BenLaw said:
strapped for cash said:
Can I ask, what makes Moon a "brilliant film?"
Hopefully the others will have a go at this too, but I'll try to give some sort of answer. Incidentally, have you seen it and if so what are your views?
I think Rockwell's performance stands out.
As you say, science fiction can ask questions about human existence and experience, and Sam's duplication posits questions about what makes us human -- are we only matter, or are we spiritual beings, theologically, and/or through our connections with others? Do our responsibilities to others change depending on how we answer these questions? Science fiction literature and cinema has always thrown up such questions.
The film also engages with themes of solipsism and perception -- if the universe exists only as one perceives it, and this perception is a fiction or construction, is continuation of this fiction preferable to more troubling revelations (red pill or blue pill)? I guess the film has a quasi-political dimension in this regard, and can be read in terms of ideology. (There's philosophical literature in this area, perhaps most notably Baudrillard's discussion of "simulacra," which is often cited in analyses of The Matrix.)
I think the filmmakers invite such interpretations without taking a stance. This is true of much cinema (and indeed much science fiction) -- artistic producers often purposefully craft what we might term "open texts" that leave spaces for audiences/readers to construct their own meanings.
I guess the mildly disappointing thing about Moon, in my view, is that rather than engaging with the above questions in challenging or particularly interesting/original ways, the filmmakers retreat to plot contrivance, which feels a bit like a cop out or sleight of hand. I'm being hypercritical here, however. I enjoyed Moon, and Rockwell's performance, but I didn't think it was a "brilliant film," and I felt a little cheated by the end. Sorry!