Moon

‘Moon’ – Sam Rockwell Lost in Space

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written in 2010, long before a certain actor in this film became quite the pariah.

You know, in retrospect, maybe 2009 wasn’t such a bad year for science fiction movies. It’s just that the stench from some of the biggest movies in that genre lasted much longer than the memories we had of the movies we saw.

With “X-Men Origins: Wolverine,” we sadly watched a strong franchise fall victim to a prequel which lacked the thrills and the complex characters that made the three previous entries so good. “Terminator Salvation” will probably be remembered best for Christian Bale’s angry rant on set than with what ended up onscreen.

And then came “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,” and I still have the impulse to bitch and moan about that sequel whenever necessary. Michael Bay left a giant robot turd for us which we just couldn’t resist seeing, so it of course made hundreds of millions of dollars. It put such an enormous dent in my enjoyment of things science fiction, and I am still getting over my frustration with it even after all this time.

But getting past that awful stench, there were a number of sci-fi gems to be found in 2009. “Star Trek” turned out to be an enormous surprise and a fantastic piece of entertainment. Imagine that, a prequel heading in unpredictable directions. And although I keep running into more and more haters of this one, “Avatar” for me was a great reminder of why experiencing movies on the big screen with an audience can be so much fun. And let us not forget “District 9,” a film that paralleled the Apartheid movement which overtook South Africa for far too long. These films were so good that I believe they will stand the test of time as opposed to the others which let me down to an infinite degree.

And then there is “Moon” which came out in limited release and did not have the same publicity as those big blockbusters did. This one proved to be the most thought provoking and original sci-fi movie of 2009. Granted, it does borrow from many classics of the genre like “2001” and “Alien” to name a few, but first-time director Duncan Jones takes all these influences and molds them into a motion picture which feels very fresh compared to what we generally get year to year. Jones is also aided greatly by another in a long line of superb performances from Sam Rockwell who is more or less doing a solo show this time out.

Rockwell plays Sam Bell, an employee of Lunar Industries who is under a 3-year contract to extract Helium-3 from the moon’s surface; a natural gas which will provide much needed clean energy back on Earth. You would figure he would get more than just a robot companion as company during all this time far from home. But I guess corporations managed to find a way to cut the whole workforce down to one person in the future, hence saving them an obscene amount of money for themselves. Sam’s only human contact is the messages he gets from his wife and infant daughter as well as his superiors who are always checking on his progress. For him, it must be like staying at “The Shining’s” Overlook Hotel with outer space to deal with instead of snow. But at least here, he is spaced out instead of snowed in.

While doing his daily work on the land rover, Sam crashes and is knocked unconscious. When Sam comes to, he is back in the lunar base but has no idea of how he got back. He also ends up hallucinating to where he sees a little girl he does not know. In short, a number of things happen to where he goes outside the base and back to the damaged harvester to find someone barely alive: himself. To reveal more would be criminal because it would spoil the many surprises this film has for you.

For a moment, I thought “Moon” was an adaptation of another Philip K. Dick novel like “Blade Runner” or “Total Recall.” It turns out, however, it is not, but “Moon” does deal with some of the same themes. How would you feel if one day you woke up and found you were not who you thought you were? Would you continue on in life if you found you were nothing more than a copy of another person? How long can a secret be kept before it comes out into the open? While scientists may continue to play around with the evolution of human beings, they can never fully control the desires and actions of them. Throughout history, humanity has always found a way to break through its collective suppression to get at a reality which cannot be forever contained.

As I said, “Moon” borrows from many other sci-fi movies. The design of the lunar base looks much like the Nostromo from “Alien,” and a lot of the lettering and fonts seem very similar to those seen in “Aliens.” And there is no mistaking the influence “2001: A Space Odyssey” had on this film, especially with Sam’s robot companion GERTY (voiced by Kevin Spacey). Instead of an eerie looking red dot like HAL, GERTY has a smiley face which illustrates the different emotions which better relate to Sam’s emotional needs. This is that same smiley face Wal-Mart co-opted, and although this company is not mentioned here, seeing that icon makes me believe this particular corporate monolith may very well have the last laugh on the unions and remain more dominant in the future. Be afraid. Be very afraid…

Other directors would just take these elements and throw them up onto the screen without much forethought. Jones, however, takes all these familiar elements and more than makes them his own. “Moon” looks familiar in some ways, but it feels quite unique in others.

