Review:<br /><br />If I had to make a thematic comparison, I would say Andrew Proyas' 'Knowing' is the action film equivalent of '2001: A Space Odyssey' (1968). Though it is no masterpiece like '2001', 'Knowing' suggests the same thing '2001' did – that determinism and coincidence, intelligent design and natural selection - the great differing viewpoints on the nature of our existence - may not be at odds after all; they may be counterparts to a greater whole.<br /><br />Nicholas Cage plays John Koestler, an MIT professor who has recently lost his wife. He lives in a beautiful but shabby home in Lexington, Massachusetts with his ten year old son Caleb (Chandler Canterbury). At Caleb's school there is a ceremony where a time capsule is opened. Fifty years earlier a classroom of students was asked to draw pictures of how they pictured the future and to place their pictures in this time capsule. Lucinda, (Lara Robinson), a seemingly disturbed child in the class does not draw the future. Instead she lists a seemingly chaotic sequence of numbers. Now, fifty years later, John Koestler gets a hold of this list through his son and begins to see an alarming pattern emerge from the numbers.<br /><br />In some respects, 'Knowing' is similar to popular contemporary mysteries like, say, 'The Da Vinci Code.' The main course of the film follows Koestler as he scampers throughout the east coast trying to find clues to what's going on and reassuring himself that the list of numbers means what he thinks it means. Along the way Koestler encounters Diane Wayland (Rose Byrne), the daughter of the numbers-writer Lucinda, and Diane's daughter Abby (Lara Robinson again). They embark on a mission to find the missing clues for discovering the secret of the numbers. All the while they are being pursued by mysterious, pale men called 'the whisper people' by Caleb and Abby. <br /><br />Like in Andrew Proyas' previous films 'Dark City' (1998) and "I, Robot" (2004) there is both visual and philosophical food for thought at work here. The central question of 'Knowing' is clearly stated at the beginning of the film by Cage's character when he asks his students in a lecture whether they think the universe is inherently deterministic or a series of random events. As we know, determinism suggests a higher intelligence controls existence while randomness implicates a meaningless sequence of accidents led to our existence.<br /><br />I've always thought determinism excluding randomness and vice versa is a limited way to think about the nature of things. We have such a frustrating inclination to seek out mutually exclusive answers. For me, 'Knowing' suggests that the universe is in fact deterministic on a grand scale but that determinism is fueled by smaller, random occurrences, if that makes any sense. The end is already written but it is only reached through the decisions of individuals trying to avoid that very end.<br /><br />Rating:<br /><br />On a scale of one to Casablanca, this film is a "Big Fish" (2003).<br /><br />Rationalization:<br /><br />To express my honest opinion about this film, I'd say I thought the ideas it evokes are more intriguing than the film itself. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Most films do not attempt to evoke cosmic ideas at all. Most films only evoke the idea that love is good. 'Knowing' is a thought provoking film that banks on time honored sleuth plot devices. Some of the disaster sequences are exquisite though, especially the plane crash and the final disaster. I would even go so far as to say that the final ten minutes of the movie is what elevates 'Knowing' above most mystery-thrillers. The last ten minutes are visionary. They made me think back to "2001: A Space Odyssey." And yet, when I think about "2001: A Space Odyssey" I must admit that 'Knowing' pales in comparison.