gain power, it ultimately

(47:53):
devours and corrupts you and perverts you. And I mean
he is of course our central antagonist, but also more
than that, because I think he's he represents the system
that Violet is fighting against. You have this it's literally
bureaucratic corruption fused with religious hypocrisy and scientific perversion. I mean,
in this world where you have humanity and morality both

(48:14):
being infected as thoroughly as its biology, I think Daxus
stands as the ultimate expression of control, polished, intelligent, but
utterly hollow, because he isn't a warlord, he isn't a soldier.
He's a bureaucrat in religious robes. Even his title vice cardinal.
It fuses that political and ecclesiastical authority and maybe almost

(48:38):
implying a world where faith and governance have merged into
one authoritarian regime. Ring a bell anyone, And this blend
of science, I think of religion and state power, it
gives him an omnipresent reach because he doesn't just command armies,
he dictates an ideology. And in that sense, I think
he represents this institutional evil, the kind that hides behind

(49:02):
policy and procedure. Sounds very familiar. And I think his
calm demeanor and his precise speech make him more chilling
than say a brute force villain, because he doesn't rage
or rant. He rationalizes. Every atrocity is justified as necessary,
every act of cruelty is framed as order. Very dictatorial

(49:23):
once again, And so I think, ultimately, like you were
saying Keith very well, they are conceptual opposites because Violet
is emotional, she's instinctive, and she's driven by empathy. Daxus
is calculated, sterile, and driven by greed. So where Violet
is defined by loss in humanity, Daxus is defined by
control and detachment. And so I think their conflict isn't

(49:45):
just physical, it's very philosophical, because she fights to restore meaning.

Speaker 1 (49:49):
To a world that's lost its soul.

Speaker 2 (49:51):
He thrives on the lack of a soul even visually,
their contrasts are very sharp because Violet's vibrant palette and
fluid movement versus Das's cold, controlled environments and measured tone.
He's he is the world's infection in human form, elegant, systematic,
and self sustaining. So even as I said, his title

(50:14):
isn't arbitrary because it signals a world where religious structure
has been hijacked to sanctify political control. Even his use
of spiritual language to justify technological oppression blurs that line
between salvation and subjugation because he manipulates the symbolism of faith, order, purity,
redemption while weaponizing the tools of science. This fusion, I

(50:38):
think turns him into dare I say, a postmodern devil,
not as supernaturally, but a man who uses divine imagery
and scientific authority to literally play God. So I think
he serves as the embodiment of posthuman authoritarianism, as in
the idea that technological progress stripped of ethics leads to

(50:59):
tear master's order. So I think this you have this
combination of religious authority scientific mastery. It makes him both
the architect and the symptom of our disease society. So
not necessarily driven by hatred of others, but he's driven
by the belief that he alone understands how the world
should function, and in that way, he is the perfect

(51:22):
mirror to violets belief in individual freedom and emotional truth. So,
and I'm very glad that they cast somebody like Nick
to play this character, because he is probably the most
realized character of this film alongside Violet for the most part. So,
is there anything you would like to add Keith on
our movie before we get to ratings?

Speaker 1 (51:44):
Now, I think you and I went really deep on
this one for a shallow pond, as it were a
type of movie. So no, I think we're.

Speaker 2 (51:51):
Good, awesome, I guess as as my as I get
a little bit older and possibly a little bit wiser,
my my vocal skills and improve, as well as we're
closer to my birthday, Oh right away, I guess. Then
getting to ratings, then what do you give Ultraviolets out
of ten?

Speaker 1 (52:12):
I'm gonna have to give it a seven out of ten.
If there was more character development as you and I
had mentioned with some of the supporting characters. Heck, even
the head of the organization she was a member of,
just more background story would have done better in my book.
But right now seven out of ten, you know, decent, rewatchable, Yes,

(52:32):
what I watched again recently or in the near future.
Rather No, probably not.

Speaker 2 (52:37):
You're actually more generous than I am, because I'm going
to give it six and a half out of ten.

Speaker 1 (52:42):
I thought about that.

Speaker 2 (52:45):
Because, like I said, the as I mentioned before, I
think the ideas are in there, but they're very much
half baked. This is a half baked cookie because it
could have been really, really crunching, really delicious, to use
the food analogy, but it just goes halfway. It doesn't
go all the way. And though I think it raises
some very important questions, especially in today's world, so it's

(53:05):
twenty nineteen years later, I think it does raise some
questions which are still very much sadly alive and well today.
So I did appreciate that it did get me thinking,
But there were just so many things that seemed that
were so rushed. The story made little to no sense
in large amounts of places, and yeah, the use of
I think it was also a big cgi overkill, which

(53:27):
ultimately soured my experience with this film. As wonderful as
it was to see all these great visuals. I'm just like, yeah,
we have this new technology were it's going to use
every single place we can. So, as I said before,
that did sort of sour the experience for me. But
other than that, I appreciate the score as well. I
thought that was well done, and I think our performances

(53:49):
that our actors brought were great. They literally, as we
often sell on this podcast, they did their best to
work with what they were given, so I won't fault them,
just like Youth, and so it's a six and a
half out of ten for me. And now I can
finally so I've seen this movie completely sober, so getting
them to recommendations. Is there anything you'd like to recommend

(54:10):
to the class this week?

Speaker 1 (54:12):
Oh? I have so many. You actually mentioned it before
I got a chance to his Equilibrium. Definitely im Flox,
just because you know, if you like these these types
of movies. And I'll keep it short because I literally
thought of like fifty movies, but Johnny Numonic, which is
a classic Keanu Reeves, which it's one of my guilty pleasures.