But what is especially impressive about “Moon” is how it was made for only $5 million dollars. Most sci-fi movies these days cost at least $150 million, and this does not include advertising and other promotion costs. Heck, when I see a sci-fi movie that costs only $30 million, I expect subpar effects and am usually forgiving about them. But Jones takes the budget he has and makes everything look like it cost ten times as much. I guess this further proves what Robert Rodriguez said about having less money forces you to be more creative.

“Moon” also benefits from an excellent music score by Clint Mansell whose career as a film composer keeps getting better and better. His music adds a strong emotional quality that strengthens our need to understand Sam on an emotional level. Ever since “Pi” and “Requiem for a Dream,” Mansell has proven to be one of the most original sounding composers working today, and the musical themes he typically deals with are perfectly suited to this kind of material.

In the end though, this is Rockwell’s show, and he has quite a challenge as he is essentially acting opposite himself. You have to wonder how an actor plays off of himself and yet makes it look so natural at the same time. Rockwell has become better known for playing bad guys or heavies in mainstream movies, but he is more than capable of playing outside of that and continues to prove so in movies like this, “Frost/Nixon,” and “Choke” to name a few. In giving his character a strong complexity to someone who may not really actually be human ends up forcing you to identify more with something which may simply look like a machine from the outside. As a result, you could say that “Moon” also has a bit of “A.I.: Artificial Intelligence” in it as well.

And I do not want to leave out Kevin Spacey whose voice as GERTY creates a soothing trust Sam wants to hold on to and, at other times, test. GERTY is HAL but without the homicidal tendencies, and that has to be reassuring if you are stuck on the moon with no one else but a robot. Spacey makes GERTY seem like more than just a robot, and he makes us see how GERTY more in common with Sam than at first glance.

“Moon” is easily one of the most intelligent sci-fi movies of 2009, and it got lost in the shuffle of all the other big Hollywood releases, both bad and good. It deserves a long shelf life at your local video store, if there are any left where you live. In the end, it will last much longer in the memory than Michael Bay’s desecration of all things Hasbro. But enough of that one already…

* * * * out of * * * *

‘Source Code’ – Like ‘Groundhog Day’ But with a Shorter Time Span

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

The best way to describe “Source Code?” It is “Groundhog Day” crossed with “Quantum Leap.” It stars Jake Gyllenhaal as Captain Colter Stevens, an army helicopter pilot who has been assigned to a mission which has him looking for a bomber who blew up a Chicago bound train and killed everyone onboard. The movie’s title refers to a special program which allows him to enter the body of one of the passengers on that train for the last eight minutes of their life. So, perhaps this film is more like “Groundhog Day,” except that the day is going to be a lot shorter than 24 hours, and I mean a lot shorter.

Now this is a great concept for a film as we all have those moments which can prove to be as painful as they are unforgettable. Whether we admit or not, we keep replaying certain memories in our minds over and over again, often changing the outcome to something far more pleasing to our ego and sense of well-being. Even though it does us no good to dwell on the past, we fall into those patterns when our present is not all that great, and our future is more uncertain than we would prefer it to be. And through the breakthroughs of science here, Captain Colter gets to relive a moment which, while not his own, allows him to manipulate reality whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Of course, we can replay a moment from our lives to where we can no longer remember what was real or what was not. “Source Code” explores this as well, making one believe that if our lives were predestined, they will cease to be thanks to what science can continually do for us.

This film is director Duncan Jones’ follow up to “Moon” which itself was one of the very best movies of 2009. Like “Moon,” its main character is caught up in a situation not entirely of his making, but which becomes clear as the story rolls along. Like Colter, we are making discoveries about who he is along with him, and we eagerly await the answers he comes across even if they do not produce the desired result of stopping the bombing.

From the outset, “Source Code” looks to be a whodunit, but this ceases to be the case before the film reaches its midpoint. Besides, it’s pretty easy to figure out who the bomber is, and it is only a matter of time before Colter confronts said person to learn their true intentions. In actuality, it is about a man caught up in a situation which he has no control over, and of how he gets that control back in a way no one can predict.

