The 6th Day

2000 "Are you who you think you are?"
5.9| 2h3m| PG-13| en| More Info
Released: 17 November 2000 Released
Producted By: Columbia Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

A world of the very near future in which cattle, fish, and even the family pet can be cloned. But cloning humans is illegal - that is until family man Adam Gibson comes home from work one day to find a clone has replaced him. Taken from his family and plunged into a sinister world he doesn't understand, Gibson must not only save himself from the assassins who must destroy him to protect their secret, but uncover who and what is behind the horrible things happening to him.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Starz

Director

Producted By

Columbia Pictures

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!
Steineded How sad is this?
Dorathen Better Late Then Never
Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.
david-sarkies Cloning doesn't seem to be as much of an issue now as it was back when this film was released, particularly since the famous Dolly didn't actually live for that long. Okay, there was been a ban on cloning in place since then, but you don't seem to hear as much about it anymore. Anyway, back then it is not surprising that an Arnie action movie, and this is basically what this film is - an Arnie action movie - came out with this idea in mind. It also isn't surprising that the bad guys seem to be the biotechology firm because, well, as one person told me the biotechnology department at his university seemed to be like some sort of James Bond super villain's lab. So, Arnie comes home one day to discover that there is an identical replica of him in his house. Now, cloning animals has been going on for some time, but cloning humans is a big no no. In fact not only is it illegal, but clones are considered to be void of any rights whatsoever and are to be terminated on sight. This is why these thugs appear to basically get rid of Arnie because they don't want anybody to know that they are actually cloning anybody. Well. We can pretty much guess what happens from there - Arnie goes on a rampage, kills the bad guy, and everybody lives happily ever after. The problem with cloning is that there seems to be an assumption that when we are cloned we pretty much become the clone, but honestly, I'm not actually convinced about that. In truth, there is so much we don't know about the brain, such as what makes us, us, that if we were to create a clone then we are probably just creating a completely new person. There is no suggestion that we are going to be able to transfer our consciousness into that new body, which means that if we are using clones to prolong our lives then we are probably just acting in vein. Okay, I am probably going a little too deep into what is basically an Arnie action flick, but we can't ignore these ideas because films like this are actually exploring these ideas. If we clone ourselves are our clones us, or are they completely different people. Moreso, if we are running around while our clone is running around do we experience both bodies - if not, then I guess this whole creating a replica in case we die isn't going to do us any good - we are still going to die. Interestingly though, there is this idea that it is not so much the rich and powerful protecting themselves, but protecting their investments. At the opening we have a multi-million dollar football player suffer a serious injury that will sideline him for, well, forever. So they kill him and bring in his clone. As such, it is actually working to make humans more of a commodity than they already are. Further, there is this idea that they have built in diseases to limit their life span, just in case they decide to do something that we don't particularly like. If that happens, well, we just kill them and then wheel out a clone that hasn't had that revelation yet - a great way to protect one's investments. Sure, they might not be the same person, but in reality that's probably what they want. As for the film, well, as I mentioned, it's an Arnie action flick, and if you like these types of films the you are surely going to be entertained for the two odd hours that it takes for this film to run.
theromanempire-1 I really can't explain why this film bombed in the box office with just 34 millions gross in USA and just 96 millions gross worldwide. I also can't explain why this film never took positive reviews from the critics and even from a lot of fans it's considered an average Arnold B-Movie when it's exactly the opposite. this film is not only an A grade movie but it's the best movie in years from this genre. I think it's even better than Arnold's masterpiece total recall. the reason is not only that it had a lot of action a great plot and twists but it's also brought the dilemma of where the human race is going if those clone experiments become reality in our lives. cloning is already happening today and this film foretold that some 20 years ago. it's a film which foretold the near future and it's considered an average film ? really ? this film should be re-released now and gross like a billion dollars. morals....all are tested in this film. personally I love all of Arnold's films but if I had to choose ONE film from him to have I would pick this one without a further thinking. one of the few films that gets from me not just an A grade but an A ++++++
