"Moon" - what was all the fuss about?

[Trent Roman]

I saw last summer's "Moon" yesterday at a special screening, and was really disappointed after all the hoopla I heard about it during the summer. It's basically a standard Outer Limits episode fluffed up to feature length by long visual sequences and having dense characters stretch out what is blindingly obvious to the audience. Very short on story, and what was there--though I wouldn't go so far as to say it bored me--certainly didn't grab my interest. I had the plot figured out within the first twenty minutes, and, except for the robotic intelligence proving a help rather than a hinderance, everything unfolded exactly as expected. I kept waiting for a twist to justify the acclaim the film had received, but where I had been expecting a psychological thriller from the trailer, it was really just a paint-by-numbers clone short story drawn out to film length. On the technical side, the lead puts in an appeciable amount of effort at not only doing essentially every scene himself, but doing so twice for most of the film, and the visuals outside, particularly when Earth is visible, are nice, although the interiors felt blocky and even somewhat retro.

So what am I missing? What was supposed to make me love this film?

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Trekker4747]

The "hooplah" was that it was a genuine, real, sci-fi movie. Not a nutty, over SFX'd Hollywood SciFi movie.

 

[T'Baio]

Why do you hate cinema?

 

[Base_Delta_Zero]

^Nice.

Seriously, though. It was so well made. It was like watching a classic sci-fi story I read as a kid translated perfectly up onto the big screen.

 

[Mysterion]

The "hooplah" was that it was a genuine, real, sci-fi movie. Not a nutty, over SFX'd Hollywood SciFi movie.

^^^
This.

A rare SF film where plot and character are in the forefront rather than blowing up stuff. Would like to see more SF films like it. Like an adaptation of Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein, if done right, could be a masterpiece.

 

[cylkoth]

The "hooplah" was that it was a genuine, real, sci-fi movie. Not a nutty, over SFX'd Hollywood SciFi movie.

^^^
This.

A rare SF film where plot and character are in the forefront rather than blowing up stuff. Would like to see more SF films like it. Like an adaptation of Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein, if done right, could be a masterpiece.

I'll throw in a Double Ditto. It was also nice to see the use of miniatures after so much CGI...It gave the film a heft, a rugged texture that's been missing from many space based shows and movies.

 

[Kegg]

The atmosphere is a key element, also. I'm surprised nobody brought up Clint Mansell's hauntingly excellent soundtrack (I've been playing "Welcome to Lunar Industries" over and over, maybe I'll go listen to it again now).

having dense characters stretch out what is blindingly obvious to the audience.

It's more of a human reaction. Sure, the obvious conclusion is in the back of the Sam Rockwell's character's mind when they first meet, but it is a rather absurd one. If you were suddenly presented with another you, how would you react?

although the interiors felt blocky and even somewhat retro.

The retro feel is intentional; it's sort of an homage to Silent Running and such (just as GERTY resembles a certain computer A.I. we all know and love). I found that pretty cool, but then, I like Silent Running. That attitude does partly inform the film as it plays with some sci-fi conventions with a degree of wry humour; GERTY is the inversion of HAL, which is why he has both HAL's eye and a smiley face (and so on).

Hell, last year's sci-fi films seemed to have a preoccupation with evil corporations - MNU in District 9, RDA in Avatar, and Lunar Industries in Moon. The last is by far the most believable simply because at no point do we see any corporate guys hamming it up about how evil they are; just smiling impersonal prerecorded messages that are full of BS.

Simply put, it's intelligently told, engaging visually/aurally, has an excellent one-man show from Rockwell, and just damn good atmosphere. Sometimes you just don't need a Star Child or noir tropes to create an exceptional film.

 

[stonester1]

By gods, I can't wait to see it.

 

[firehawk12]

Why do you hate cinema?

Because it wasn't in 3D!

 

[FalTorPan]

Moon was an intelligent film, which is more than I can say about most sci-fi flicks of any era.

 

[Reverend]

Why do you hate cinema?

Because it wasn't in 3D!

I realise that was tongue in cheek, but I honestly wonder if it's even possible to shoot miniatures in 3D without ruining the illusion than the object looks bigger than it really is?

 

[FalTorPan]

Why do you hate cinema?

Because it wasn't in 3D!

I realise that was tongue in cheek, but I honestly wonder if it's even possible to shoot miniatures in 3D without ruining the illusion than the object looks bigger than it really is?

I'm sure it's possible, although with smaller-scaled objects, the margin for error in camera placement, etc., is probably smaller.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Sam Rockwell's performance didn't hurt either. I thought they did a good job in conveying the weirdness of the plot as well, a lot of times it's just like "oh Hey" and they just get on with it. I was never really sure how Sam was going to react to what was going on.

I might concede that it's a bit overhyped but it's still a good watch.

 

[Trent Roman]

Thanks to those who gave answers instead of ad hominems.

The "hooplah" was that it was a genuine, real, sci-fi movie. Not a nutty, over SFX'd Hollywood SciFi movie.

In my view, a film should stimulate. Broadly speaking, it can do so in two ways: physically, by being exciting, impressive and/or visually engaging; intellectually, by engaging with innovative ideas, structure and challenging concepts. "Moon" (to me) did neither; it was bland and predictable. It had the simple story of an SFX-fest without the SFX.

Moon was an intelligent film, which is more than I can say about most sci-fi flicks of any era.

In what way would you consider it intelligent? The story was predictable, the content generic; nothing we haven't seen a dozen times before. I left the theatre wondering why I had spent an hour and a half watching something that could have fit into an hour-long TV episode and still feel stretched out.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[DarylCarpenter]

I couldn't watch this movie without thinking of all the older, better movies it was ripping o...err, homaging. I was sitting there thinking "Man, the sets look awfully like 2001, they've even got an octagonal corridor and a computer with a creepy child molester voice, the plot is awfully similar to Solaris, the three-year lifespan thing is from Blade Runner, hey, weren't those Purina dog chow logos all over the place in Alien too?"

It wasn't a bad movie, but I felt like I'd seen it all before.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

SPOILERS TO FOLLOW:

You make it seem like the revelation that the other Rockwell is a clone was a big twist that you saw coming a mile away. But they didn't exactly hide it, and it WAS pretty obvious early on he was a clone. I don't think it really WAS meant to be a twist, in the traditional "Wow, didn't see that coming!" sense. It was simply a plot point. He has a clone. They got it out of the way early on, as a matter of fact, and then went on with the movie showing the interactions between the characters.

That's where the intelligence is. Get the "twist" (it wasn't one) out of the way, then show the interactions and watch the drama unfold. That's what the story is about.

 

[stonester1]

Dude...too spoilery...

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

In a thread titled "what was all the fuss about?", if the fuss is plot-centric, it's dumb to have the whole thread in spoiler-tag. Common sense.

Besides, as I pointed out, there's no twist that was given away, and nothing that wasn't figured out by the trailer.

 

[stonester1]

In a thread titled "what was all the fuss about?", if the fuss is plot-centric, it's dumb to have the whole thread in spoiler-tag. Common sense.

Besides, as I pointed out, there's no twist that was given away, and nothing that wasn't figured out by the trailer.

You see a duplicate, I for one wouldn't assume it was a clone. I for one wouldn't assume ANYTHING. I'd wait for the story to reveal what was going on...and I'd prefer to get it from the story, not some inconsiderate poster on a BBS.

Could you have at least put a spoiler warning at the top of your post?

Yes, you could have.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

My apologies, I could have put a spoiler warning.
I didn't think it was necessary in this thread at this time. I'll fix that.

(It seems I'm a week away, literally, from the statute of spoiler limitations running out. Lucky you!)