Maybe I should pay less attention to trailers. Not only do they frequently steer me toward crummy movies, but also they sometimes prompt me to miss a film that I otherwise might enjoy.

In the latter category fell 1998's Dark City, a picture that I skipped during its theatrical run. Thank heaven for home video, because it lets us find little treasures like Dark City that we otherwise wouldn't experience.

John Murdoch (Rufus Sewell) awakens in a strange motel room and lacks memory of how he got there. He doesn’t even recall his own identity.

John seeks answers to these questions and also finds himself under suspicion for murder. We follow his journey as he attempts to solve a number of mysteries related to the nature of the town where he lives.

As I mentioned, I didn’t see Dark City theatrically, and don’t believe I ever thought about seeing the film until after the success of 1999’s The Matrix. I heard that the two films boasted a number of similarities, and since I really liked The Matrix, I thought I should give City a look.

And I'm glad that I did. I prefer The Matrix because I'm an action film kind of guy, but City certainly holds its own as a more thoughtful alternative.

It's weird to say that because I first saw City months after I viewed The Matrix. This makes it hard to remember that City came first.

Both films really do offer a lot of similarities, primarily due to plots that revolve around the nature of the "real" world. They also come with expository paths that follow somewhat obscure and circuitous routes, but I don't think that The Matrix ripped off City.

Yes, Matrix came out more than a year after City, which certainly would seem to have been plenty of time for the makers of The Matrix to see and copy City. However, since the former film spent lots of time in preparation – with six months martial arts training for the actors alone! – it remains likely that these similarities are coincidental.

Whatever the case, both films stand up on their own, with The Matrix offering the more compelling visceral experience. City boasts the more emotional and more intellectually complex production.

City revolves around questions of what makes us who we are. Although it's not tremendously deep in a philosophical way, it's definitely one of those movies that can provoke thought and conversation.

And it's pretty entertaining, too! I worried that City might lose something during additional screenings since much of the tale acts as a mystery.

The viewer spends most of the movie just trying to make sense of what's happening and what the underlying truth is. Both of those become irrelevant upon subsequent screenings.

However, City offers such a rich and detailed enough experience that I liked it as much additional times as I did the first. What I lost in impact I gained in nuance, as City draws you in and keeps you hooked.

As with The Matrix, Dark City is one of those movies that can even wriggle out of apparent flaws due to the nature of the story. In my review of The Matrix, I noted that some of the CG animation looked fake, but that was actually a good thing due to the way the computer-created objects were supposed to have been generated in "real" life.

In City, it's the acting that often seems flat and wooden. However, the performances should come across as vaguely disoriented and uninvolved due to the nature of the story.

These are people whose lives get changed radically every few days. Thus it would seem logical that their personalities appear unformed and tentative.

I'm not completely sure that the premise excuses everything, as part of me thinks that while these folks have indeed gone through frequent personality changes, they don't know that and they think they've been who they are forever. As such, their personae should seem well established to themselves and their lack of engagement doesn't make sense.

However, I suppose the latter supposition requires the memory implants and their execution to be flawless, and it's probable that some bugs exist, so I guess it's sensible that the new personalities come across as pretty blah.

Dark City gives us an abnormally complex fantasy. It comes with an intriguing premise that it explores in a satisfying manner.

Dark City appears in an aspect ratio of approximately 2.35:1 on this Blu-ray Disc. Expect a solid presentation.

Overall sharpness satisfied. Some softness occurred – often due to all the visual effects – but most of the film seemed accurate and well-defined.

The movie opted for a restricted palette that favored greens, yellows and blues most of the time. These came across with positive range and vivacity.

Blacks looked deep and dense, while shadows seemed smooth and concise. The latter factor seemed especially important given the darkness that envelops so much of the tale. All of this added up to a solid “B+” image.

I felt pleased with the movie’s DTS-HD MA 7.1 soundtrack, though it didn’t dazzle. The mix emphasized the forward channels, where we got good stereo music and a nice sense of place. Various elements moved across the front smoothly and fit together well.

Surround usage added a bit of material but not much that stood out from the crowd. The back channels tended to contribute ambience and not much more, so they fleshed out the spectrum without much standout material. Still, the surrounds gave us a decent layer of environmental information.

Audio quality was fine. The movie suffered from some iffy looping, but the lines remained intelligible and they sounded reasonably natural much of the time.