elshikh4 In the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s, Arnold Schwarzenegger's name always meant big and loud action. But since the second half of the 1990s, things weren't the same anymore with Batman & Robin (1997), End of Days (1999), and Collateral Damage (2002). So, at the time, I skipped The 6th Day (2000) since I wasn't so enthusiastic about it. However after 16 years, I watched it. And – sorrowfully – the result wasn't any better than what I expected !Schwarzenegger looks rundown. While he was 53 year old, he seemed like 65 at least (how about 53 as older than his character already !). I believe he was recovering from a heart surgery that he had before filming. So you can touch the heavy make-up which tried to hide both his age and exhaustion. It's bad that there is no one beside him in the whole movie. Although Tony Goldwyn was fine as the cold-blooded evil guy, but he lacked the star power and the high charisma. Robert Duvall was pale, doing it for the paycheck. Michael Rapaport wasn't funny, and seemed strangely confused all along. Michael Rooker played the same nervous, weary, and sweaty baddie in nearly 2 million movies in the 1990s alone. And this round, nothing was enjoyable about his performance, as usual !The action is all about endless, no dazzling, laser shootouts that take place in half dark garages. Everything feels cheap. I didn't run into production values that could be called grand. Even the climax, with saving an helicopter from crashing into skyscraper, was exposed as something done inside the studio ! Director Roger Spottiswoode, who I adored back then; thanks to his action masterpieces Shoot to Kill (1988) and Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)—did it no less poor. I don't know why he got that fetish over the slow-motion ? He drowned his movie with it, unnecessarily and pointlessly. Then those gaudy electronic-ish cuts, like we're watching hallucinations of a robot ! And in some moment, he chose to distinguish one of the killers' failure by playing a somehow lengthy rock song in the background. So what was that about ?! As if the MTV interrupted the movie suddenly ! Sadly, Spottiswoode wanted to be "hip", but lost "cool" in the way.The story is similar to Schwarzenegger's previous movie Total Recall (1990), yet with less imagination and surprises. It has a consumed plot, which its timeworn skeleton is visible behind every event, to the extent that you become bored with the movie very fast. For instance, the lead becomes a fugitive, while he's innocent, so he runs away from his chasers by jumping into watercourse; well.. IT IS, indeed, The Fugitive's same scene 7 years earlier ! Moreover, it opens the door for plenty of logic questions : While the lead is cloned to cover up assassinating the company's owner, which might expose the human cloning business—wasn't killing him more practical and less expensive ?? And considering the ending, what about that clone's presence in one country with his original self ?! Wasn't his death, while sacrificing for his original, more dramatic and less complicated ?? The movie says that cloning is bad; when the lead explodes the evil guy's laboratory. Then, the movie says that cloning is good; when it leads to human heroes who deserve life (therefore the lead's clone is left alive in the end). Contradiction.. Right ?! Also, notice well that the lead hated how cloning could give humanity the gift of immortality, while he accepted eventually the cloned cat; namely the cloning that could give humanity the hated immortality !! SO WHAT IS THE MOVIE'S MESSAGE ABOUT CLONING EXACTLY ??!! The climactic sequence dragged a bit. The one-liners were so limited. The evil guys were mostly meant as comic relief, but that was done pathetically, to end up as not menacing or comedic either. The "Sim doll" was meant as a relief as well, however served as an awfully creepy factor instead; OH MY GOD, I still have the shivers !Trevor Rabin's theme music is a clear play on John Barry's theme music of On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969). Just listen to the 2 of them, and you'll easily find out that the first stole the second, yet after changing couple of notes. I think that was an early example of the "Temp Music" which fills Hollywood's movies nowadays, as masked plagiarism that proves nothing but frightening bankruptcy.The movie's "good" side can be existed by a few advantages. The make-up of Tony Goldwyn's last imperfect clone was perfect as an execution and as an idea; since it revealed his truth as an