Blaironit Excellent film with a gripping story!

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Ortiz Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Leofwine_draca The second teaming of Jean-Claude Van Damme and director Ringo Lam after the underrated MAXIMUM RISK is an extremely violent tale with a neat twist which makes it akin to both THE BONE COLLECTOR and Schwarzenegger's recent THE SIXTH DAY, as it mixes both science fiction and horror elements into an otherwise action-orientated plot. Hong Kong legend Ringo Lam shoots his movie with style and his typically hard-edged action scenes don't disappoint here, from the acrobatic martial arts battles (Van Damme inevitably ends up battling himself, as almost always in these kinds of films - the actor has a fetish about playing dual roles, you see) which make good use of props and take full advantage of Lam's brutal, fast-paced style. Then there's a hair-raising ambulance chase in an underground car park which really gets the blood going - an excellent sequence, near flawless in its execution.The plot is slower-paced than normal and rather more complex than you might at first expect. The 'bad' Van Damme is a long-haired sunglasses-wearing punk, who was tortured and beaten by his mother as a child and now has a vendetta against single mothers, whom he burns like in the chilling opening shots. As the baddie, Van Damme is pretty nasty and totally acceptable in what is a total turnaround from the normal, masculine hero-type parts he plays. The 'good' Van Damme on the other hand is a clone with the mind of a child, who must quickly learn to mentally grow and adapt to the world. Van Damme's acting in this part is superb and far surpasses any of his previous performances: he conveys the naivety and wonder of a child trapped in a man's very well indeed, far better than the likes of Robin Williams have done so previously. Congratulations indeed for such a complex part for the actor and that he managed to pull it off successfully.The only major flaw that this film has is its handling of violence - some of it is pretty graphic, not bloody but still repellent. I refer to scenes in which beaten men are repeatedly kicked - hard - in the stomach whilst on the ground, sadistically so. The worst offending moment is when Michael Rooker beats the heck out of a handcuffed Van Damme whom he believes has mistreated a child (it turns out he hasn't after all) - judging by the mental state of Van Damme's character at the time this is akin to the beating of a child and as such leaves an unpleasant aftertaste - is this really necessary? Fortunately this and other scenes don't spoil the film too much but the gratuitousness of the violence is something we haven't seen much of before in Van Damme's other movies and take the edge of what could have been a classic.The only other actor of note in the cast is the veteran Michael Rooker, playing yet another cop (okay, an ex-cop in this case) with a grudge. Rooker puts in a solid and believable turn but it's nothing he hasn't played before, having become typecast in such roles in recent years. Ironically a minor character - Marnie Alton playing a hooker with a heart - is the strongest female part the film has, but then this is really a three-hander between Rooker and the two Van Dammes. A solid entry for the ageing action hero and different enough to be accessible for even those who aren't his fans - this is deeper and far more complex than anything he has made in the last five or six years and also a better film for it. Well-made, well-acted and only spoiled by some unnecessary sadism which it would have been better off without, my advice is to give REPLICANT a chance.

thinker1691 Modern Science has achieved many wonders in the real world. Indeed, such wonders have also been the wellspring of the movies and vice-versa. This movie is one such example. The story is of police officer Jake Riley (Michael Rooker), a Seattle detective out to snare an elusive criminal arsonist called 'The Torch.' (Jean-Claude Van Damme) Years have been amassed chasing him and Jake retires. Not wanting to end the game, The Torch, baits him to return. Also wanting to capture the deadly criminal, the Government run NSA offers Riley a Clone of the actual killer to assist him. With the body of an adult and the mind of a growing child, Riley and his assistant chase after the notorious killer and soon unforeseen events combine to put the police, Riley and the public in mortal danger. Mayham ensues as do physical confrontations, car chases, fiery explosions and death raining everywhere. Van dame is superb as the unstoppable heavy as well as his infant twin. While Michael Rooker is fast becoming a cinema Icon. The movie develops as fast as the audience can keep up and its a roller coaster ride after that. Excellent movie. ****

