(spoilers ahead! :P)
I came out of watching Moon thinking that Blade Runner, if you only thought a bit about it, covered the same ground, and in a better way. Moon is a corollary, a footnote to the world of Blade Runner.
And had the same feeling of fake-ish, exercise-ish, not-really-well-thought-to-the-end-ish that for example had Gattaca: there are a number of small details that are just left there hanging. They can be just forgotten and the main story is still there; or that's what I guess that the film makers thought. But nevertheless that makes it feel non-finished, not-taken-care-of. Like someone said "c'mon, the premise is good enough, don't mess too much with the details". But no, the result isn't good enough; interesting how that detracts from the whole feeling.
(I will forget about these details later, so better dump them here now: isn't it too easy to have those "filers" with the clones ready to be deployed? Is enough Gerty with those flimsy arms to ready and clean of hints an used room, or a whole base, before a new clone is awaken? Are clones really so easy to control for 3 years, do they never find about the extra towers? What are really Gerty's motivations, how come he's so straightforward and sincere and helpful sometimes and others so company-bound? C'mon, it can accept so easily that Sam is a clone but it can't say anything about the real-time communications? Also, is Gerty more like a person in which he moves and has a localized presence, or has it any more HAL-like control of the base? Generally it looks like a person, to the point of sometimes seeming absurdly limited because of it (it stands in front of the camera for a videoconference!), but in a couple of situations it looks like more in control than that... And, why keep at all the videos of the previous clones?)
But I kept thinking about the link Moon-Blade Runner. For at the beginning I only thought about the relationship in the purpose of the story, the problems portrayed. But there are much clearer, textual relationships. Replicants in Blade Runner were used (between other purposes) to mine distant planets; clones in Moon are used to mine the Moon. Replicants were persecuted in Earth; we hear that Sam is going to have "immigration problems".
Funniest of all: looks like the new film from Moon's director, "Mute Witness", will be somehow inspired by Blade Runner (as he himself says), and will sport a brief appearance of Sam Bell, "as an epilogue of his going to Earth". So: I'm betting he'll be "retired"!
Gotta watch again Blade Runner. It's hard to believe it was that wide, that thorough, that classy. I guess that comes from not having filler like clones playing ping pong.
Interesting how without trying too hard to be realistic (the argument is more of a little fairy tale without much pretenses) it gets realistic and interesting and funny enough to forget the most simplistic parts. And to pack some message, too. I loved the final credits. A beautiful and optimistic alternative to the new human society of Clarke's Songs of Distant Earth, or the one in Douglas Adams' Golganfrinchans-inhabited Earth. Lovely quick recount of human art history - with robots. To the sound of Peter Gabriel. The Filthy Critic nails it again. (Wall-E is a robot, yet he has way more personality than Hollywood's other robot, Tom Cruise. I love you, man.) Oh, and he seems to think that I shouldn't see Batman. Which is what I was suspecting after seeing the ads in the cinema, anyway. The short Presto was also nice; looks like more people are looking for its connection with Portal. The carrot should have been a cake... a delicious and moist carrot cake (and a lie!!1!).
I never thought I would begin a blog talking about a movie, but so be it. After all, it has been a long time since a film didn't hit me like this one (maybe "Solaris", about 5 years ago?). And what the hell, I should start one way or another. And am missing a good debate. Let's see how this goes.
- "Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it"
- Those who cannot remember the past, but are informed of it (not too vividly, maybe)... can accept it? Even have a 2nd chance? (I would love that branch to be explored with the same guts)
- "External memories": the sore fist after the punch in Memento, the attraction in ESotSM, ... (though the first is a consequence, the second a cause). Anyway, for some reason, I was (so!) thankful that the word "predestination" didn't pop up. Would have been too cheap, I guess.
- Even without memories, causes may still be there, like roots waiting to grow again... Memento's character tried growing new roots to be able to live on.
- And without the wound, you can't grow a scar; you can't learn. The root will grow again eventually. Better to know that, to either attack the grow itself, or control the way it grows. Know thyself... Temet Nosce (yeah, Matrix again).
- At the end of the deletion he (inside the "dream") still remembers what is happening... and that looks wrong. As some moments when Clem talks a bit too much to be just a memory. (Maybe looking for "errors" helps me rationalize, put some distance?)
- Are we all, are all relationships, THAT typical?
- It started a bit rough and wanting... maybe because I was comparing it to "Before Sunrise". But the comparison makes no sense, as one discovers soon.
- Interesting how the seediness of the company and the process brought credibility. I read somewhere that the 70's future was clean shiny plastics, the 80's dirtyness... maybe now it is something more mundane, mediocre?
- Funny how the lucid dreaming, the trying-to-wake up was sewn into the history. Like the deja vu in Matrix. Haunts me when makes me think about that kind of episodes.
- And I remember myself making more comparisons with BladeRunner (Rachel), with the inverse situation in Groundhog's day (only the main character remembers), ... and the middle point which is Memento: he can't forget, he always has just-suffered the loss, "Probably burned truckloads of your stuff. Can't remember to forget you.". Lots of situations, of films to compare, too much to make a meaningful class of films: after all, how many different ways there are to say that life is a dream, that what you feel may not be Reality?
- The reason why the relationship failed was already present in the beginning... yeah, maybe it usually is like that, but here it was interestingly explicit.
- Michael Gondry, director of Björk's Bachelorette and Human Behaviour, is screenwriter and director!! I love when old "friends" come up by surprise like that. Maybe I should start fishing actively for my already-known likings... (though that will make me see Nolan's Batmans...)
- On the other hand, Kaufman, also writer in ESotSM, also made Adaptation (bleh!) and Being John Malkovich. That would have made me wary. The jury is still out, I guess.
- After having this movie immediately snap-in with me, It was interesting to read a couple of established critics with negative opinions. Enlightening actually, as in "so this is what critics are worth" (babbler and babbler and sometimes managing quite perfectly to obviate some of the best things). One of them complained about the lack of erotic tension (or some such) between them. Excuse me, are we talking about the same film??