I switched to this movie because nothing else was on and expected the usual garbage that comes out of a "Sci-Fi Channel Original", due to low budgets and everything else. I was actually pretty impressed with the script when I took considerations for what TV writers have to go through in terms of rigorous formulas and budget crises. There were definitely some issues: was it really necessary to have a bad guy? What if the team really was going after what the hero thinks they are going after? The worst was that stupid robot Rook; although it's not a bad name for a robot, it looked like a 30s scifi plastic piece of junk. We could have skipped all of that. The psychological games between the hologram and the hero actually make up about 90% of this film anyway. The rest is just 10 minutes of silly subplot. Without any of the extra fluff and with a budget this movie actually had the potential to work.
16 Reviews
A painfully twisted plot
Pro Jury10 August 2003
What is left of Planet Earth is populated by a few poor and starving rag-tag survivors. They must eat bugs and insects, or whatever, after a poison war, or something, has nearly wiped out all human civilization. In these dark times, one of the few people on Earth still able to live in comfort, we will call him the All Knowing Big Boss, has a great quest to prevent some secret spore seeds from being released into the air. It seems that the All Knowing Big Boss is the last person on Earth that knows that these spores even exist. The spores are located far away from any living soul, and they are highly protected by many layers of deadly defense systems.
The All Knowing Big Boss wants the secret spores to remain in their secret protected containers. So, he makes a plan to send in a macho action team to remove the spore containers from all of the protective systems and secret location. Sending people to the location of secret spores makes them no longer a secret. Sending people to disable all of the protective systems makes it possible for the spores to be easily released into the air. How about letting sleeping dogs lie?!
The one pleasant feature of ENCRYPT is the radiant and elegant Vivian Wu. As the unremarkable macho action team members drop off with mechanically paced predictable timing, engaging Vivian Wu's charm makes acceptable the plot idea of her old employer wanting her so much. She is an object of love, an object of desire -- a very believable concept!
Fans of Vivian Wu may want to check out an outstanding B-movie she is in from a couple years back called DINNER RUSH. DINNER RUSH is highly recommended. ENCRYPT is not.
The All Knowing Big Boss wants the secret spores to remain in their secret protected containers. So, he makes a plan to send in a macho action team to remove the spore containers from all of the protective systems and secret location. Sending people to the location of secret spores makes them no longer a secret. Sending people to disable all of the protective systems makes it possible for the spores to be easily released into the air. How about letting sleeping dogs lie?!
The one pleasant feature of ENCRYPT is the radiant and elegant Vivian Wu. As the unremarkable macho action team members drop off with mechanically paced predictable timing, engaging Vivian Wu's charm makes acceptable the plot idea of her old employer wanting her so much. She is an object of love, an object of desire -- a very believable concept!
Fans of Vivian Wu may want to check out an outstanding B-movie she is in from a couple years back called DINNER RUSH. DINNER RUSH is highly recommended. ENCRYPT is not.
Didn't care for it all that much, but not that bad
TheLittleSongbird1 August 2012
I have definitely seen worse movies than Encrypt. From the premise it seemed intriguing, but for some reason(maybe it was the fact that it was a low-budget TV movie) I was also dubious as to if it would be as good. It isn't quite, but it is not a complete waste of a good concept either. For instance, for a low-budget TV movie it actually looks quite good. The editing is crisper than I was expecting, the settings do at least have some atmosphere and the special effects are above average, not outstanding but not crude or artificial. There is only one exception, which was the robot that looked as though it would be more at home in the 30s, even then it was nowhere near as bad as special effects for other low-budget TV movies I've seen recently. The music has a suitably haunting quality, not over-bearing or sluggish-sounding. The acting is also above average, especially from Vivian Wu who is radiant and has a certain command, nobody's absolutely outstanding but again there is nobody terrible at the same time. The story also has points of interest, the psychological games between Wu and the hero are very intriguing especially. On the other hand, there are other scenes that do feel as though they were there for padding, consequently the pace drags at times. The ending also underwhelms, not in a rushed or abrupt sort of way but it did seem a little too easy and contrived for my liking. The dialogue is not as cheesy or as stilted as I feared, but it is rather talky with too-episodic a structure which drags Encrypt further. The characters are less stereotypical than you'd think but underdeveloped, and I really didn't see the need for a villain. All in all, not bad but at the same time I didn't care for it. 5/10 Bethany Cox
EnCrypt
Skrib28 July 2003
Guys,
As the author of the EnCrypt screenplay that was the basis for the Sci Fi Channel movie of the same name, I must point out that writers receive no credit when a film is good (because it's the result of the 'director's vision'), and often all of the blame when it's bad ("Man, this was a piece of crap! What was that writer thinking?")
