dbdumonteil Before he began to work for Spielberg and co and got caught up in the Hollywood machine,Crichton was really an auteur,whose works have strong connections between them."Mondwest" "Coma" and "Looker" deal with the same subject:distrust or disgust of technology,heroes trying to find what lies beneath.These three works display two worlds which coexist ,the second thriving in the shadow of the "real" one.We have James Brolin and Richard Benjamin leaving their routine nine-to-five life for a fake far-west(Mondwest);Geneviève Bujold ,far from her comforting hospital ,pacing up and down the ominous Jefferson Institute (Coma).Albert Finney,(Doctor Robert)hip cosmetic surgeon,closing his office to investigate in the unsettling building of "Digital Matrix inc." That said,"looker" is not as strong as the two previous works (I put aside "the first grain train robbery " which is a different matter):one can go as far as to write it's merely some kind of repetition of what came before:the Jefferson Institute and Digital Matrix inc. play the same part in "coma" and "looker";and there's more:Leigh Taylor -Young 's part in the latter recalls Elizabeth Ashley's in the former:same spooky smile,same frightening coolness.You can compare James Coburn and Richard Widmark as well ."Coma" wins hands down though:its directing is much more mastered,the camera wonderfully used the corridors of the hospital,and the huge room full of dead bodies in the institute; it lacks vigor,intensity,which makes it look like a made-for-TV movie.There are excellent ideas particularly when Coburn says that nobody forces you to watch TV,and however most of the American people spend 20% of their time in front of their set.We might see commercials differently next time we're confronted to a spate of this mind-destroying drivel.But suspense is very weak -in "Coma" it was almost constant- and Albert Finney was not perhaps the good choice :a good Hercule Poirot( who works with his gray cells),he's too listless in this active part."Looker" is worth a look anyway.

JoeB131 Obviously forgotten today, and maybe that's a problem.Michael Crichton dealt in practical Science Fiction. How a potential technology could really cause problems in the here and now. This movie hit on a few of them, some of which HAVE come to pass.His premise is that computers could be used to simulate characters (already has happened) and that they could be used to influence us by using algorithms to calculate our optimum responses. (Again, probably happening now, even if we don't know about it.) The plot is that a plastic surgeon is asked to alter four women into perfect specimens, but three of them are killed after wards (they never really explain why.) In trying to protect the last, whom he develops a personal bond with, he uncovers a plot to use computer generated images (wow, and now they are real!) to manipulate our responses.A note on nudity. We have Susan Dey of Partridge family fame going topless in a couple of scenes. We'd NEVER see that now. If we are lucky, we might see a name actress have her head CGI'd (ironic) onto a body double. But usually, the MPAA would go completely nuts and give the film an R or NC-17 rating.Some things are dated, such as tape-reading computers and big hair on the women- SO 1980's. But the film's concepts hold up pretty well.

JasparLamarCrabb Not awful. Michael Crichton's techo-thriller has a lot of great ideas floating around, but few are really fleshed out enough to make for a really good movie. Albert Finney plays a Beverly Hills plastic surgeon who stumbles upon a plot to kill off models (many of whom were his patients). The trail leads to a conglomerate run by oily James Coburn and his sexy goon Leigh Taylor Young. What he uncovers is a pretty clever plot to replace the models with computer generated replicas, thus allowing them to work forever without aging or getting paid. Unfortunately, the leaden pacing of the movie does it in. Finney seems surprisingly engaged, but Crichton has directed nothing. In fact, his direction here (as it was with COMA) is so without personality it has a deadening affect on everything. Coburn is fine in an all too brief role and Susan Dey is terrific as one of Finney's luckier patients.

morpheus1-2 Today's audiences are a bit spoiled and jaded. This was a great movie for it's time. (Yes, I still have a copy of it on beta format) It is also kind of prophetic since the advancements in computer animation. At some point, real actors will no longer be needed. Hmmmmmm. There is also a "looker" gun that sends out a light pulse that causes the victim to "freeze" and loose chunks of time. (Sounds a little familiar -- anyone seen MIB?) There is the look into the plastic surgery and the need to look perfect (that's where the title comes in). Albert Finney and Susan Dey make an unlikely pairing in this "futuristic" sci-fi drama. Anyway, this is worth checking out. So grab a Tab soda, relax, and try to find a copy of this movie.