Moon

As many other reviews have already pointed out, Moon is the kind of beautiful, intelligent, and intense film that redeems the reputation of the science fiction genre in an age when mindless summer blockbusters garnering all the public’s attention claim membership in the same category. The film pays loving tribute to several great science fiction pieces that have come before it, perhaps most prominently including Tarkovsky’s Solaris and Kubrick’s 2001 – A Space Odyssey, yet it consciously resists the urge to follow in their footsteps, even using familiar plot elements from these films as red herrings.

Indeed, Moon takes its own path into the psychological and technological unknown, serving up a slow-paced, rich character study of a man on the brink. And, while the sets and models are convincing and deliver everything that the story requires of them, director Duncan Jones resists the urge to indulge in gratuitous special effects and action sequences. For most of the film, Moon is exactly what tasteful science fiction should strive to be: high production value, but never at the cost of the idea; never with the sole intent of showing off.

Unfortunately, after a few less than thrilling revelations a little more than halfway into the film, a threat is determined, a countdown is established, and what was once an intense study of the mind and soul bumbles into a simple plot device. While there are no over the top action sequences, the clock is ticking, and there’s little time left to think and consider. As the film kicks into its final act and the script lays its final cards on the table (which I will not spoil in this review), we find the surprise revelation we’ve been waiting for to be nothing more than a confirmation of what we’d already been mostly told. As my family and I left the theater, we shared the surprise revelations that we had expected and hoped to see in the final act, all of which were far more imaginative than what actually happened. The film could have done a lot more to provide shock and dramatic impact at this point.

Worst of all, though, the film ultimately fails to leave us with anything to consider. The plot is resolved too easily with no unanswered questions and no psychological, existential, nor sociological parallels to be considered. Any such issues raised early in the film are abandoned partway through, and while the film is suspiciously littered with biblical names and references, there is no apparent unifying theme that helps us to organize and make sense of them. Protagonist Sam Bell shares some characteristics in common with the prophet Samuel, but why is his daughter named Eve? Why are the four harvesters named after the gospels, and what is the significance of the fact that Luke is the one that is offline throughout the film? Why does the number 3 (likely referring to the holy trinity) occur an inordinate amount of times throughout the film? I’ve pieced together my own theory about this, in which Sam functions as all three parts of the holy trinity and as the savior of his own people (this statement won’t make any sense unless you see the film), but I feel as though I am grasping at straws. Jones does not leave us enough clues to draw any definitive ideas from this other than the fact that a biblical level of interpretation is intended. Beyond that, your guess is as good as mine.

In the end, Moon is a strong science fiction piece, but it falls just short of achieving a meaningful and artistic purpose like the great films it homages. It’s a brilliant, painstakingly composed film that cheats at the finish line, ultimately offering little more than an ending.
Rating: 3 / 5