Aristides-2 In trying to "humanize" the story, unprofessional behavior takes place between a couple of the key psychiatrists, in small as well as large occurrences, that remind one of soap opera reality: 'emotionality as a substitute for dramaturgy. Too, the difficulties filming science-fiction cheaply are having visual loose ends take place that imaginative (or merely competent) directors take care of as a matter of course because of budget largess. Sci-fi writers are obsessive and brilliant and cannot brook 'loose ends'; if a story includes observable 'state' surveillance everywhere, for example, then between production design and computer effects, you will see it on the screen. "Final's" budget shortcomings unfortunately prevail and sink the story's need for a airtight, highly controlled production design. Emphasis on the word controlled. With the possibility of human survival at stake, would there not be complete surveillance of what's taking place.....everywhere in the facility, since there are only two unfrozen humans available? Security was highly negligent throughout the institution.I also wondered why they would cast an actor such as Dennis Leary? His personality is so abrasive and unlikable. Bill doesn't have to be a dullard but he shouldn't alienate the viewer. Goodness, once his eminent demise was spoken of I on several occasions wished the toxins would start dripping into an IV. (Hope Davis's Dr. Ann at least showed some human attractiveness within her quandary about participating in the harvesting of this guy's body for medical science and/or the race's survival.)Five stars because some of the story's main and imaginative ideas survived to keep me interested.

Alan J. Jacobs I felt as though I should watch it again to figure out plot elements that I really didn't get, hints of things that may or may not have happened. But I didn't, because I just wasn't that interested.I guess that mental hospitals are popular as sites for movies because there must be lots of vacant sanitoria lying around the country that you can rent for cheap. And this movie seemed quite cheap. What is it about Denis Leary? He so unsympathetic, such an overactor, such an emoter. He has the right to exist, but I've never seen him in anything where I enjoyed watching the guy act. And when he speaks as himself, as a guest on a talk show, he's even less sympathetic. Hope Davis was her usual bland self.But there are a few elements of the plot that I didn't get, and I didn't go back to figure out: (SPOILER)1. Is there a prior relation between Bill and Ann? Specifically, is Bill the father of Ann?2. Is Ann an unfrozen person, who once had some relation to Bill?3. What's with Ann's sister? Was she frozen, but now having troubles? Is she really Ann's sister, or her mother, via Bill?As you can see, I missed something. I'm not good at sci-fi mysteries. So blame it on me.Jim McGaffin as the orderly was perfect.

denos-3 The Good: Given the Bad (see below) this film is surprisingly good at hooking you. If only it had carried through. Also, from reading the other comments, it appears that fans of Denis Leary can't stand Hope Davis and visa versa - yet they both have excellent moments, if you're a fan of either, you might want to see this film just because.The Bad (SPOILERS!): The story and its staging promise dark complexities, revelations and an emotional ride. It does not deliver -- worse, it doesn't really try. The story is illogical on almost every front. Illogical Plot 1: The patient wakes from a coma with 'delusions' that are in fact what's really going on. But how does a coma patient know what happened while he was out? (we never find out). Given that this is not an action or mystery film - what are these delusions supposed to be setting up?Illogical Plot 2: Perhaps we're supposed to be asking ourselves "is he sane or isn't he?". Yet the truth is revealed in a straight forward manner over the course of several scenes 2/3 of the way through the film. Denis Leary does a decent job with the material, but the script and the director portray his character as exactly what he is - an average person who's heavily disorientated and distrusting in a situation that, what do you know, induces disorientation and distrust. {He's also emotionally disturbed by the personally trauma that led to his being in a coma - but that's another thread that is never fully explained or incorporated into the plot.} So where's the tension in a documentary like presentation of a distressed patient who bares no emotional secrets and who's broadcasting the end of the film in his first scene?Illogical Motivations: The patient was frozen three years into his coma, and is then thawed 25 years later, specifically so that his body's natural immunity can be used to fight a horrible plague. Naturally, this requires a medical procedure that will kill the patient. So why do the doctors spend weeks trying to cure his delusions? Especially as they know he's not actually delusional? Why don't they chop him up day one? Its never explained.By the way, you'd think what with the plague and the intent of killing their patient and all, there would be lots of emotional complexity with the staff, right? And that the patient (who dies more or less willingly) would have a complex internal dialog going on, right? Particularly in a film that uses the style of a dramatic character study, right? Wrong. It's not that they attempt it and fail - its not even in the script.I wish there had been some big revelation in the end. Even a really bad one. Some justification for my staying up an hour past bedtime to see this film through.

Bobbi Crow Being a huge fan of Denis Leary, and Hope Davis I knew going in I would enjoy it. I didn't anticipate how much, or how long afterward I'd be re-running scenes in my brain. I couldn't wait to check it out on the IMDb to read what others felt after viewing it. I'm a retired Psychiatric RN and kept questioning what Hope Davis was doing with her patient... I'd love to have this shown to a group of Mental Health workers and read their reviews. Unlike one of your reviewers I didn't connect any religious association at all with, and after reading that review think the reviewer was one of my former patients...still obsessing over his own devils. At first I didn't recognize Leary with the very short crew cut, but I'm so glad they did that too-this certainly isn't a comedy for Leary, rather it is a showcase for Campbell Scott's direction and the ensemble cast are to be congratulated. I may go buy a copy- it was just wonderful.