(Directed by Michael Winterbottom, written by Frank Cottrell Boyce)

When Michael Winterbottom presented an unfinished version of “Code 46” at the Venice and Toronto festivals last autumn, he came in for some pretty heavy criticism. Those lucky (or unlucky) enough to attend the first screenings described the film as an “all-over-the-place experience” – a style-over-substance story with no real chemistry between the leads (Tim Robbins and Samantha Morton) and a few storylines that went nowhere. Apparently Winterbottom took the criticism to heart, for he went back to the editing room, re-cut “Code 46” until it formed a coherent whole, and started experimenting with the soundtrack. When he was done, he took his new version of the film to Rotterdam and presented it at the RIFF, taking pains to emphasise that this wasn’t the final cut, either. Apparently, he is thinking of reverting to the original music (whatever that was) and of making some changes to Samantha Morton’s voice-over.

Personally, I’d rather he added a few scenes to the story, for while the film as it stands now is fascinating (and occasionally even haunting), there are a few plotlines that need further fleshing out. And while I agree that Morton’s voice-over needs some work, the soundtrack that I heard was absolutely fantastic, so I hope Winterbottom won’t change it too much.

So what is “Code 46” all about?

Basically, it’s a “Blade Runner”-like love story set in a near future where cloning and genetic manipulation are de rigueur. There was no need to design an elaborate set for the film; the proper setting was found ready-made in Shanghai’s Pudong area, which has to be the most futuristic-looking square mile on earth. All Winterbottom had to do was fly his actors there and have them parade in front of the ultra-modern buildings. The effect, startlingly enough, is more convincingly futuristic than that of many a multi-million-dollar set.

Not that Winterbottom’s Shanghai is a very Chinese place. Although Chinese people are plentiful in the film, they are extras, not actual characters. The story focuses on the foreigners who live in the city – an international crowd who habitually intersperse their English with foreign expressions and loanwords, without anyone ever appearing to be at a loss to understand the other. The message: this is a global village where everybody is multilingual and everybody travels about. That is to say, if one has the right papers.

One of the characters who does have the right papers and who does indeed get to travel a bit is William (Robbins), an American detective sent to Shanghai to investigate the theft of “papelles”. Papelles, it soon turns out, are a kind of passport/visa/green card/insurance certificate-type thing one needs to fly from one city to another. The cities, you see, are fortresses, jealously guarded against invaders from outside, such as the poor and the genetically unbalanced.

It doesn’t take William long to find out who is responsible for the theft of the papelles. Thanks to an “empathy virus” which has sharpened his instincts, he identifies the thief as Maria (Morton), a young foreigner living in Shanghai. The problem is, he actually feels quite attracted to Maria, and she to him. A romance ensues, but it is thwarted by the authorities – not because Maria is a criminal, but because there are rules that stipulate that William and Maria can’t be together. And so the central question of the movie emerges: is William and Maria’s relationship (a fairly Oedipal affair) indeed doomed, or do the lovers find a way to be together?

“Code 46” crosses many borders. On the surface, it is Philip K Dick-like science fiction written by the man responsible for the scripts of Winterbottom’s “Butterfly Kiss”, “Welcome to Sarajevo”, “The Claim” and “24-Hour Party People”, but in actual fact it plays more like a “Brief Encounter”-type romance which just happens to be set in a future in which bio-technology, cloning and the eradication of memories are the order of the day. It’s also a bit of a warning, for this wouldn’t be a Winterbottom film if the vision we’re given of the future weren’t thoroughly dystopian. For let’s be honest, the future Winterbottom and Boyce have invented isn’t a cool place. On the contrary. It is a bleak place, fresh from an ecological disaster, where segregation is rife and where extreme wealth (in the form of squeaky clean, high-tech-looking cities) contrasts sharply with the poverty that holds the wasteland just outside the cities (footage of which was shot in Dubai and Rajasthan) in its grip. The contrast between Inside and Outside is such that if you’re lucky enough to be Inside, you’ll do anything to prevent being exiled to Outside.

At least, that’s the idea.

In actual fact, the contrast between Inside and Outside is rather ambiguous. You see, on the one hand we are told that living in the city is a privilege, and that those Outside would kill for the right to share that privilege. Hence the fact that the production of papelles is so closely guarded – if everybody got hold of papelles, refugees would flock to the cities in droves, thus disturbing the fragile equilibrium that is so painstakingly maintained there. But happens when the camera finally moves Outside? Life there doesn’t strike one as too awful. Admittedly, at first glance, the desertlike Outside does indeed look pretty dreary, especially when compared to the shiny cleanliness of the city. The fact is, though, that the more you see of the world outside, the less depressing it is beginning to look. In actual fact, it looks sort of free, in a pleasant Indian backpackers’ hostel kind of way. Especially when you compare it with the kind of life the “privileged” lead in Shanghai, which may be luxurious, but also fairly cold and clinical.

Now I’m not sure Winterbottom intended this ambiguity. In fact, I’m quite certain he didn’t, which is why I think that if he is going to re-edit the film anyway, he should add more footage of the poverty and despair that mark life Outside. Not just views of the desert and its dirty but merry-looking Indian backpackers’ hostels, but actual grief. Hunger. Despair. Refugees clamouring to be let into the city. Anything to indicate that it is indeed a privilege to live in the city, not a punishment.

The contrast between Inside and Outside isn’t the only thing that needs some work. Another point that needs clearing up is Maria’s background. At one point in the current cut, we learn an important fact about Maria’s origin – the reason why a relationship between her and William is out of the question. It’s an intriguing little fact which, given a bit more background, could add some depth to the love story, but sadly, Winterbottom refuses to go into it, focusing instead on the effect it has on William and Maria’s relationship. And while that relationship is indeed what the movie is mostly about, I think the film as a whole would benefit from a little fleshing-out of the casually referred-to fact.

And now for the good stuff.

First of all, the acting. Despite rumours (confirmed by Winterbottom) that Tim Robbins had trouble with his director’s penchant for improvisation, Robbins’ performance in “Code 46” is actually quite impressive. True, he is outplayed by Morton (who is simply radiant in some parts of the film, and clearly had no problems whatsoever improvising her part), but he is pretty convincing, both as a paranormally gifted detective and as a lover. Nor is there a lack of chemistry between Robbins and Morton. Theirs isn’t the most natural of relationships (in any way), but as far as I’m converned, Robbins and Morton make a believable couple, and a beautiful one, too. And they’re not the only ones doing a creditable job. The supporting actors (amongst whom Om Puri, Jeanne Balibar and Benedict Wong of “Dirty Pretty Things” fame) are pretty spot-on, too. They are not given much to do (after all, this is mostly a love story, meaning a two-character piece), but what little we see of them is solid.

Secondly, the atmosphere. While “Code 46” does suffer from a flawed narrative (which I hope Winterbottom will improve before the film is released), it has a bucketful of style and ambiance to make up for it. The futuristic atmosphere is well drawn, both in general and in the particulars. The buildings are shiny, the clubs are dark, the gadgets are realistic and there’s even a fairly convincing futuristic lingo, made up of English (the global language) and loanwords from Spanish, Italian, Chinese, Arabic and Farsi, to name just the languages I recognised. Add to that some humour, some stunning cinematography and some intensely atmospheric music, and you have a pretty good sci-fi romance. Needless to say, it would be nice if the story were fleshed out a little to match the stylistic perfection, but even if it isn’t, the film is worth seeking out for its atmosphere.

According to the IMDB and the British press, the film will be released in the UK in spring and in the US in August. Start counting the days, guys.

Elaine