It's an enjoyable film, it carries a pertinent anti-tech message, but it's not even close to being a horror film.
First, let me make one thing clear: horror movies have an imperative duty to scare and disturb us. Tension, suspense, fear and some scares are something that should not be missing. It's the essence of horror cinema, right? So, can someone explain to me where came from the bad idea of making horror movies for teenagers who aren't old enough to ride a motorcycle? Don't get me wrong… the movie is good, and I liked it, but I can't consider it a horror movie. It is not able to frighten anyone! It has no scares (we are able to predict them from a mile!), it has no tension or suspense. As a horror movie, forget it. As the people say, it rains, but it doesn't get us wet, do you understand?
The script begins with a young girl who loses her parents in a tragic accident and goes to live with an aunt who works in a large corporation of highly technological toys. Things aren't easy and neither of them is prepared for the situation. It is in this context that we met M3GAN, a prototype of a toy that is, basically, an android child that is capable of learning, improving itself, teaching and, basically, replacing parents in the tiring task of… being parents. The problem is that, being a machine, it has no notion of good or bad, right or wrong, and that seems to have been a secondary detail in its programming. So it's no surprise that she quickly turns into a sly, cynical creature who kills without any remorse.
The film was directed by Gerard Johnstone, an illustrious unknown. Who is behind the project is the producer and screenwriter James Wan, who we know from “Saw” and “Conjuring 2”. Wan's brand is everywhere. It would have been better if he had directed it and the project had evolved into a somber film, a true horror piece. Allison Williams does the main character well, giving us yet another excellent job. The actress is living a happy moment in her professional life after having shone in “Get Out” and seems to be managing to take advantage of the opportunities. Amie Donald and Jenna Davis, in turn, give body and voice (respectively) to M3GAN, complementing the work with an animatronic doll created for this purpose.
The animatronic doll is nothing new. Cinema has used this technology for decades, and Spielberg's shark – one of the first and most infamous examples – is proof of that. However, the special effects and CGI are to be congratulated. The film utilizes a number of expensive visual and digital resources to excellent effect, wonderfully complementing what was done in the studio. The sound (particularly the sound effects related to the doll) also deserves praise, and the cinematography, even though it doesn't bring new or innovative features, makes the best use of it all. The film has good costumes and convincing sets, as well as a very good, modern and fun soundtrack. It's on the editing table that things go wrong: either because of the excessive length, or because it wants to target young age groups, the film was badly edited, and the cuts are rough. There are even scenes from the trailer that, because they are not in the final cut, make it difficult to understand the story: for example, the scene where Gemma orders M3EGAN to protect Cady, which appears in the trailer and was cut from the film, but which would help to understand why the doll starts to behave that way to protect its young owner.
The only real fear that this film conveys is the credible possibility that, in the medium term, there will be some toy similar to M3GAN. Advances in AI, computing, robot creation and design, or other technologies make it plausible. Will it be that one day we will have robots and androids that, due to their characteristics, will be considered alive and, as such, immortal and, therefore, superior to the humans who created them? I don't think anyone wants to see that. Therefore, the film carries with it a message of distrust in technology, visible not only in M3GAN, but also in Cady's technological dependence. I can do nothing but applaud: the generations born after the year 2000 saw their childhood dominated by cell phones, iPads or computers, to the point of despising conventional games and toys and alienating themselves from living together, normal and healthy, with other children. I'm not making it up, this is a fact that we can all see in a short trip to any school. And if there are parents who appreciate the creation of devices that keep their children busy, I am in the group of parents who see technology as something that should be dosed in a more measured way, allowing children a normal childhood before introducing them to the digital and tech world. I think there is a time for everything in life, and childhood shouldn't be spent looking at screens and LCDs.