Gyllenhaal remains one of the most dependable actors in movies, and he does not let the audience down in this one. In many ways, his performance is not too different from others he has given in recent years, so there is not much new to what he does here. All the same, he is very good, so why complain? Gyllenhaal engages us emotionally in his character’s struggle as, like him, we do not know how we got into this and we are desperate to get answers.

Jones does great work in making each visit to the same eight minutes unique from the last Colter gets unwillingly subjected to. “Source Code” could have been redundant as hell, and certain moments and actions are repeated ad nauseam throughout, but each eight-minute period has a different theme or construction to it. There are various people Colter has to meet, and there are other things for him to take advantage of in the little time he has to work with. Colter also gets to pull the rug out from under us to where, once the bomber is found, he finds there is still work to do.

Aside from Gyllenhaal, “Source Code” features other strong performances like the one from Vera Farmiga who was so great in “The Departed” and “Up in The Air.” Her character of Captain Colleen Goodwin at first looks to be Colter’s embattled conscience, but it is really the other way around. Farmiga is great in taking a typical military stock character and giving them a heart and soul which strongly informs the decisions Colleen later makes.

Also in the film is Jeffrey Wright who plays the creator of Source Code, Dr. Rutledge. This could have been a simple obsessive doctor, one mad with power, or one who is overly cruel. Somehow, Wright succeeds in making Rutledge something of an enigma to where you are not quite sure what to make of him. He may not be a mad scientist, but he is also not the warm kind either.

And, of course, we have the infinitely lovely Michelle Monaghan here as Christina Warren, girlfriend to the man Colter inhabits. Whether it is “Mission: Impossible 3,” “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang” or “Gone Baby Gone,” she always has a wonderful presence about her, and her smile brightens our mood every time we see it. And, like many actresses I tend to have a crush on, she is already married (dammit).

Is “Source Code” an original movie? I do not know nor do I care, but it sure feels like one compared to most movies being released these days. While you could say that there is a bit of “Inception” in this film as it involves searching through the mind of another person, this one feels like its own thing. It is a pointless argument to complain about what Jones borrows from here because not much of anything is original these days. It becomes a quest to take elements from other movies or stories and make them your own, and Jones has succeeded in doing this here.

While “Source Code” is a bit confusing at times, and I did not fully buy the its concluding act, this film is an enthralling mystery with a good dose of exciting action. Hopefully, Hollywood studios will start taking the time in being more openly inventive instead of just regurgitating the blockbuster hits from the recent past.

Still, it would be nice to change some of the more painful moments from our past so that we can look at ourselves in a kinder light, one which will help make our egos rise out of the muck they too often sink into. While it is best to make peace and forgive ourselves for our foolish trespasses, science is always catching up with us. Just you wait!

* * * ½ out of * * * *

Exclusive Interview with ‘Apollo 11’ Director Todd Douglas Miller

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

Apollo 11 poster

For many of us, the events of the Apollo 11 have long since been relegated to the annals of history. Back in July 1969, astronauts Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins were propelled into outer space to fulfill President John F. Kennedy’s 1961 national goal of landing a man on the Moon and then returning him safely back to Earth before the end of the decade. Those who were alive back then cannot and will not forget this incredible event, but many who were born after it occurred observe it as a mere footnote in history which has long since passed them by.

This historic event was revisited recently in Damien Chazelle’s film “First Man,” but now we have the documentary “Apollo 11” which takes audiences right back to 1969 when the mission took place. Described as a “cinematic event 50 years in the making,” it has been crafted from a newly discovered treasure trove of 65mm footage and 11,000 hours on uncatalogued audio recordings. The end result is a motion picture which makes you feel as though you are watching America’s first flight to the Moon as if it just happened yesterday, and it is a movie which demands to be seen on the biggest screen near you.

“Apollo 11” was directed by Todd Douglas Miller whose previous films include “Dinosaur 13” which observed the discovery of the largest Tyrannosaurus Rex fossil ever found, and “Gahanna Bill” which chronicles the life of Bill Withrow; a middle-aged, mentally handicapped man. I spoke with Miller about the making of “Apollo 11,” and he discussed why no narration or interviews were included in the documentary, the process of restoring much of the footage, and of how the discovered audio proved to be as informative as the visuals on display.