Music appeared vivid and full, while effects showed nice range. Those elements came across as fairly accurate and concise. This ended up as a satisfactory mix.

How does this 2025 Arrow Blu-ray compare to the original 2008 BD? Audio felt identical for both.

However, the 2025 Blu-ray offered improvements in terms of visuals, primarily because it lost the grain reduction of its predecessor. The 2025 version clearly offered superior picture quality.

On two separate discs, the Arrow release provides both the film’s theatrical version (1:40:32) as well as a Director’s Cut (1:51:49). Though the DC adds more than 11 minutes, the majority of this comes from extensions to existing scenes.

A few small new subplots emerge, but they don’t add a whole lot. The DC also restructures sequences from the original and makes other alterations such as the elimination of the narration that opens the theatrical edition.

I’m surprised the Director’s Cut runs so much longer than the 1998 version, as the additions seem so minor. With an extra 11 minutes in play, I expected some major changes, but those don’t occur.

I guess the many little bits and pieces tossed into the DC account for that running time. Nonetheless, they sure don’t feel like they contribute that much footage.

Despite the subtlety of most of the changes, I think the Director’s Cut offers the more satisfying experience. It seems smoother and becomes a better integrated tale.

The DC also loses the occasionally clumsy narration from the theatrical edition. Both versions work fine, but the Director’s Cut seems a smidgen stronger.

Audio commentary fans rejoice, as Dark City provides seven separate tracks. The first two accompany the theatrical version and also appeared on the original DVD.

Commentary One involves director Alex Proyas, writers Lem Dobbs & David Goyer, director of photography Dariusz Wolski & production designer Patrick Tatopoulos. Recorded individually for this edited, occasionally screen-specific piece, we learn about story/characters/themes, cast and performances, sets and production design, effects, music, editing and cinematography, and connected domains.

Some people don’t like this kind of edited “Frankencommentary”, but when done well, the format succeeds, and this track comes across in a very satisfying manner. We get a great array of notes and insights, as the participants flesh out different elements in a compelling way. The commentary keeps us informed and involved from start to finish.

For the second commentary, we hear from film critic Roger Ebert. He brings a running, screen-specific view of story/character areas, visual design, influences, themes and inspirations, performances, cinematography and interpretation.

Ebert clearly knew his stuff, so he gives us a fine examination of various aspects of Dark City. He provides nice insights and allows us to better understand different cinematic techniques. Expect an engaging, useful discussion.

The other three commentaries run alongside the Director’s Cut. First up, we get a solo track with director Alex Proyas. He offers a running, screen-specific look at changes for the Director’s Cut, cast and performances, sets and visual design, effects, story/characters and connected elements.

After a slow start, Proyas delivers a mostly engaging chat. Some of the material repeats from the 1998 commentary, but we learn a fair amount of new material. That’s enough to make this track worth a listen.

For the second DC track, we get another piece with film critic Roger Ebert. Ebert recorded a commentary specifically for the Director’s Cut, but the end result mixes in parts of the 1998 piece as well.

That makes the Director’s Cut commentary a mixed bag that doesn’t really work. If you already played the 1998 discussion, then you’ll hear a lot of the same notes here.

If you didn’t listen to the original commentary, then you’ll miss a lot of its insights. The DC chat includes some of the 1998 material but not nearly all of it.

Frankly, Ebert offers too little Director’s Cut-specific information to make this commentary worthwhile. He gives us occasional thoughts but they pop up too infrequently to keep our attention – and that leads to all the regurgitated bits from the 1998 track. I can’t recommend this spotty commentary, so go with the 1998 chat instead.

One odd editing choice occurs here. In 1998, Ebert speculated how Proyas’s career would proceed in the years after Dark City. The Director’s Cut commentary retains those predictions, even though they became outdated by the Blu-ray’s 2008 release date. Why pair 1998 predictions with a 2008 commentary?

Next we hear from writers Lem Dobbs and David S. Goyer. The only commentary without any new content, this one consists solely of recordings made for the 1998 disc. That means it lacks any direct discussion of the Director’s Cut.

It also means Dobbs and Goyer touch on topics they discussed in the 1998 commentary. The writers cover story/character areas, the development of the screenplay, themes and motifs, and related subjects.

As occurred with the Director’s Cut track from Ebert, this one includes material that also appeared in the edited 1998 piece. However, the Dobbs/Goyer discussion expands better than Ebert’s chat, and it includes a lot of good new details.

