Moon
Moon (2009)
manages to seamlessly fit into the genre of science fiction, not only by embodying
the common themes of control over man, and the fragileness of humanity, but by
its plausible view of the future. To
begin Moon, managed to consistently remind
me of Blade Runner due to its
similarity between the clones and the replicants, each beings created in the
mirror image of a human yet not considered one. Both in Blade Runner and Moon do
we see the reaction of a “Non-Human” being struggling with the fact that they
are not an original. Moon makes various
references to an outside power, a something superior that manages to control
the lead character, the Ministry in Brazil,
and the Tyrell corporate in Moon.
There seems to be a theme of “ownership of man” in sci-fi films, that someway
or somehow man will be controlled and will be manipulated by a higher
force. In Moon Sam Bell is literary property of the Tyrell Corporation, while
in Brazil Sam Lowry is owned by the
society he lives in (on a random note they both have the same first name, coincidence?
I think not!). Finally in a final note Moon
manages to follow in Primer’s footsteps
by showing a realistic approach to a futuristic or out of bounds topic, such as
cloning or time traveling. Like Primer,
Moon is able to create a scenario of
the cloning process and use that is not only reasonable but also well thought,
creating a plot more believable and thus more interesting.
What surprised me about Moon
was how easy it was all to believe. When we watched other films they either
seemed ridiculous or so well fabricated that their possibility was never
probable in my mind. Moon manages to
create a scenario, a character, and a situation, that are just true. If I were
to turn on the news and hear something similar, I would be shocked of course,
but I wouldn’t need much convincing to believe it. Moon manages to rid itself of the silly elements that seem to
follow sci-fi and create a provocative and self-aware piece that makes us
question not only the ability of science but the use of it as well. We manage
to create clones? Then what would we use them for? Moon answers the question; Profit.
The profit motive...yes. It does seem that space exploration is going to be done more and more by private companies than gov't institutions like NASA. Glad to hear Moon was convincing. I'd like to know what about the cloning program seemed really believable to you.
ReplyDeleteI just wrote a really long response and then accidentally deleted it. Here's the gist:
ReplyDeleteI don't believe that something has to necessarily be "believable" in order to be provocative or cause reflection. There are plenty of fantasy and sci-fi films that can cause this type of reaction without being completely realistic. In fact, sometimes it is the exaggeration that makes them so provocative or really makes the point. In Brazil or Hitchhiker's guide, both films are not really "believable" and the level of bureaucracy is exaggerated in both, but that is used to make a point, and also helps the audience to identify. (The unrealism/exaggeration causes the audience to identify? I feel like I should revise that statement. I guess it's like a parody or something. Now I'm rambling. I'll stop now.)
I am also curious as to what elements of sci-fi you considered "silly" that moon didn't have. Saying that sci-fi generally has silly elements is a pretty big statement, and I would like to know what you are referring to. I guess the definition of silly could vary for us.
I do see how you would find Moon more believable as opposed to The Day the Earth Stood Still or Brazil. I agree with you there, rather than having the future be blatantly cast into our faces with a definite visual of technology. With Moon however, the director choose to secclude the movie's setting to just the Moon - not showing Earth's technological development. Without seeing it, the movie allows it's viewers to determine how advanced Earth would be technologically going with the fact that they have gone far enough to spend a couple years on the Moon and be able to create clones.
ReplyDeleteYou outline here the similarities between GERTY in "Moon" and the replicants in "Blade Runner" by mentioning that they two "non-human" groups are constantly dealing with the fact that they are in fact, not human. But doesn't the way that each respective group deal with their (for lack of a better word) lack of a human identity in opposite ways? The replicants are militant, trying to find a way to change their situation until Harrison Ford's character kills them. On the other hand, GERTY is much more submissive and follows the orders he has been given (namely, to keep Sam safe) to the letter. While both the replicants and GERTY may not be human, they deal with this in drastically different ways, which signifies a huge schism between the two groups.
ReplyDelete