2067 Review

Synopsis: One man’s journey to the future to save a dying world.

Cast: Kodi Smit-McPhee, Ryan Kwanten, Damian Walshe-Howling, Leeanna Walsman, Sana’a Shaik, Matt Testro, Finn Little, Aaron Glenane, Deborah Mailman

Directors: Seth Larney
Writers: Seth Larney

Sometimes I’ll watch a movie and when those final credits begin to roll it’s become rather obvious the writer started from the bottom and worked their way backwards. An ending punch-line is found, and the script’s puzzle isn’t crafting exciting and well-developed characters, but instead how to reach the magic trick at the end of the script. That’s 2067 in a nutshell. It’s a film so focused on the magic trick that the characters feel like a last-minute afterthought.

In the year 2067, the earth is dying, plants no longer exist, and synthetic oxygen is now relied upon to live. Enter Ethan Whyte (Kodi Smit-McPhee) and Jude Mathers (Ryan Kwanten) who work at a power plant to make ends meet amongst harsh and gruelling conditions. Their world gets thrown upside-down when they’re called up to the offices of the Chronicorp Corporation. Head of the company, Regina Jackson (Deborah Mailman) explains they’ve received a message from 407 years into the future and all it said was ‘Send Ethan Whyte.’

Of course, Ethan mulls it over and discusses the situation with his sick wife (Sana’a Shaik) at home before deciding to go forward with the mission: head deep inside the crazy time-travel portal and discover how people are still alive 407 years into the future, and why someone specifically asked for him to be sent forward. Jude ends up following him, and the two discover that plants are alive and kicking 407 years into the future, but it appears humanity is not.

The science of 2067 is very messy, albeit with some interesting ideas here, even if you’ve seen them before. That magic trick at the end of the film is exciting, but it certainly doesn’t feel earned. There are many glaring issues with the time travel logic in the movie, but maybe if the characters engaged me in the film I’d have had less time to think them over, but I was not.

I like Kodi Smit-McPhee. He’s been great in the last few X-Men films, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and, of course, The Road and Let Me In. However, in 2067 he was terribly miscast, and Seth Larney’s direction isn’t helping the young actor. He’s an unlikeable, one-note, mess of a character that I did not care for at all. Smit-McPhee has his abilities to carry a film stretched beyond his skills and years, and it’s like seeing the cracks appear before you in real-time.

Play

Unfortunately, there’s little in the way of good performances in 2067. Ryan Kwanten is a macho-stereotype riding with no direction for his character. Even Deborah Mailman, who is usually pretty good, suffers to the extent she seems to be reading of cue-cards. It’s distractingly amateur across the board.

The focus of the film seems to be almost entirely on the special effects made on a budget. Which appears to be an Australian sub-genre at this point (looking at you Occupation: Rainfall, in cinemas now). Admittedly the effects do look good, but at the end of the day no matter how good your effects are – and no matter how well you did them and for what budget — if the story and characters aren’t interesting, your movie won’t be any good. Which is the crucial issue with 2067, it’s simply a poorly written and acted film that ultimately makes for a boring mess.

2067 is streaming on Netflix from February 19th.