Ben Kenber: I love how the documentary opens with the image of the rocket and the capsule being slowly moved out to the launching area. It’s a fascinating way to start as we are reminded of the immense size of the rocket and also, more importantly, what humanity is capable of creating. What made you start the documentary with this image?

Todd Douglas Miller: One of the first images that we saw when we were doing some test scanning of the original film reel was the rocket being taken out on the crawler to pad 39A. It was actually upside down because the reel was wound backwards. So, we are looking at it and the way it comes off the scanner you only see an image every three or four seconds. And then we go, wait a minute, we know this is large-format but this is actually taken from a helicopter too, so we immediately put it up on the big screen in the theater and our jaws were just on the floor. I knew that I wanted to start this film to put the audience right in the moment, and I just felt like what better moment to see this giant 300+ feet tall Saturn V rocket and this amazing machine which was created to move it. It was really a no-brainer to start the movie there.

BK: I agree. Also, the resolution of the images you have to work with here is just breathtaking.

TDM: Yeah. Originally, we had set out to just rescan all the 16 and the 35mm film which we ultimately did. But when we dealt with those materials, some of them had been used over the decades, a shot here in a shot there, so there was a fair amount of clean and prep before we actually scanned them. With the 65mm, it was just so pristine, we really treated it with kid gloves in the color correction and the conform of it. It was just something that the technicians who were working with it on the scanners, they had just never seen anything like that: the condition and the way it moves through the machinery. Important to note too, the scanner that was developed for this was a prototype scanner. There is only one in existence created for just this project, but it actually moved the film through a series of air pressures. There was never anything physically touching the film itself. It’s a real testament to the guys who developed the technology created to handle it.

BK: In addition to all the footage which was discovered, there was a wealth of audio recordings recovered as well. Which give you more information and more help in making this documentary, the video or the audio?

TDM: That’s a great question. I would say if I had to pick because I am a visual guy, seeing the large-format film obviously informs some of the edit decisions as far as the eye candy shots go. But certainly, from a story perspective and how I want the shape the narrative of the mission, there was no better resource then the audio. We knew about all the air to ground audio and all the onboard audio that existed. When Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins were in the command module while they were on, let’s say, the dark side of the moon and they weren’t in communication with the earth, they flipped on a recorder so we have recordings that were taken on board, and there were also on-board recordings from the lunar landing and some other key moments during the mission. But we didn’t know of and what landed in our lap was 18,000 hours of Mission Control audio that was recorded at Mission Control on 30 tracks of audio in the front room, an additional 30 tracks of audio in the back room, and 11,000 hours of the 18,000 hours was statistically Apollo 11. It was a real mishmash. It has been digitized by a team down at the University of Texas in Dallas. It was going through NASA exports control. We got it fairly early so we could rifle through it and kind of help with the effort to transcribe everything and see if there was anything questionable in there or anything we can utilize in the film. It turned out it became our main resource for shaping the structure of this story that we wanted to focus on this because there were things in there that had never been heard before, or there were lines in there that might have not ended up on the air to ground transmissions that were cleaner than this 30-track audio recording.

BK: This documentary has no narration, but it really doesn’t need it because you can tell everything that is going on. Was it always your intention to not include any narration in this documentary, or was it something which came up during the editing process?

TDM: Yeah. One thing that you discover when you listen to all the mission audio, NASA broadcast what is basically the flight directors’ loop. So, if you hear any of the four flight directors (Gene Krantz, Clifford E. Charlesworth, Gerald D. Griffin and Glynn Lunney) talking with the other guys and also the flight capsule communicator in direct communication with the capsule, that gets broadcast.  But a lot of times it’s just a lot of technical jargon and numbers. They are inputting data into their local computer, the command module and the lunar module. So, what’s great for the average viewer or for a filmmaker was there was also four public affairs officers stationed in Mission Control that were of functioning as narration for the general audience that was listening via TV or the radio and would kind of dumb it down for people like me. You could get kind of a blow-by-blow, it’s almost like watching a live sportscast, of exactly what’s going on. From a filmmaking perspective it was really great that they so happened to have the voices of airline pilots. They were just this really calming influence and it certainly translated very well into utilizing them in the guise of the film.

