Moon - Page 6 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 157 Old 03-10-2011, 09:47 AM
CIH USER
 
Franin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 17,778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 411 Post(s)
Liked: 340
What amazes me is these film ( the silent achievers I call them ) that end up being really good ( better than some block busters ) and have a once a year replay value in them.

_________________________

Frank
Franin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 157 Old 03-10-2011, 10:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Shaded Dogfood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Terminus and the Lake of Light
Posts: 4,862
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 38
If you have a really good script and it doesn't take mega-millions to make the film, sooner or later you will get either respect, prestige, a recouping of your investment or quite possibly all three.

CW Hinkle
Shaded Dogfood is offline  
post #153 of 157 Old 03-10-2011, 02:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
Herve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Speaking of movies inferior to Moon, how about Shakespeare in Love getting an Oscar for Best Picture?

More comments.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Spoiler  
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I think we have to remember that the moon base must have from the beginning been designed and constructed with that underground facility as an integral part of the whole. That means that the role of the clones was pre-determined. With the number of clones available in that storage facility, it was almost certainly the intent of the company to have them operate the base virtually forever. Also, it must have taken many years of work involving probably thousands of workers both on Earth and on the moon to design, get approvals for the design, transport to a facility to launch and then to launch all the pieces to the moon and then, finally, assemble the facility on the moon.

Also consider that those jammers had to also be designed, approved, transported, etc. as part of the facility.

At one point, when old Sam asked the computer point-blank if he was a clone, the computer said yes and that thoughts had been uploaded into him. Therefore, I believe that virtually any type of memories could be uploaded and, therefore, it was not necessary that there was an original Sam Bell to experience those first three years and pass on those memories to new clones. The notion that the original Sam Bell, or whoever it was that was the source of the DNA, had to actually go to the moon for the first three years is a bit of a stretch, I think. He would almost certainly have known about the station's ultimate purpose and the role of the clones in operating it, so why not just let the first clone get on with it? But I might very well be entirely wrong on this.

I think that the most important thing about the movie, ironically, has little to do with the sci-fi aspects - location of the facility, cloning, fusion power, etc. - and everything to do with, for lack of a better word, politics. And there are some interesting aspects about the release of the movie itself that I think could also be classified as political, even sinister.

One of the big questions I had, almost as soon as the movie started, was why it was necessary to wait so long between transmitted question and received answer, when light (radio) time to the moon is just a few seconds. As soon as I learned that there was a problem with a communication satellite, I had an idea that there was trouble afoot. Then there was the interrupted video from the wife to reinforce that feeling - a feeling that only gets stronger throughout the film. After rescuing old Sam and hearing that there's a rescue mission on the way, the new Sam almost immediately deduces that they're coming to kill them, not rescue them. Soon, the old Sam comes to the same conclusion.

This movie is another version of Enemy of the State (EOS), only this time it's a large corporation that's the bad guy, not a federal candidate and a senator and his merry band of high-tech henchmen. (We now all know that the evil legislation described in EOS has in our real world become the law of the land and its name is the patriot act.) Although real corporations hopefully do not operate the way Lunar does in Moon (in the US and Canada, at least), the irresistible influence of the real military-industrial-congressional complex is nowhere near as appreciated as it should be, IMO. I won't elaborate further on more details of that influence, but an argument could easily be made that the US is populated by millions of Sam Bells - people who are, by design and education, almost completely ignorant of multi-national corporate power - power that owns and operates governments in its own interest. But there are some new Sams among the old and, just like in the movie; they're starting to have some influence on the old Sams. Etc.

BTW, one of the most significant statements that the computer makes during the movie is that there are minor, but significant, differences between clones. The new Sam is definitely a wary bugger, don't you think? From the moment he hears that live communication between the computer and the Earth, he's skeptical of everything he's told by the computer. (And isn't it funny that the computer makes such an error in judgment about new Sam's proximity and ability to overhear that conversation? Was this error intentional on the part of the computer? I think it was. For example, just exactly why did the computer assist old Sam and punch in that password? Was Gerty developing a conscience over all those years? Was Gerty evolving? New Sam must have thought so because he said to Gerty we aren't programmed. By we, did Sam mean himself and the computer, or himself and the other clones?)

