Pluskylang Great Film overall

Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

room102 What a surprise. Very impressive and very Cronenbergian.This movie is excellent in almost every aspect, except for the plot that isn't very strong (but has a good ending).Excellent cast (all unknown to me, except for an old Rik Mayall in a dramatic role), cinematography, score, direction, practical effects and makeup. Great filming locations and atmosphere. Very impressive acting by the lead actors (Mayall is also great).It's too bad that the plot is not strong enough, otherwise I would have given it a higher score. Still, I give it credit for all the elements above, the originality and risks they took and the high quality result.

pierrot72 Definitely a far underrated movie. Probably disappointed horror fans expecting a straight genre movie are giving bad votes. It takes a while to establish it's world, but then it all contributes to a smart and involving thriller-drama. The way the main character's destiny and realistic experimental genetics are connected is not only fully believable and moving, but develops an intriguing and threatening dimension. Aesthetically and technically the film is surprisingly convincing, camera-work, pacing and music is remarkable. Michael Eklund's lead performance is outstanding. I can recommend that one.

in1984 5.1 of 10. The first 2/3 of this film are technically magnificent, then it seems to acquire the same tumor/virus this modern industrial sci-fi film centers upon.There are defects early on that hint at the writer/director failing to understand the subject and not knowing where he's going. Characters have flaws, defects, and strengths that simply don't fit. The acting, setting, filming, and atmosphere, however, make up for it. The story, minus the little defects, is also well told and creates immersion and suspense. Then, maybe in some attempt to become more of an action/suspense film, it becomes nearly a constant cliché and nonsensical for the last third.The filmmaker has talent as a director, but really needs help as a writer after the initial idea and plot development.

Ordinary Review It was after watching The Call (2013) that I decided to browse through Michael Eklund's filmography hoping to find other portrayals of deranged characters. Errors of the Human Body is a title that immediately hooked me and I wanted to know more. The poster looked marvelous and it seemed to have won some awards and nominations so I decided to see it. Doctor Geoff Burton was once renowned and a beacon of hope to the medical field, but a rare genetic condition that led to his son's death ruined him.On the verge of being fired he accepts a job offer in Germany. The transfer was supported by a young female doctor who was once Burton's intern and with whom he had a liaison. Once he arrives, he discovers what Rebekka is working on: a way to have cells regenerated extremely fast. However, the processes which work in amphibians seems bound to failure when tested in mammal embryos. This is until Jarek, Rebekka's previous partner on the project, tries it illegally on a mouse. Geoff, who was following the scene, steals the mouse in either desperate scientific interest or a desire to protect Rebekka's project. From there on, Geoff's mental health begins to deteriorate as he enters a conflict with Jarek and is plagued by his past. I was quite pleased with what strikes first in the movie: the constant ambient low tune of disturbing music and the quality of the medical environment which was not portrayed in the typical scientific way, but was filmed in a way that made it beautiful. The story is quite simple overall but the flashback of the past along with the deterioration of everything around Geoff makes the movie really smooth. Geoff Burton's character reminded me in many ways of the protagonist in The Machinist (2004). Eklund really shines in this deranged guilt-ridden persona, although he might now be typecast as the new crazy actor (that'll give Michael Shannon a break). The scene at the party with loud electronic music, bright neon colors and costumes is really a pleasure to see. In the background, a great deal of moral issues are dealt with, but the first plane is always about Geoff. The film depicts a bare, rough and industrial vision of Germany which seemed to be in perfect harmony with the isolation of the main character. I couldn't help but wish there was more that was done with the tools we were shown. In the end it felt like a really lonely and caustic movie. At least it managed what Splice (2009) didn't; to make research in medicine look good. I wish there was more and maybe this is where the movie feels a little short in its unfolding. I think I felt really similar after watching Antiviral (2012) where I loved the world I was thrown in and it was visually astounding, but the story left me wanting for more. I liked: Constant background noises and music. Geoff and Eklund's acting. Exploration and depiction of guilt. I disliked: There was more to do, more to say. Some scenes seemed unrealistic--for example, a chase scene with a mouse is far stretched-- the protagonist was after all a top notch scientist. 72/100 I'm really going to look forward to future movies by Eron Sheean. I like his directorial work. I would recommend this to those who enjoyed Antiviral (2012) and also maybe Upstream Color (2013).