The EnCrypt film is not the spec screenplay I wrote, which, after all, was shiny enough to sell to strangers at the Sci Fi Channel. Another writer was brought in behind me and extensive changes were made resulting in the film you saw. If anyone is interested I'll email them the original spec screenplay. Judge for yourself what EnCrypt would have been in a perfect world.
The world is not perfect.
-- Richard Taylor
As the author of the EnCrypt screenplay that was the basis for the Sci Fi Channel movie of the same name, I must point out that writers receive no credit when a film is good (because it's the result of the 'director's vision'), and often all of the blame when it's bad ("Man, this was a piece of crap! What was that writer thinking?")
The EnCrypt film is not the spec screenplay I wrote, which, after all, was shiny enough to sell to strangers at the Sci Fi Channel. Another writer was brought in behind me and extensive changes were made resulting in the film you saw. If anyone is interested I'll email them the original spec screenplay. Judge for yourself what EnCrypt would have been in a perfect world.
The world is not perfect.
-- Richard Taylor
It is pretty tough to imagine that they could be so predictably bad.
dtype29 June 2003
I'm a big fan of camp, but when every plot 'twist' is predictable and bad, while obviously not trying to be, even I lose interest. I was going to rate this a 3, but the ending dropped it a point easily. Its only saving grace is that I hated other movies more. Not enough beer in the world for this one.
Poorly realised, bad props, bad dialogue, bad ....
corsoski19 December 2004
A stuttering plot, uninteresting characters and sub-par (to say the least) dialogue plagues this TV production that could hardly have been interesting even with a billion dollar production budget.
The characters aren't believable, in their motives, actions or their professed occupations. The plot reads like a bad Dungeons and Dragons(TM) hack but with plasma rifles and force fields. There are severe continuity issues and the degree of pointless interaction between the characters has this author, at least, wincing.
Avoid it like the plague. Watch any episode of Dark Angel and you will have better acting, dialogue and plot. Yuck.
The characters aren't believable, in their motives, actions or their professed occupations. The plot reads like a bad Dungeons and Dragons(TM) hack but with plasma rifles and force fields. There are severe continuity issues and the degree of pointless interaction between the characters has this author, at least, wincing.
Avoid it like the plague. Watch any episode of Dark Angel and you will have better acting, dialogue and plot. Yuck.
This Story was better as RESIDENT EVIL
TheTollTroll4 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
If you really enjoyed the 2002 Resident Evil movie, then you should just see it instead of waisting 2 hours you'll never get back. I can not believe that no one has commented that this movie is just a cheap knock off of RE. First, a "special" commando force is the unique defense for a facility with a computer matrix that has an AI and holographic projection. And this "Hive" rip-off has a series of traps that inevitably kill off one member of the squad at a time. There's even a chess reference in the code names, which was in the dialog of RE. Despite the fact that there are no zombies, the "Rook", the movie's nemesis, is some sort of bio-creature, very pail in color suggesting necrotic tissue, with a lot of cyborg components just like a super mutant of RE. So, a wag-of-the-finger to Mr. Richard Taylor for claiming any credit for this story.
They are not the same movie obviously, but the writer got the idea watching Resident Evil I think.
They are not the same movie obviously, but the writer got the idea watching Resident Evil I think.
My kingdom for a hologram
unbrokenmetal18 August 2009
"Encrypt" reminded me of "Resident Evil" without the zombies. A team of specialists led by a former major enters a building full of deadly traps, and a computer appears in the shape of a female person to talk to them - preparing death for them all, maybe. Anyhow, the character development is interesting in so far as Vivian Wu (playing the hologram) gets the opportunity to begin a relationship with the major, and being damned to immortality, she has a tragic edge. In a beautiful scene, the mercenaries discover a painting of her and realize how obsessed the hologram creator must have been with her when she was still alive. The whole post-apocalyptic scenery is nothing new, the hundreds of shot-shells used is what you expect for the genre, so in the end it's nothing unusual, but OK for the TV budget.
Another video game gets made into a movie!
Little-Mikey18 February 2011
I love sci-fi flicks, always have and always will. But this movie reminded me of a video game that was made into a movie.
I had to rate it with 5 stars because the special effects were impressive and the movie held my attention from start to finish.
Our heroes, a crack team of commandos, led by two leaders who don't get along, perhaps due to the fact that they were on opposite sides at one time and are forced by a common cause to work together.
Their mission is to penetrate a villa that is full of hidden traps and snares to retrieve a precious artifact.
The first problem with this movie is in how this DVD was packaged. I couldn't help but to notice that the two stars are made to look as unphotogenic as possible. You would never guess that the female, Vivian Wu is one of the most beautiful actresses. She was depicted on the cover as a plain and unappealing Oriental, which is not so.
Vivian Wu plays the part of "Diana", a beautiful hologram who wins the respect of one leader and the hatred of the other as the team penetrates the villa in pursuit of what it was the team was assigned to locate.
