I Origins movie review & film summary (2014) | Roger Ebert (2024)

“If scientificanalysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to befalse, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims.”—DalaiLama XIV

The conflict between science and religion, fact and faithhas been a starting point for great fiction for centuries. Mike Cahill, thewriter/director of “Another Earth” and “I Origins,” is fascinated with wherethese seemingly diametrically opposed viewpoints conflict or, moreinterestingly, intersect. Can we be scientific and faithful? Can we believe inforces beyond our control even as we live in a world increasingly fascinatedwith explaining how everything works? With “I Origins,” Cahill takes thisinternal conflict common in so many people and pegs something of a Puzzle Movieon to it as one science-minded man experiences that which he cannot explainwith traditional reason. It is a film that can sometimes frustrate in its supporting charactersbut Cahilland his talented cast are unapologetically willing to explore the kind ofcomplex intangibles that filmmakers often ignore or merely turn intopretentious drivel.

Dr. Ian Grey (Michael Pitt) is obsessed with the human eye,one of the elements of biology that makes us unique and that religions aroundthe world have used as proof of the Divine Creator. We all have eye biometricsthat are specific to us, and various cultures have viewed the eye as a windowto the soul or even the thumbprint of a creator. Grey wants to get to thebottom of the evolution of the eye, working with colleagues Kenny (Steven Yeun)and Karen (Brit Marling). Then he meets a model whose eyes essentially take himemotional prisoner.

At a party, Ian has a sexy encounter with a mostly maskedwoman named Sofi (Astrid Bergès-Frisbey) and can’t stop thinking about her. Hefinds himself pushed by fate or destiny to a billboard of her unforgettableeyes, eventually tracking Sofi down and beginning a passionate romance with thewoman who will change his life. While the preview for “I Origins” gives awayalmost the entire film, we’ll stop the plot synopsis here—it’s better if youdon’t know much—but Ian’s relationship with Sofi sends him down a verydifferent path than the scientific one on which he began. “I Origins” is a filmabout how destiny and love can lead us to different revelations than we couldhave possibly reached without them. Anyone who has known love can attest to itsability to forever alter a charted course and Cahill’s emotionally raw approachto filmmaking gets to the truth of that in a memorable way.

It’s also a remarkably confident film technically. Cinemahas had a love affair with the eye for a century now and Cahill andcinematographer Markus Förderer take the timeless image of the eye and give itemotional resonance in the way they use it, balancing the film's two equally important halves. Cahill and his technical teamwisely ground their film, only occasionally allowing it flights of visualfancy. We spend more time with Ian and Karen in a lab than we do in existentialpursuit of a greater purpose. And that makes the film’s more extremely philosophicalthemes forgivable. Cahill's work here is a notable technical advancement over "Another Earth," proving he's not just a filmmaker with big ideas but one who can pull them off with visual confidence as well. There's a flow in the cinematography and editing that carries us along, only occasionally becoming untethered to a pretentious degree. Cahill’s smartest move was to not allow his film’s “bigissues” to overwhelm the human story at its core. And he’s helped notably byyet-another strong performance from Michael Pitt, an actor who has shown suchrange just recently from his terrifying work on TV's “Hannibal” to this relatable,likable performance.

The film's biggest problem is that the two women in Ian’s life aren’t as well-drawn as theycould have been in a superior film. Sofi and Karen feel a bit too much likeobvious opposites—the "spiritual model" and the "scientific technician." If bothcharacters were allowed a bit more of their alternate, “I Origins” would havebeen a more interesting venture. For, in the end, it’s a film that argues wedon’t live in a world of science OR faith but one in which both will give us adeeper understanding of who we are and where we’re going.