Moon is a thoughtful but imperfect sci-fi alternative to the brain-dead blockbusters that dominate the summer.
Here is a true space oddity: a low-key, British-funded sci-fi thriller produced by Sting’s wife and directed by David Bowie’s son. Having taken professional cover behind his mother’s maiden name, Duncan Jones (christened Zowie Bowie) has earned his shot at feature filmmaking via a splashy career in advertising, where he directed a kung-fu lesbian spot for French Connection which, improbably, was every bit as good as it sounds.
Moon is a thoughtful but imperfect alternative to the brain-dead blockbusters that dominate the summer. With an aesthetic borrowed from Dan O’Bannon’s ‘used future’, Jones conjures the ghosts – both literal and metaphorical – of Tarkovsky’s Solaris (or perhaps Soderbergh’s glossier version) in the story of a mining contractor whose three-year stint on the moon is nearing an end.
Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell) is an employee of Lunar Industries, a conglomerate that controls the extraction of ore from the surface of the moon to fulfil the earth’s energy needs. This is a convincing landscape of industrial machinery, sweat and loneliness – a knowing reaction to the shiny surfaces of 2001. Indeed, Sam’s only companion is a computer, GERTY (Kevin Spacey), whose dispassionate voice is both familiar and sinister.
And yet Moon is full of misdirection. In an atmospheric first act, Jones effectively turns our familiarity with sci-fi archetypes to his advantage, as the audience struggles to decode the film’s signals. Should we be expecting the techno-fear of 2001? The ET intruder of Alien? The space psychosis of Sunshine?
This paranoid guessing game induces a creeping sense of cabin fever that mirrors Sam’s own descent into apparent madness, as a series of hallucinations leads him to question his sanity.
Jones has achieved a lot with very little. Clearly made on a shoestring, Moon is nevertheless full of ambition. Though it would have been easier (and cheaper) to confine the action to Sam’s quarters, there are numerous excursions to the surface. And though the special effects are more Spaceballs than Star Wars, Gary Shaw’s photography provides a high-class finish, while Jones’ glossy direction betrays the early influence of Tony Scott.
If anything, the craters in this particular Moon are a result of Nathan Parker’s screenplay rather than any technical or financial limitations. A twist at the halfway mark reveals the dark secret behind Lunar Industries’ corporate philosophy, but as the threat to Sam shifts from his sanity to his life, the film loses its interior, psychological menace, and replaces it with an external threat that is too remote to sustain the dramatic tension.
Parker is also guilty of some logical gaffes (Sam’s hallucinations are a vision of somebody he could never have met) and pedestrian resolutions. The latter stages of the film are benign and airless, failing to provide either a serious critique of a corporation unhitched from its moral bearings, or a dramatic narrative with sufficient punch.
As ever, Sam Rockwell is an engaging presence, here balancing his trademark charm with a haunted alter ego. But Kevin Spacey is a duff choice as GERTY, a piece of stunt casting that only serves to distract from the hermetic isolation of the rest of the film. Hollywood has seeped in through the airlock, but this is a defiantly British film. It’s one we can be proud of – in moderation.
A British film without gangsters that’s not directed by Richard Curtis? We never thought we’d see the day.
A film of two halves. The first is an excellent example of how to stretch a budget to breaking point; the second loses the plot.
By no means a masterpiece, but it’d be a harsh judge who dismissed it outright.
View 18 comments
Anton Bitel
• 3 years agoJust caught Moon this afternoon, and was intrigued by its ambiguous plotting, which I still don't feel that I've fully deciphered. On the one hand, it might be exactly as this review suggests - i.e. a brooding psychodrama transformed by the halfway-point 'twist' into a sort of dystopian conspiracy thriller with an identifiable, external threat. On the other hand, it might remain an internalised psychodrama right until the film's (and its main character's) end. On this reading, Sam, already avowedly talking to himself a lot and hallucinating when we first meet him owing to his long-term isolation, suffers an accident while in his lunar vehicle, and spends the rest of the film injured and caught in a paranoid fantasy (reflecting both his sense of abandonment and the fragmentation of his identity) as his life slowly ebbs away in the damaged vehicle - i.e. all along Sam really is 'the one and only', and the film is yet another variation on the 'Incident at Owl Creek Bridge' type of plot-in-the-head.