BK: I was also really fascinated with how fast the spacecraft goes. It’s frightening when you realize what the velocity is. The scene where the astronauts land on the moon is almost terrifying because they are descending so fast and I found myself wanting to yell at the screen, hit the brakes!

TDM: (Laughs) Yeah, it was really fun to deal with all that telemetry and hours and hours spent with the consultants trying to figure out different angles and the velocities and approximate altitudes for different things. It really puts in perspective the technical accomplishments in this year expertise that these astronauts had to fly these machines and land them safely. It’s really incredible.

BK: “Apollo 11” deals with some very iconic moments, and yet it all feels like we are watching this event for the first time.

TDM: Thanks for saying that. That was definitely the intent. We joked that from the beginning we wanted this to feel like “Dunkirk” in space. It’s an analogy in that if you think about just being dropped into a situation, even though you know how it ends, that it’s definitely going to take you for a ride just by the sheer imagery involved. Some of the imagery that was captured, whether it was Buzz Aldrin operating the 16mm camera during the landing or Michael Collins during the lunar liftoff when the lunar module was coming off the surface of the moon towards the command module to dock, those two scenes we wanted them to be unbroken shots because they are two of the most iconic things ever captured on celluloid as far as I’m concerned. I think that too often it gets kind of missed on people how special that imagery really is when you just see it in bits and pieces or sped up, or it has too much flash to it. To see it as it was, it had an emotional impact on me for sure.

BK: The film score by Matt Morton helps to heighten the more dangerous aspects of the mission. Every once in a while, we are reminded of how dangerous space travel can be just as were while watching Alfonso Cuarón’s “Gravity.” What was it like working with Matt on the score?

TDM: Well I have known Matt since we were kids, and he’s my oldest collaborator. Typically, the way we work is we do post scores so I’ll temp in music to a team and then give it to him, and we talked about it and then he goes off and does his magic. With this, he told me very early on even when we were in the research phase of the film that he wanted to do a period score with modern composition and I said, what does that mean? (Laughs) He said I actually want to go out and only use instruments that were made pre-1969, one of which is a Moog synthesizer. Moog at the time was reissuing their 1968 synthesizer. They only made 25 of them and he got, I don’t know, number 13 or 14. I was scared at first but I didn’t tell them. I trust him but he didn’t know how to play one, and it’s a monster thing. It takes up an entire wall. It’s huge. He would go off and give me these hours and hours of these Moog compositions, so we ended up pre-scoring most of the film that way and it was just an absolutely wonderful way to work. It is one in which we, moving forward, want to do more of. It’s really just a testament to Matt and his skills as a composer and his versatility too. I’m just lucky that I get to work with him. I think his skill set as a composer is really in the spotlight and this one, and I’m just really proud of the work he did.

BK: “Apollo 11” is dedicated to Al and Theo. Can you tell me about those two people?

TDM: Al was Al Reinert, and he was a filmmaker. He made of film in the 80’s called “For All Mankind.” We became friends. I reached out to him when we did a short film which was really a primer for this film called “Last Steps” about Apollo 17. We just really hit it off, and he was working on a space themed film. We were doing some resource sharing and I was really looking forward to sharing this with him. Unfortunately, he passed away not too long ago before he could see the film. It’s one of the things I regret most, not showing him an early cut. Al was also the screenwriter on “Apollo 13,” and his films had at impact on me as a filmmaker. But I’m also lucky enough to call him a friend and develop a personal relationship with him towards the end of his life. Theo is Theo Kamecke, and he also passed away during the making of our film. Theo was the director of a film that’s become a cult classic among space fans called “Moonwalk One,” and a lot of the imagery that’s in our film “Apollo 11” was created for “Moonwalk One.” He was known as a really good editor too, and he actually worked on an Academy Award-winning short film called “To Be Alive!” which was produced by the Francis Thompson Company which ended up producing “Moonwalk One.” There was going to be a contingent of myself, National Archives and Maps and some of the team were going to show him some of things we discovered, and unfortunately he passed away a few weeks before this happened. So, we dedicated the film to those two filmmakers.