monacoforeverr This film is brilliant! Ringo Lam is a genius!!Come on, OK, Hopkins is a good actor, but with all the arrogant stereotypical crap that actors just like him deliver (I'm so good, I'm so respected and important in the movie industry, you don't even need to watch my films, you just know I'm the best actor ever.).? Give me a break! This film has none of that, and is way better!It's basically about a serial killer (who has been coined 'The Torch' by cops, for very obvious, and extremely interesting reasons you will notice) who lives a very elusive (which explains how he can live in a fixed position without being noticed) and disturbing life in Seattle. I won't say who he kills, but it is for very specific reasons, almost to suggest that he's actually a good guy, with the exception of a couple of body counts which were different to the rest, but still motivated by method in madness. He's basically a very lonely man, who has been the victim of a lot of abuse and is now pretty keen to show the world what if feels like to be a victim, which is so cool because it 180% reflects an actual serial killer's mind!There are so many interesting elements to this film, like why does Garrotte get so angered by Riley (played by the legend that is Michael Rooker) talking so bad about him on TV near the start, considering nobody knows his true identity? How about the tattoo we get a shot of near the start on his arm? United States Marine Corps......? Why does he kill almost all his victims in the same fashion? Why is Riley so sadistic on the innocent clone when he first meets him? Who injured the little boy? The clone? The dog?....Himself? And how is Jake related to the little boy and Angie anyway? How about him hearing the woman calling her son a 'bad boy'? We don't see him finish her off, so what did he do? Why does it seem that since the police are involved he's killing just for Riley, not any other cops, to pick up the pieces? What does Garrotte mean by 'You received my message...'? Why is he so interested in taking pictures for his computer and for his mother to see? Why is she in the place she is, and in that condition? How did he know the cops would turn up at his apartment when they did? How about his apartment in general? What did he actually do so wrong as a child to be treated that way? There's a line by Jake's mother :If you treat people like criminals, that's exactly what they will become.' Remember it for the rest of the film. That's the most down-to-earth statement I have ever heard in my life! Pay close attention also to the file Jake's co-worker has on Garrotte near the end about him, and the scene where the clone remembers Garrotte shaking like a child next to his mother's bed. I can't stress it enough, this film is absolutely incredible!!!!! It's all these ambiguous questions that make this a cult classic, this is one of the most interesting films ever!You have to really feel sympathy for the serial killer, he is so innocent underneath it all, and so incredibly interesting, and Van Damme delivers an incredible performance as the killer and the clone. Yes, Jean-Claude can act! If you compare this to 'The 6th Day' made one year earlier, with a similar plot, it's amazing how much better it is, and how much better Van Damme can act than Arnie! Forget Hannibal, seriously, Van Damme would absolutely wipe the floor with Hopkins' character and performance in those movies!! Another great thing about this film is that the death toll of the killer (told by a news reporter shortly in the film )is a very small number over the time, which is awesome not being a cliché like Grissom's death count in Con Air or Hannibal Lectar or some other film and serial killer that is 500 miles up its own backside with how amazing they think they are.The ending is humorous and enlightening, and it never at one point leaves you bored, there is always some awesome question you are asking yourself. As for the action? Van Damme can still do the moves like a master blaster at 40 years old and he is in tremendous physical condition, car chases and explosions to keep you going all the way.I must also thank Jean-Claude for proving that he doesn't always ruin or damage the career of Chinese directors making American movies for the first time, like people think he did with Ringo, John Woo and Tsui Hark, because he has now done 4 films with Ringo Lam, all of which are great. Also thanks to the legend that is Michael Rooker for a hell of a convincing performance as the obsessed detective, who is also in great shape for his age. Always fun to watch him. Highly recommended. 500/10

Paul Andrews Replicant is set in Seattle where over the past three years a serial killer known as the Torch (Jean-Claude Van Damme) has murdered eleven people, cop Jake Riley (Michael Rooker) has been trying to catch him but thus far has failed. The day of Jake's retirement comes & he hangs up his badge with the Torch still at large, however Jake is contacted by National Security Federation boss Satn Reisman (Ian Robison) who wants Jake to work for them & that they can help him catch the Torch. Jake agrees & it is revealed that the NSF have created an exact clone, or replicant (according to the IMDb's automatic spell-check the word 'replicant' isn't actually a word at all...) as they like to call it, of the Torch taken from an extract of his DNA from a hair strand at a crime scene. The NSF hand the replica over to Jake in an attempt to use his genetic memory inherited from the Torch to track him down...Directed by Hong Kong action film maker Ringo Lam this was his second Hollywood made film after another JCVD vehicle Maximum Risk (1996) & to date his only other two Hollywood films have also starred JCVD in In Hell (2003) & Wake of Death (2004), I have to say that Replicant is actually a fairly intelligent sci-fi action flick although it's not perfect. The script by Larry Wiggins & Les Weldon has a fairly emotive & relevant issue at it's core with both the moral & ethical dilemmas surrounding human cloning touched upon. Replicant doesn't just use the notion of cloning as an excuse for lots of action as it really does try to approach the issue in a somewhat grown up way. The whole idea of how a clone should be treated & the line 'if you treat someone like a criminal expect them to behave like one' is a very obvious allusion to the way we treat each other, the themes of the relationship between the clone & the person who has been cloned is raised as is whether they would share the same memories or feelings or thoughts. In the end it doesn't amount to much but at least Replicant tries to say something & have some sort of message which is a lot more than most straight-to-DVD action films attempt. Of course it's not all good news, the action scenes are a little too low key & infrequent for my liking & despite trying to present cloning in a semi serious light I don't see how a clone can have the memories from the person used to create it yet alone some sort of telepathic link. At over 100 minutes I think it goes on for a bit too long as well with an alarming amount of time between action set-pieces.Director Lam does a decent job, there's not much style here & it's a little bit flat & bland. In fact it feels like a made-for-telly film at times. The special effects are good & the action scenes are well choreographed. The fights are good, there's some explosions & an impressive sequence of an ambulance speeding through a car park crashing into other cars & the like. The violence is strong but not graphic. You know call me odd but I actually quite like JCVD, while the likes of Steven Seagal, Chuck Norris, Mark Dacascos, Dolph Lundgren & Wesley Snipes are content to churn out horrible low budget action films JCVD at least tries & his films are usually much better than those as well with the interesting if not totally successful Replicant a good example.According to the IMDb this had a budget of $17,000,000 which is total crap, in fact I believe it was $7,000,000 so I guessed someone pressed the '1' button by mistake somewhere along the line! It's well made for sure, although set in Seattle it was shot in British Columbia in Canada. The acting is pretty good, JCVD plays a dual role again as both the bad guy & his clone. Michael Rooker is decent as the burnt out cynical cop while there is no one else of any note in the cast.Replicant is a film which tries to be different, it tries to take a relevant issue & do something with it & it almost pulls it off. A couple more 'big' action moments & Replicant could have been great, as it is it's definitely good but not great.