The I Inside

2004

Mystery / Sci-Fi

0
IMDb Rating 6.1

Synopsis


Downloaded 282 times
12/1/2019 8:02:29 PM

1080p
1.74G
Normal
English
/
90 min
P/S 51 / 82

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Superunknovvn 6

Considering how great this movie was in the beginning I was stunned why I had never heard of it or why it only got a rating of 6.0 on IMDb. It had to have something to do with how the story unfolded. Turns out, that this is indeed the problem. The first 45 minutes of "The I Inside" are really a blast. The story sucks you in immediately and unfolds beautifully until a certain point is reached where the writer lost control and messed up what had been set up so well. All of a sudden the story's getting way over the top, apparently for no other reason than to keep the viewer puzzled. That wouldn't have been necessary. They could have taken the story anywhere as intriguing as it started. Unfortunately, the plot becomes uneven when the "rules" of the movie are adapted arbitrarily. The final solution doesn't really come as a surprise anymore. Worse still, it's not good enough to explain everything. It's obvious that there are mistakes and flaws throughout the script and it's a shame, because, as I've said, unlike a lot of other movies where the story is already set up for an impossible, unbelievable ending, "The I Inside" had a more than promising start. Anyway, although the movie isn't completely satisfying and kind of stumbles over its own feet, it's still very entertaining to watch. It has an atmospheric stage play-like atmosphere (in fact, the story has been adapted from a play called "Point Of Death") and there are some really creative suspense scenes. Summing up, "The I Inside" isn't the masterpiece it could have been, but it's a nice way to spend 90 minutes.

Read More
Reviewed by shiftyeyeddog 7

I&#39;ve never liked the idea of test screenings. The changes they make just end up neutering a movie and making it &quot;safe&quot; for the general masses. But if ever a movie needed feedback to prompt a rewrite and alternate ending, this is it. <br/><br/>The first half of this movie is spectacular. It&#39;s atmospheric, tense, and confusing (in a good way). It kept you guessing the whole way. Much like Memento, it&#39;s an intelligent film that makes you watch closely and think. The story could have gone a number of directions.<br/><br/>...but the last half, it all falls apart. They start changing the &quot;rules&quot;, the suspense gives way to straight storytelling, and the ending goes a completely different direction than it could have, and SHOULD have. It&#39;s not just that I didn&#39;t like the ending or that it didn&#39;t match my predictions. The problem is the truth is still unclear and viewers are left confused. Too much is left unexplained. <br/><br/>As it is, the film is wasted potential. A good story and a good movie, but one that could have been so much better with a different ending.

Read More
Reviewed by mwbubelah 8

Here is a film that will keep you wondering just what it&#39;s all about. For those who are into such movies, you&#39;re in for a treat. The familiar theme of going back to the past to &quot;fix&quot; certain wrongs is offered here with an engaging plot and a bang-up twist.<br/><br/>Simon Cable is a wealthy young man who wakes up in a hospital after some kind of accident in 2002, supposedly due to wood refinishing fumes. We soon learn that he has been in this hospital before, in 2000, which is when his brother Peter was killed. His wife Anna comes to see him but apparently was somehow involved in the cover-up of the truth behind Peter&#39;s death. All of this is unknown to Simon, since he has amnesia (or so his doctor thinks) and now believes he has lost two years of his life. It is here that we movie-goers become intrigued, and the attention-grabbing twists do not stop. Who is the blond woman Claire? What is the secret of Simon&#39;s brother&#39;s death? Why is his doctor unfathomably a pediatrician?<br/><br/>As Simon recovers from his accident, he seems to have flashbacks to 2000, filling the holes in his memory. Or does he? His doctor in 2000 makes a pretty good case that his mind is creating images that Simon feels are actually premonitions of 2002. Confused? Well, so&#39;s Simon, and we come to understand the &quot;real&quot; story in bits and pieces, just as Simon does. Eventually, he believes (based on a rather shocking incident during a &quot;flashback&quot; to 2000) that he can go back in time to undo past wrongs and, as in so many other films of this type, things do not go well.<br/><br/>Seen it before, you say? Well, this is a well-wrought presentation of the basic premise, with a possible murder and wife/mistress conflict, some good editing, and more than respectable acting, especially from Ryan Phillipe (Simon), who seems to be blossoming as an actor, or at least is getting better roles. This is a good thing, considering that Phillipe is in every scene, and the other actors all have rather small parts by comparison. Big-name actor Stephen Rea as Doctor Newman is nothing to write home about, but that may partly be because his role is relatively less significant to the total story. The role of Simon&#39;s brother Peter, played by Robert Sean Leonard, is even smaller, and Leonard seems to barely walk through it. However, watch for Stephen Graham&#39;s portrayal of particularly crabby heart patient Travitt in the year 2000 scenes.<br/><br/>In any event, go into this film with an open mind, and try not to compare it to others of its genre, most recently &quot;The Butterfly Effect.&quot; The last few minutes of the film will make you rethink your comparisons anyway and leave you with a new confusion worth discussing at your favorite coffeehouse afterwards.

Read More
Read more IMDb reviews