(54:34):
Those are probably my top three choices if you liked
this style. But one something that's got a little more
substance to it. I would check those out right.

Speaker 2 (54:45):
Two recommendations for sure, I will tack on as I
mentioned earlier, I would say Blade if you want to
see avengeful warrior taking on vampires in that case but
has a similar style to it. You've got your trench
coats and you've got all the all the other great
things going on with that. You've got to lost a
lot of course of sunglass wear and sunglass wearing as
well when it comes to that too. And also the

(55:06):
matrix I think is another one which which you think
folks will appreciate when it comes to this, especially the
use of CGI and the color palette also which dominates
the matrix movie as well, and especially, as I said,
the fast paced visuals. Visuals is very much sure part
you know a kin to a movie like this. So
those would be my recommendations. So of course, dear listeners,

(55:27):
if you want to weigh in on your when with
your thoughts on the movies we discuss here, you know
what to do. Un this is the first time listening
to us. If that is the case, welcome so to do.
So what we have to do is shouldn't email to
happiness and Darkness How at gmail dot com once again,
Happiness and Darkness how at gmail dot com. Be sure
to follow us on our social media platforms. If you're

(55:49):
not doing that already, you can find us on x
where you are at the High Darkness Pod, Facebook, where
you can finde us Happiness in Darkness, And of course,
if you listen to us on such platforms as Spotify, Apple, podcast, Pandora,
you name it, sure to rate and review us, as
that allows a little show to grow, keeps the algorithm
stimulated and allows shows to reach more like my das

(56:11):
like yours. Tell your friends, tell your enemies, we don't care.
Just spread the good word and a big thank you
those who have done so, future thank you to those
who will so. Keith when you're not here and during
my deep philosophical questions that I posed on today's movie
where can folks find you on the interwebs.

Speaker 1 (56:31):
Clearly I'm going to be contemplating the mysterism of the
unknown and my poor life choices. And then when I'm
not doing that, I'm occasionally on some other podcasts. Let's
see I did Jeez, I've done so many and cannot
think of any of them, which is weird. I did
the Hour of Comics again this year. I did a
special guest appearance for one of my favorite all time movies,

(56:52):
uh nineteen ninety three Freaked, which is I love that
movie Star Trek The Undiscovered podcast. I've popped up on
a couple of those episodes. You can catch me on
the season finale of that one. I did an opener
gold Standard with you. I did. Was that this year
or last year? I don't remember.

Speaker 2 (57:09):
I believe that was last year where you joined the
sky Captain in the world tomorrow.

Speaker 1 (57:13):
Yeah, goodness, gracious, my day's just blend together, folks. I apologize,
and then you know what am I doing any of that?
I'm catching up on the sleep because I worked twenty
four hours a day. And you can always reach out
to me on our Facebook page. You can drop a
comment message, whatever the case may be, smoke signal, carrier, pigeon.
Just be warned. I have dogs and they do attack birds.

Speaker 2 (57:34):
So folks, you have been warned. When it comes to myself,
you can find me at my day job hosting the
radio show Whiskey and Cigarettes. Well, we play the very
best and nothing but the best of country music for
you guys. From Malabama to Zach Brown. With more information
about that you know what to do, You can visit
our website which is Whiskey and Cigarettes Show dot com.

(57:55):
Podcast Wise is always Keith very kindly mentioned. You can
find myself, Zan Sprouse and Rachel Friend on gold Standard
the Oscars podcast, where we have reviewed all the Best
Picture winning movies in chronological order. Now as who wait
for the ninety eighth Best Picture to make its presence known,
reviewing movies that we have picked, and we also have
returning a new guest co host, just like mister Keith Bliss,

(58:15):
bring their favorite movies to the gold Standard Theater. We
recently reviewed Zan's pic Fatso from nineteen eighty starring Anne
Bancroft and Don de Luis, of course also directed and
written by am Bancroft. At her directorial debut coming up next,
in order to honor the memory of the late great
Robert Redford, Dave Proctor will be making his debut in

(58:37):
the gold Standard Theater and the movie that his select
he selected is going to be Butch Cassidy and The
Sun Dance Kid, So we'll get to talk some good
old Robert Redford and more. Besides, when it comes to
that and last, but say not least, and myself and
Charles Skaggs can be found on the fandom Zone podcast.
We recently concluded our review of the second season of Peacemaker.

(58:58):
We're going to be on a bit of a high
just now, because let's be honest, we don't have any
superhero TV shows to review at this point. But we
will be returning in the new year, where yours truly
will be driving the bus for the conversation, and we
were reviewing the latest mcu entry, wonder Man, So there's
that to look forward to and spin things to come
on this show. Next time, myself and mister Keith Bliss

(59:21):
will be taking on the two thousand and seven Francis
Lauren film I Am Legend, So, Keith, anything you would
like to add on our next movie or anything else
before we sign off.

Speaker 1 (59:33):
This is another one of those movies I apologize in
advance for recommending fans, but otherwise it's a great movie
and I can't wait to review it.

Speaker 2 (59:42):
Well, we continue with our vampire saga, I suppose, and
also I love the fact that ironically the movies we've
picked up until this point have been going year by
year two thousand and five, two thousand and six, and
now two thousand and seven. So I thoroughly enjoyed the
novel of this film. I guess I will save my
thoughts when it comes to the movie rendition of it.
That said, of course, folks, thanks as always for listen

(01:00:04):
to the show and supporting us. We will see you
next time with I am Legend. Until then, thank you
so much for the privilege of your time. Stay Super Show.

Speaker 1 (01:00:14):
Mobby Ball.

Speaker 2 (01:01:10):
Tad the e