The special effects are well done and since the story takes place in the future, this allows a lot of leeway as to what is believable and what is not. Remember, this is science fiction, not science fact.
The movie is entertaining, but exactly the type of movie that I would want to watch over and over again.
Rent the movie, if you must. If you're a sci-fi fan, you won't be disappointed. But don't buy it unless it is on sale.
I had to rate it with 5 stars because the special effects were impressive and the movie held my attention from start to finish.
Our heroes, a crack team of commandos, led by two leaders who don't get along, perhaps due to the fact that they were on opposite sides at one time and are forced by a common cause to work together.
Their mission is to penetrate a villa that is full of hidden traps and snares to retrieve a precious artifact.
The first problem with this movie is in how this DVD was packaged. I couldn't help but to notice that the two stars are made to look as unphotogenic as possible. You would never guess that the female, Vivian Wu is one of the most beautiful actresses. She was depicted on the cover as a plain and unappealing Oriental, which is not so.
Vivian Wu plays the part of "Diana", a beautiful hologram who wins the respect of one leader and the hatred of the other as the team penetrates the villa in pursuit of what it was the team was assigned to locate.
The special effects are well done and since the story takes place in the future, this allows a lot of leeway as to what is believable and what is not. Remember, this is science fiction, not science fact.
The movie is entertaining, but exactly the type of movie that I would want to watch over and over again.
Rent the movie, if you must. If you're a sci-fi fan, you won't be disappointed. But don't buy it unless it is on sale.
Fairly ambitious, fairly successful
gridoon202422 October 2009
"Encrypt" is a medium-budget film that tries to do at least three genres simultaneously: post-apocalyptic sci-fi, commando-type action, and philosophical rumination on what it means to be a human or a machine. It achieves modest success in all three fields. Occasionally the budget constraints show through and it becomes a bit too talky, but in general the effects are pretty good and the relatively unknown actors play their parts solidly (the most familiar name is probably Vivian Wu, who appears exclusively as a hologram). The script is rather ambitious and concludes with a hopeful but not happy ending. If you can find this movie, it's worth a look. **1/2 out of 4.
Cheese from beginning to end
rlange-36 March 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I see where a few people involved in this debacle wrote reviews to share their side of the story, and I thought what they wrote was helpful in understanding it. The fact that they basically came up with excuses -- rewrites, budget constraints, production formats etc -- simply underlines how bad this movie is. And my criticisms in panning it are not personally directed but simply a warning that this one doesn't make the cut.
It's watchable, but barely so. There are plot holes in every corner, the dialogue borders on the ridiculous, and the ending is telegraphed a mile away. The modestly interesting feature of a hologram interacting with a recon team get drowned in silly dialogue like who makes a meal in the midst of what is supposed to be a tense and deadly encounter with an unknown enemy. Would ya wrassle us up some Hamburger Helper Sally, between us getting killed by these automated carpet sweepers? Apparently this elite team equipped with the latest gizmos and red plastic tubed wonder armor has no access to MREs. Once they get into the last rooms they treat the place more like a four star motel than a deadly encounter zone.
The rationale for the encounter with the fearsome Rook is that it can't be killed single handedly. Yet only one scene ago, the hero making that case abandoned King to do exactly that. Huh? Vivian Woo was attractive and hands down the best acted character in the movie. But that's not saying much.
It's watchable, but barely so. There are plot holes in every corner, the dialogue borders on the ridiculous, and the ending is telegraphed a mile away. The modestly interesting feature of a hologram interacting with a recon team get drowned in silly dialogue like who makes a meal in the midst of what is supposed to be a tense and deadly encounter with an unknown enemy. Would ya wrassle us up some Hamburger Helper Sally, between us getting killed by these automated carpet sweepers? Apparently this elite team equipped with the latest gizmos and red plastic tubed wonder armor has no access to MREs. Once they get into the last rooms they treat the place more like a four star motel than a deadly encounter zone.
The rationale for the encounter with the fearsome Rook is that it can't be killed single handedly. Yet only one scene ago, the hero making that case abandoned King to do exactly that. Huh? Vivian Woo was attractive and hands down the best acted character in the movie. But that's not saying much.
Stock Sci-Fi i.e. Melodrama in the future.
mshambli1 November 2003
This isn't a bad movie, as much as it is a bland movie.
The plot has much more to do with human "melodrama" than it does with any particular science fiction element. The story could be told in the middle ages as much as in the future.
It is watchable, and there are some fairly attractive images. I'd watch it again, but mostly only if something better wasn't on. I gave it a 7 but it's probably only a 5 or so.
The plot has much more to do with human "melodrama" than it does with any particular science fiction element. The story could be told in the middle ages as much as in the future.
It is watchable, and there are some fairly attractive images. I'd watch it again, but mostly only if something better wasn't on. I gave it a 7 but it's probably only a 5 or so.