BK: You are known for another documentary you made previously called “Dinosaur 13.” I was curious, between that and “Apollo 11,” which was the tougher documentary to make?

TDM: That’s an interesting question. I think in terms of sheer scope, this was more difficult. We knew from the very beginning the immense responsibility we had. The fact we were transporting priceless materials up the I-95 corridor from (Washington) D.C. to New York led to a lot of sleepless and restless nights. We shot a lot on “Dinosaur 13,” but the narrative kind of set itself, and we were purely focused on just the film. With this, it wasn’t just the film. It was also the preservation and curation of all these materials that we were generating, and also the ones we were utilizing. We just felt a real pressure to get it right, so I would have to vote for this one.

BK: I imagine it’s a lot more challenging to get the details right something like this especially when you have this treasure trove of material which was left unseen for far too long.

TDM: Yeah, and I am so proud of all the work that everybody did on this, and I am proud of the work everybody did on “Dinosaur 13.” That was definitely a big project to pull that all together. We used a lot of archival material on that as well and filmed as much as we did. With “Apollo 11,” we didn’t shoot it ourselves. We had the responsibility to honor a lot of these filmmakers who are now deceased.

“Apollo 11” opens exclusively in IMAX on March 1st for one week only, and it will open in theaters everywhere on March 8th. If you can, see it in IMAX. It is an extraordinary cinematic experience.

Duncan Jones Revisits ‘Moon’ at New Beverly Cinema

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

Moon movie poster

Filmmaker Duncan Jones was the guest of honor at New Beverly Cinema on November 19, 2011 where his first two movies “Moon” and “Source Code” were being shown. Right after “Moon” finished, he leapt up to the stage like a contestant on “The Price Is Right” for a Q&A alongside his “Moon” producer Stuart Fenegan. Sam Rockwell and Kevin Spacey were not in attendance, but Jones brought along Rockwell’s spacesuit and a balloon of Gerty’s face as their stand ins.

Jones explained how he had worked in the advertising industry for years with the goal of eventually working in movies. He originally wanted his first film to be “Mute” which takes place in a futuristic Berlin, but he and Fenegan came to the conclusion it was too big for them to make into a movie at that point. It’s amazing to learn “Moon” only cost $5 million to make, and Jones said he was determined to squeeze as much out of that amount as possible. Fenegan was quick to point out what was at stake and said, “With the first movie, commercial success is far more important than critical success as it determines whether you’ll make another.”

There were two distinctive sets Jones had to work with on “Moon;” a 360-degree space station set which everyone got stuck in for the day once it was sealed, and another for the lunar module which Rockwell’s character uses to travel outside. As for Gerty, the “2001” Hal-like character voiced by Spacey, Jones described it as a beautiful model which could be moved around the set, but that it was a CGI effect in the wide shots. The special effects ended up getting a polish from Cinesite, a digital visual effects and post-production facility in London.

One audience member asked if Rockwell’s character was named Sam on purpose, to which Jones said yes. “Moon” was made with Rockwell in mind for the lead, and since he plays different clones of the same person, Jones really wanted to mess with his head during the 33-day shoot. This way, Jones said, the actor would be constantly reminded of the movie’s thematic elements. While this made Rockwell uncomfortable at times, Jones described him as a good sport overall.

In terms of influences, Jones said “Moon” was inspired by many science fiction movies he watched in the 60’s and 70’s. Specifically, he cited Bruce Dern in “Silent Running,” Sean Connery in “Outland,” and the first chunk of “Alien” as the biggest influences on the movie’s story. The characters in these films came from a working class or blue collar environment, and the portrayal of it in an outer space setting made everything seem more real and relatable. As for must see movie recommendations, Jones replied “Blade Runner” is the be all and end all of science fiction. You could follow any character in Ridley Scott’s film, he said, and you would still have an amazing movie.

When asked of his future plans, Jones said that he has finished polishing his latest script and will be sending it to the one person he wants to star in it (he wouldn’t say who). It is another science fiction movie, but the director is eager to move beyond this particular genre. With “Moon” now being considered as one of the best science fiction movies of the past few years though, I’m sure his fans will be begging him to revisit the genre more often than not.