Warning: This review contains mild spoilers about a plot point that occurs very early in the film, but you may want to experience it without knowing that, so tread lightly.
Duncan Jones has directed a nice quiet sci-fi film in Moon. It is not the most original piece of work, though, and as I watched it I counted the films that it reminded me of, including Silent Running, Solaris, and most especially 2001: A Space Odyssey, with the use of a computer with a spookily level speaking voice and its own agenda.
However, the nods to 2001 are, by the end of the film, clearly part of Jones’ plan, and he uses those cinematic references to catch snarky viewers like me off our guard.
The simple premise of the film is that a new form of energy is being mined on the moon. A one-man crew, assisted by a computer, looks over things. That crewman is Sam Rockwell who, we are told, is near the end of a three-year contract. He is looking forward to returning to his gorgeous wife and their adorable little girl. At first you may wonder why a guy would leave a family like that to spend three years in isolation on the moon, but don’t get too critical, all will be answered.
Going out to investigate a mechanical problem, Rockwell crashes and is injured. When he awakens in the infirmary, the computer (called Gerty, and voiced eerily by Kevin Spacey) tells him that he will be fine in a few days. But Rockwell is suspicious, and when he goes out, against Gerty’s instructions, to the scene of the crash, he finds something shocking–himself.
I won’t go any further than that, but I needed to reveal that bit of plot to discuss the notion that the bulk of the film consists of Rockwell playing two parts, and the special effects involved to have both characters on screen at the same time. This is accomplished most effectively because Rockwell, even though he is playing two characters who are the same person, manages to make us see separate individuals. But the camera tricks are interesting. Jones starts with having them simply share the screen, but then it gets more complicated–they play a game of table tennis. Finally they are physically interacting, such as dressing each other or having a knockdown drag-out fight.
But I don’t mean to suggest that this film is about special effects. Instead it’s about identity, and what makes each of us unique. Discovering one has a doppelganger is surely very disquieting, and Jones and Rockwell both express this notion effectively.
I wouldn’t say the film is excellent, though, just good. At times it seems like an extended Twilight Zone episode. Though I understand what Jones was trying to do with Gerty vis-a-vis the HAL 9000 in 2001, I couldn’t help but spend half the film thinking to myself, “It’s been done” (but I did like the monitor on Gerty which showed his mood with a changeable Happy Face application).
Appropos of nothing, Jones is of course the son of David Bowie. I can only be grateful he did not name his main character Major Tom.
Ahhhhh, you beat me to it. I had a chance to see this a while ago at a special screening in Manhattan, but ended up not going.
The plot spoiler you touch on is actually shown in the trailers, so I’m not sure it’s that much of a spoiler.
Your review doesn’t really reveal why I’m not that up on seeing this movie. These types of movies are my thing, and so I wonder, since you say it apes from 2001 and Solaris, if it’s because I was so disappointed with Solaris (save the really, really good opening thirty minutes and the great performance by Jeremy Davies) that I just couldn’t bring myself to watch this, and of course, because 2001 was so iconic, the smooth-talking computer with a smiley face just…I don’t know. (With all that technology, couldn’t they give these computers at least human avatar faces instead of disembodied voices?)
Anyway, another solid review, Slim, and thanks for covering this one, also.
Brian and I watched 2001: A Space Odyssey over the weekend, and I watched many of the extras a couple of days ago. So it was fresh in my mind as we watched Moon last night.
**MAJOR SPOILERS intended for discussion between those who have seen the film**
There are obvious similarities between Gerty and HAL (except for the emoticons, and not being omnipresent and homicidal). This was mildly amusing when I thought to myself, “Open the pod bay doors, HAL” as Sam was returning from the crash site. The similarities were also a bit distracting.
What disturbed me about Gerty was “he” was susceptible to persuasion. Sam begged him to do something more than once that he was instructed not to do and Gerty gave in. This didn’t really make sense to me, especially when the (second) Sam wanted to do something that would spare his and the (first) Sam’s life. Why would Gerty feel sympathetic towards saving the lives of two clones when it would seem as though he were indifferent to the lives of any previous clones, in addition to the yet-to-be-awakened one?
And what makes the clones suddenly start dying after 3 years? Is it a defect of the cloning process? Or was it by design (because it was the length of his contract)? If by design, it reminds me of The Prestige; those sick bastards. And why were there edits to his wife’s transmissions?
Despite having complaints and unanswered questions, I think I liked it. The interaction between the two Sams was so seamless that I hardly realized the complexity of the filmmaking as I was watching it. I have more to say about this, but should really get back to work. I will return to comment more later.
I forgot, I saw this the other night, also. Thought it was interesting, and I enjoyed it, but in the end it’s hard for me to see much depth to it. It doesn’t seem to have ideas, so much as it has ideas about ideas, if that makes any sense (probably not). What I mean is, there’s a lot here that might be more thought-provoking if it didn’t feel so sketchy and half-formed.
********SPOILERS***************
Jeanine mentions her issues with Gerty, and I think that’s a good example. I understand that Jones was playing off of our familiarity with HAL in 2001 and messing with the expectations that we have about Gerty as a result by having Gerty turn out to be a good and helpful robot. But while this is a clever bit of writing, I don’t really see a “why” there. Does Gerty behave according to any consistent logic? Is there a point to be made about artificial intelligence by having Gerty go against our expectations?
I don’t really know. But it felt that the movie was screwing with us more than it felt like it had anything to say about its subject matter.
*********END SPOILERS*************
At any rate, it’s an easy movie to sit through, and it’s unquestionably worth watching. But it felt like something of an opportunity lost because it’s a great premise.
Saw this last night and while I respected it, I didn’t particularly enjoy it.
I’d agree with JS’s comment that this felt like an extended Twilight Zone episode; I thought the story could easily have been told in 60-70 minutes. At this length I found it tedious – even boring – at times.
I did respect it though from a technical point and that it was quite unusual in many ways. Rockwell’s efforts were impressive and it did generate a lot of debate amongst my friends after the film, which is always a good sign.
But not a film that I got much pleasure or satisfaction from.
Alright. Finally. Here is an original, thought-provoking, ridiculously well-made film on a limited budget and most of all, a movie that attempts to be about something and not just a bloated genre exercise or lame attempt to be an edgy romantic comedy.
I agree with a lot of the issues you guys have with this movie, but damn, if it isn’t one of the most thought-provoking sci-fi’s I’ve seen in a long time and if Rockwell didn’t give one of the best performances I’ve seen in a while.
I was really troubled by, as Jeanine first said, the computer could be ‘convinced’ to do things pretty easily.
There were quite a few instances that didn’t sit right, but Rockwell and the amazing ‘old school’ effects work phenomenally.
I don’t think Jones will be a major talent of historic proportions, but I look forward to his next one.