Its a decent flick
asinyne26 October 2005
I watched most of this film recently but had to leave towards the end due to an appointment. It was by no means a great movie but it wasn't terrible either. In fact I was drawn in after a while. I agree that with a bit more budget this could have been really good. A couple of things that would have helped a lot are more interesting sets and perhaps a sexier girl in the role of the hologram. This might have created a bit of sexual tension thats always a good thing. The actress that played the role was OK but i don't think the camera found her very compelling. Grant Show isn't especially charismatic either but hes not bad. I liked the suits they wore and the guards looked pretty decent also. At times the constant and slow paced moving from room to room got a bit tedious but thats why i say the scenery could have been more interesting, giving the viewer more visual twists if not plot twists. Overall, its not a bad way to spend some time, i would take it over 75 percent of Arnold's movies...I gave it a six, almost a seven. Sorry i missed the ending, but thats OK i can catch it later.
Another perspective
Robinsony7 September 2003
As the "other writer" on this project, let me give a few of you an eduction on the wonderful world of TV production. While the original screenplay Encrypt, written by Richard Taylor, was solid, it was written as a big movie. At a studio level, it would have been budgeted between $60-80 million. On an independent level, it probably would have cost around $10 million. The original movies for the Sci-fi channel are budgeted at $2 million, which after above the line costs (actors, directors, writers, producers), it's actually considerably less. Obviously, for this kind of money, the production quality on every level is going to be less than your standard Fox movie of the week. Secondly, this is a TV MOVIE, which means it has to fit into a formula predetermined by the network by past successes (i.e. commercial breaks every twenty minutes, and a structure that leaves cliff hangers before every break). It has an "episodic feel" because it is episodic TV. And for this genre, that means action beats with a body count. That means adding a team. Now, while the character development for the team members clearly didn't work, some of that was due to casting (Torontonian actors don't seem to "get" the American commando stuff), and a last minute order to "cut one character" riddled the piece with lost lines and lost moments. Lastly, (and we go back to the budget for this one), everything has to take place in one or two locations (moving around is costly), which means you usually end up forcing your set-pieces into whatever rooms are available at your primary location. As a result, things feel less organic than they should. That being said, Encrypt was better received than the few readers here have commented. The director did tremendous things within the limitations given him and both Grant and Vivian grounded the film with strong, emotional performances. Could the movie have been better? Sure. But given the time, budgetary and other constraints, the efforts put forth by many deserves a little more respect, especially given all of their good intentions.
Too many crooks spoil the script.
Orson-1729 July 2003
A user comment by Roger Tay states: "How on earth does dreck written as badly as this actually get made?" Well Roger, let me explain.
This was an original script and I happen to know the screenwriter on this project, (God I love living in L.A.). I read the script way before it was produced. This is not what was written. Producers, and there are many on a project, try to dance around each other making changes to justify their existence.
When enough changes are made, the producers bring in another writer who knows nothing of the original intent of the writer and tries not only to make the lame changes the producers want, but will do his/her best to change at least 51% of the script in order to share a full "screenplay by" credit on the project. And that's how this was re-written.
So, to answer your question.... you take a bunch of 30 year olds who know how to dress but know nothing about story telling and give them a decent script to destroy.
This was an original script and I happen to know the screenwriter on this project, (God I love living in L.A.). I read the script way before it was produced. This is not what was written. Producers, and there are many on a project, try to dance around each other making changes to justify their existence.
When enough changes are made, the producers bring in another writer who knows nothing of the original intent of the writer and tries not only to make the lame changes the producers want, but will do his/her best to change at least 51% of the script in order to share a full "screenplay by" credit on the project. And that's how this was re-written.
So, to answer your question.... you take a bunch of 30 year olds who know how to dress but know nothing about story telling and give them a decent script to destroy.
How on earth does dreck written as badly as this actually get made?
rmt3818 June 2003
While Encrypt was watchable due to its ok production quality, the feeling this left me with was just how low quality the plot was and that this production was just made for the sake of making a sci-fi production.
The challenges faced by the protagonists during the show seemed like they were inserted just to pad out its length. In addition they weren't generally very interesting or convincing as actually being much of a challenge except to serve as an excuse to remove cast members. While the ending and direction of the storyline were moderately interesting, what role various cast members were going to play was pretty predictable given their shallow dialog and tacky names.
How on earth dreck written as badly as this actually gets made I have to wonder.
The challenges faced by the protagonists during the show seemed like they were inserted just to pad out its length. In addition they weren't generally very interesting or convincing as actually being much of a challenge except to serve as an excuse to remove cast members. While the ending and direction of the storyline were moderately interesting, what role various cast members were going to play was pretty predictable given their shallow dialog and tacky names.
How on earth dreck written as badly as this actually gets made I have to wonder.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