ugly monster, or Dr. Frankenstein who turned into his grotesque creature. I loved that long list of futuristic inventions which the movie cleverly created and snappily showed as daily life details : The mirror / TV, the refrigerator that has a memory, the remote controlled helicopter, the holographic lawyer, therapist, and girlfriend.. etc. And the visual trick which gathered 2 Arnies in many cadres was semi-flawless.Cloning Dolly the sheep in 1996 send the world into a frenzy. Hence, Hollywood kept producing one movie after another, to exploit the heck of the issue, in every possible way, for the next 10 years. Just remember : Multiplicity (1996), The Avengers (1998), Repli-Kate (2002), The Adventures of Pluto Nash (2002), The Matrix Reloaded (2003), Godsend (2004), and The Island (2005). The 6th Day (2000) was part of that cycle, as an action with satire, made under the name of super star. But it had bland action, muddled satire, and star who looked anything but super !
mgruebel Released in 2000, "The Sixth Day" does not quite hearken back to Schwarzenegger's glory days of Terminator 2, Predator and the like, but it is a far cry above other late period work like "Last Action Hero." In my opinion this breezy action flick deserves better than a 5.9 on IMDb, and I give it a 7: worth seeing more than once, but not in the 8-10 great movies category.In the film, Arnold accidentally gets cloned by a business magnate due to a mix-up, and the magnate's henchmen (and women, Sarah Wynter is a great henchwoman) relentlessly pursue him to wipe out the duplicate that could give away their illegal human cloning scheme. As the film progresses, you wonder: who is the clone, and the 'real' person? Does it make a difference? Of course, there's a happy ending for Arnold - and his clone, while the bad guys get dismembered, necks broken, consumed in explosions that tear skyscrapers apart, and all the usual good stuff in Arnie action flicks.The best part of this film is its script. Perhaps too intricate for some, it is a lovingly written action script that really makes an effort not to have too many plot holes. Even stuff that seems unimportant or a plot hole at first, turns out to be cleverly crafted. Some examples:The 'real' Arnold has a nick from shaving, which his friend uses to ID the 'real' one. But later we learn the cloners have copied that, too. So who is real?In passing on the phone, evil magnate Michael Drucker (Tony Goldwyn) mentions "Get me the Speaker (of the house) on the phone." It turns out much later in the film that he invited the Speaker to a gala where he talks about cloning saving cancerous children; the speaker has a son with cancer, and becomes a sucker for making cloning legal.Likewise, Drucker explains that brains cannot yet be cloned without support from the whole body during cell growth, getting a major pothole out of the way. Likewise, a lot of care is taken to explain the medical 'science' just enough to close plot holes, but not so much that it becomes fake. They even get away pretty well with the idea that clones can be grown from 'unformed' templates by gene infusion to differentiate them within hours. (After all, the plot has to keep moving, and we can't wait for 30 years for the clone of a dead 30 year-old.)The script and production team also hit the nail on the head with the 'near future' background material: a self-driving car awfully like a Google car, styled slightly futuristically, but just as you might expect something in the year 20XX to look. Taxis that are paid by fingerprint (Apple Pay, anyone). Jet-helicopters; malls with gigantic monorails to move people; super- realistic dolls; refrigerators that order milk when it runs out, but in a normal-looking house. And best, the Re-pet (re-peat, get it?) pet stores that clone your beloved dog or cat so your kids don't suffer anguish when the old dog goes to heaven. The store chain serves as a foil for a bit of bioethics and cloning philosophy. Basically, the world in this movie feels very much like 20XX USA could feel, as opposed to the often overblown futurism in 'near-future' action flicks.But of course, this IS an action flick, so don't expect deep philosophy here. It moves along fast through a complex but quite self-consistent plot, and an intelligent action fan will enjoy this movie, and the fact that (s)he will have to search just a little harder than usual to find the unavoidable plot holes. If the scriptwriters make me work at it a little bit (and even realize that what I thought is a hole is actually consistent on careful examination!), I am happy.This is a 7/10 on many levels, for above average complexity, above average consistency, and plenty of action - although the action in this one is pretty mundane. What can I say, more mundane action is actually more realistic, and this is one of the more realistic action films of the 2000s, if there is such a thing as a realistic action film. Can be viewed more than once, and new details will be discovered.