Dobbs and Goyer show a delightful bluntness in their remarks. It’s a minor disappointment that the commentary only recycles recordings from 1998, but it’s still a solid look at the film.

Two more commentaries come new to this 2025 Arrow release, and the first brings back director Alex Proyas. He delivers a running, screen-specific view of story/characters, influences and inspirations, cast and performances, changes for the Director’s Cut, sets and design choices, themes, and other production topics.

Did we really need a third Proyas commentary – and second alongside the DC? No.

Does this mean fans should skip the 2025 track? Also no.

Inevitably, Proyas repeats some information from the prior discussions. Nonetheless, he makes this an engaging chat and the added perspective of the 17 years since the last commentary helps ensure this one becomes worth a listen.

Also new to the 2025 Arrow release, we get a commentary from podcasters Craig Anderson, Bruce Isaacs and Herschel Isaacs. They offer a running, screen-specific examination of the movie’s themes and subtext as well as connections to other films and their thoughts on it.

This becomes a pretty rich chat, as the participants dig into the topics well. The track moves at a good pace and becomes a worthwhile listen.

On the theatrical disc, we find archival elements. Memories of Shell Beach runs 43 minutes, 26 seconds and provides info from Proyas, Goyer, Dobbs, Goyer, Wolski, costume designer Liz Keogh, 2nd unit director Bruce Hunt, and actors Rufus Sewell and Richard O’Brien.

“Memories” looks at the project’s roots and development, story/character areas and screenplay issues, casting and performances, costumes, sets and visual design, the addition of the voiceover to the theatrical cut, the original release, and the film’s “afterlife”.

We also get The Architecture of Dreams. This one lasts 33 minutes, 41 seconds and features Dobbs, Ebert, Proyas, author Rosemary Dinnage, UCLA Professor of Critical Studiies Vivian Sobchak and Tisch School of the Arts Professor of Cinema Studies Dana Polan.

“Dreams” discusses the movie’s themes, influences, interpretation and cultural significance/ramifications.

Both programs work well. “Memories” offers the more “nuts and bolts” view of Dark City, while “Dreams” adopts an intellectual view of the film. Even after all those commentaries, both provide some new – and interesting – observations.

In addition to the film’s trailer, the theatrical disc concludes with an Image Gallery that consists of 322 stills. Though we see a handful of advertising elements and shots from the set, the vast majority of those depict movie moments, and that makes this a tedious compilation.

From here we go to the Director’s Cut disc and find an introduction from Proyas and Ebert (4:51). They give us some general thoughts about the flick and the DC in this decent launching pad.

New to the Arrow release, Return to Dark City, we find a 58-minute, 55-second documentary. It offers new remarks from Proyas, Keogh, Wolski, Sewell, Tatopoulos, producer Andrew Mason, production designer George Liddle, storyboard artist Peter Pound, hair and makeup artist Leslie Vanderwalt and VFX creative director Peter Doyle.

“Return” examines the project's roots and development, various visual choices, story/characters/influences, cast and performances, sets and locations, costumes, hair and makeup, various effects, editing, compromises for the theatrical version, the movie's release and legacy.

Inevitably, "Return" rehashes some info found elsewhere in this package. Nonetheless, it comes with enough new content to merit a look.

Also exclusive to the Arrow set, we find two visual essays. “I’m As Much In the Dark As You Are” (19:50) involves film scholar Josh Nelson, while “Rats in a Maze” (14:33) brings info from film critic Alexandra West.

"Much" covers film noir elements of Dark City and reflections of its era, while "Rats" discusses psychological elements found in the movie and symbolic elements. Both offer some good insights.

Finally, we get a Design and Storyboards running montage that fills 14 minutes, eight seconds and delivers 161 frames of art. Divided among the illustrators involved, I like these elements but would’ve preferred to see them in still galleries specific to each creator rather than as one long video package.

The Arrow release loses a subtitle commentary from the 2008 BD as well as some other text extras. The “fact track” neatly spelled out differences between the movie’s two cuts, so its absence disappoints.

Clever and exciting, Dark City develops a rich universe that maintains the viewer’s attention. The movie explores its themes and conceits in a satisfying, compelling manner. The Blu-ray brings us very good picture and audio as well as a stellar collection of supplements. Dark City remains an involving movie, and this Blu-ray does well for itself.