Moon is a fantastic movie that is about our own time, not the future, and I can't help but think that that fact, and the ongoing financial crisis at the time of its release, may have had something to do with its rather strange, astonishing lack of promotion. Did anyone see Sam Rockwell on Letterman or Leno, or Stewart's shows promoting this fine movie, as is normally done? I didn't. I didn't even know the movie existed until last week. I can't help but think that there's more to its total lack of promotion than a simple lack of promotional money. (See, seasoned conspiracy theorists cannot be prevented from theorizing.)

Moon is a fantastic movie. Sam Rockwell also deserves a great deal of credit for making me believe that he was in two places at the same time as two identical, but remarkably different people.

Thanks for the opportunity to comment on it.
Herve is offline  
post #154 of 157 Old 03-12-2011, 10:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
gwsat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 14,849
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 331 Post(s)
Liked: 574
I finally ordered the Moon BD from Amazon yesterday. Although I paid $13.99 for it, I also bought L.A. Confidential and the Die Hard Collection of all 4 Die Hard films. This had the net effect of reducing my bottom line cost for all 6 films to $8.49 each. I was pleased.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herve View Post

Speaking of movies inferior to Moon, how about Shakespeare in Love getting an Oscar for Best Picture?

Shakespeare in Love got the 1999 Best Picture Oscar instead of Saving Private Ryan, although Spielberg did win the Best Director Oscar. I watched Saving Private Ryan again last night. It is the best war movie ever made and one of the best of any kind, so it's hard to defend the Academy's decision to pass it over for the lovely but far from great Shakespeare in Love. Objectively viewed, the selection of Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan was a big mistake but at the time, I was glad Shakespeare in Love won the Best Picture Oscar. It was filled with funny, charming performances, and its many sly references to The Bard and his work warmed the cockles of every Shakespeare geek's heart. Count me among their geeky numbers.
gwsat is offline  
post #155 of 157 Old 03-12-2011, 12:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Osirus23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,255
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herve View Post

Speaking of movies inferior to Moon, how about Shakespeare in Love getting an Oscar for Best Picture?

The Best Picture Oscar is meaninless with respect to a film's quality. That award is mostly used for the snobby elitistsr. Hell most of them probably didn't even watch Shakespeare in Love and just voted for it because of its artsy-sounding title.

Can you name the film that beat out Citizen Kane for Best Picture? I know I sure as hell can't.
Osirus23 is online now  
post #156 of 157 Old 03-12-2011, 05:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rboster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 17,945
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 179 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osirus23 View Post

The Best Picture Oscar is meaninless with respect to a film's quality. That award is mostly used for the snobby elitistsr. Hell most of them probably didn't even watch Shakespeare in Love and just voted for it because of its artsy-sounding title.

Can you name the film that beat out Citizen Kane for Best Picture? I know I sure as hell can't.

"How Green was My Valley" beat out Citizen Kane for best picture. This is a good article about some of the best films that never won best picture

http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/fea...st-picture.php

Sometimes two films will split the vote and allow a lessor (third) film to win in that particular year. So it's not as clear cut as "elitist snobbery"

"Retired" AVS Moderator
Feeler: I'm thinking of selling my JTR Triple 8HT's Let me know if you are interested?
For Sale: ACS PlanarTrap (freestanding acoustic panel) ($300/pair)[/B]:
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/209-au...tic-panel.html
rboster is online now  
post #157 of 157 Old 03-12-2011, 07:37 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
gwsat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 14,849
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 331 Post(s)
Liked: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by rboster View Post

"How Green was My Valley" beat out Citizen Kane for best picture. This is a good article about some of the best films that never won best picture

http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/fea...st-picture.php

Sometimes two films will split the vote and allow a lessor (third) film to win in that particular year. So it's not as clear cut as "elitist snobbery"

That was an interesting piece, although the writer left one actress off of her list of those who won an Oscar by playing a hooker. That would be Shirley Jones, who won the 1961 Best Supporting Actress Oscar for Elmer Gantry.

I will say a word in defense of the Academy. Of course they miss sometimes and some of those misses look pretty bad in retrospect. Still, over the years, the Oscars have managed to retain some semblance of legitimacy, at least compared to the Emmys and Golden Globes, among others. There are some years when the films are either so good or so bad, whatever the Academy does will be controversial. For example, in 1940 (the writer of your linked piece wrongly said it was 1939) Gone With the Wind won the Best Picture Oscar over The Wizard of Oz and Stagecoach, as well as several other highly regarded films. Holy smoke! Whatever the Academy does in a year like that, and there have been a number of them, will seem wrong.
gwsat is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Blu-ray Software

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off