Did anyone else see any of this in the film, or am I going crazy too?
Andy
• 3 years agoAndy
• 3 years agoLim Salt
• 3 years agoMatt B
• 3 years agoDan Stewart
• 3 years agoAndy Love
• 3 years agoSally Rushbrook
• 3 years agoDave
• 3 years agoAnton Bitel
• 3 years agoLim Salt
• 3 years agoTamsin
• 3 years agoIt's a strange, quiet but exhilirating experience, with good performances from the likes of Matt Berry (The IT Crowd) and a silky voiced Kevin Spacey as surprisingly empathetic computer GERTY, but this is Sam Rockwell's show, completely nailing his role as two Sam Bells, one quiet, jaded despite having been created after sevral months (maybe longer, who can tell?), and tired from the heaviness of memory loaded in from previous incarnations, and the other, younger, fresher, calm, eager to work, kind and sympathetic; this is the one who finally goes home in the place of his near-dying predecessor..
Tom
• 3 years agoI enjoyed the whole film and felt it tied up all the plot threads beautifully in the final act.
Anton Bitel
• 3 years agoI agree that the threads tie up elegantly in the final act - but I think that I end up seeing a rather different knot from the one that you do...
davidrs
• 3 years agoAnton Bitel
• 3 years agoIn any case, my reading in no way stops Moon from being 'an anti-corporate morality story'. Moon is that, surely, on any reading. It is just that, on my reading, that story unfolds in Sam's head - but, for all that, it still reflects (through a glass darkly) on the sort of corporate set-up in which a worker could be effectively abandoned, left incommunicado, and exposed to constant risk, by a corporation concerned more with the maintenance of its regular shipments than with the security (physical and mental) of its employees. On my reading, Sam is not the actual clone he imagines himself to be, but he might as well be, given his treatment by his employers as an expendable number, easily replaced.
@silvar_
• 3 years agoI agree with Anton that it could all be in Sam1's head, but I don't think it is...
Did anyone think of the Blade-Runner parallel? How replicant's had a four year lifespan? (I thought it was 3 so it was a direct parallel, but turns out it's 4) So is Sam bleeding away a result of him coming to the end of his 'contract' and lifespan?
The hallucinations are clearly the result of implants, presumably either:
a) The corporation aren't clever enough to filter out everything unnecessary from the original Sam's mind, so leaving thoughts/memories that are may be unhelpful to the clone's operation
b) The clone is, in fact biological and hence can react to implanted thoughts in seemingly random ways, including having entirely new dreams or hallucinations based on the implanted memories. This is in fact more likely, because as in Blade Runner, the clones have little life experience and understanding so are more prone to mental confusion/breakdown.
Anton Biel "...into a sort of dystopian conspiracy thriller with an identifiable, external threat."
I though that although there was a shift in the second half, really we were still seeing the internal threat and torment as the central story line. The external threat was an added complication, but the real question was still: Who is Sam? and what is he going to do?
As Sam1 broke down emotionally and physically and Sam2 took on the role of leader and decision maker, we weren't so much concerned with Elisa, but with the paths that the Sams were choosing to take.
Was Sam1 just going to break down, give up and die? Was Sam2 going to help him, kill him, or give in and give up too?
The timing at the end was fantastic, and the score just made it. Well done Clint Mansell, it wouldn't have been the same without the pensieve, eery background.
Oh, and a massive HOORAY! for British Indy Cinema :D
johnny ranger
• 3 years agoBut how can you not see that "Moon" is an instant classic?