This is a textbook case of a movie attempting futilely to use scientific premises to construct an interesting plot. To cure a plague, a race of genetically-altered cockroaches are released in the sewers of New York City. The plague is cured, and the cockroaches are assumed to have run out their pre-determined lifespan. Naturally, quite the opposite turns out to be true, as the protagonists discover the roaches have evolved into gigantic killing machines. And not only are they efficient killers, they also can fold their carapace to appear more human-like.
How did this happen? Through the miracle of evolution, according to the scientists. Okay, but in just three years? Yes, say the scientists, as insects they can go through millions of generations every year. And this is where things get silly.
First, we are shown multiple scenes of the roaches in action: they are larger than human, wielding scimitar-like claws, and flying circles around their prey. Does such a creature really need to blend in to get its job done? Second, evolution doesn't produce mimicry just because it seems like a good idea. There has to be a well-established advantage, and usually a close relationship between the mimic and the thing mimicked. The roaches wouldn't start looking like humans until there was significant contact between the two, and a significant disadvantage (say, death) to those that didn't look human. And yet, there's no mention of them ever having been seen before, and as was noted earlier, humans aren't much of a match regardless of how the roaches look.
It would be easy to overlook these flaws if there was something else to like in Mimic, but there truly isn't. We are encouraged to sympathize with the main protagonists because they have trouble conceiving a child; then at the end, it is suggested sloppily that they will become guardians of an autistic orphan. This all occurs while we're still trying to figure out how the male protagonist survived the explosion he was just at the center of, which destroyed the extensive roach nest in its entirity. (Apparently, he fell into some water.) Although the scenes in the nest are somewhat interesting, the movie as a whole is not engaging.
How did this happen? Through the miracle of evolution, according to the scientists. Okay, but in just three years? Yes, say the scientists, as insects they can go through millions of generations every year. And this is where things get silly.
First, we are shown multiple scenes of the roaches in action: they are larger than human, wielding scimitar-like claws, and flying circles around their prey. Does such a creature really need to blend in to get its job done? Second, evolution doesn't produce mimicry just because it seems like a good idea. There has to be a well-established advantage, and usually a close relationship between the mimic and the thing mimicked. The roaches wouldn't start looking like humans until there was significant contact between the two, and a significant disadvantage (say, death) to those that didn't look human. And yet, there's no mention of them ever having been seen before, and as was noted earlier, humans aren't much of a match regardless of how the roaches look.
It would be easy to overlook these flaws if there was something else to like in Mimic, but there truly isn't. We are encouraged to sympathize with the main protagonists because they have trouble conceiving a child; then at the end, it is suggested sloppily that they will become guardians of an autistic orphan. This all occurs while we're still trying to figure out how the male protagonist survived the explosion he was just at the center of, which destroyed the extensive roach nest in its entirity. (Apparently, he fell into some water.) Although the scenes in the nest are somewhat interesting, the movie as a whole is not engaging.