All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Probably not a lot of people have heard about this one although I'm sure it'll catch on after it's hit some more cities.
Anyway, Moon is the directorial debut of Duncan Jones (son of the legendary David Bowie). It's a sci-fi starring Sam Rockwell as an astronaut, Sam Bell, living on the moon who harvests Helium 3 (a real life substance in the moon's surface) and sends it back to Earth as a form of energy. Other than GIRTY (voiced by Kevin Spacey), a HAL-esque A.I. that helps to operate the moon base, Sam is single-handedly solving the Earth's energy crisis, making the sacrifice to live alone on the moon for three years. The film picks up two weeks before Sam is to go home back to Earth. While roving the landscape to harvest some H3, Sam has an accident. When he wakes up, he soon discovers that he is not alone on the moon and that he has more in common with this other being than he knows.
It's really hard to describe the plot without spoiling anything but I'm sure people will pick up on the first twist before it happens (possibly even just from my review). I did and I was afraid it would ruin the movie. It didn't. The film establishes a slow, collected mood right off the bat and no matter how crazy things seem to get, it's consistent. You never feel lost or disoriented, which allows you to focus on the suspense and character development, which is really outstanding. I think Rockwell is one of the most talented and underrated actors in Hollywood right now and he is really the driving force of Moon. Kevin Spacey is also great as GERTY. At first, he comes off as cliche and 2001 comparisons are inevitable but they really did something different here, which makes the A.I. much more true to life. Really, the film takes tons of sci-fi cliches and takes them in completely fresh and interesting directions, which is really hard to do nowadays.
It's really hard to describe what makes Moon so amazing. Yes, it is that good. Right up there with 2001 and Blade Runner as one of the greatest sci-fi films of all time. Maybe it's just me but a lot of people, critics and fans, seem to agree. I doubt the film will ever get the recognition it deserves but it's really a tour-de-force for what's usually a mediocre genre. It's just such a completely fresh and original take on all sorts of ideas that have been in the genre for years. It's not gory, violent or particularly action-packed but it's got suspense to spare and amazing performances. People seriously need to check this one out. It'll probably end up being one of the best, if not the best film of 2009. That's what I think, anyway.
mod note: Great review James. Everyone else, please don't post an announcement of your intent to go watch the movie.
Agreed sir. You and I already discussed this film (because we saw it together), but I wanted to comment on the great review. It really is hard to describe the plot without giving it away. In fact, most of the plot descriptions, even on rottentomato, are giving it away without discretion. It's best to see this movie with little to no prior knowledge of what to expect. Thats what we did and I think thats why we loved it so much. With this and District 9, the sci-fi genre might be getting better...might
I doubt the film will ever get the recognition it deserves...
Uh... wrongo! Honestly, I'm not particularly good at calling this stuff.
Anyway, recognition seems to be booming as is Rockwell's career. He's definitely been get a lot meatier roles nowadays. I didn't think his character in Iron Man 2 was particularly good but he gave it his all and for a few seconds, he stole the movie (his onstage dance toward the end). I have to wonder if Moon had anything to do with this. Either way, it's cool to see him being offered more lead(ish) roles.
I liked this movie a lot - it's not one I think I'm gonna re-watch a whole lot of times - but it definitely struck a cord with me. Sam Rockwell really does put in a very, very strong performance and he alone made this movie worth the while. I haven't seen the trailer to the movie so I don't know how they pimped it but it's definitely not a fly by the seat of your pants thriller. What you have here is a little movie with a very powerful and sad story.
Down in the hole / Jesus tries to crack a smile / Beneath another shovel load
This was actually my favorite movie from 2009. Maybe I'm biased since I really enjoy this genre and I can't put into words how awesome Sam Rockwell is. He's actually my favorite thing about this film. His performance was amazing. Not only did Rockwell make me care about the character he was portraying, but he made Sam Bell seem genuine and real. Rockwell acted his ass off and in the process showed us rage, despair, bewilderment and enchantment. This was pretty impressive considering he was the only human on screen.
I loved Kevin Spacey's voicing of GERTY and his interaction with Sam. I found myself smiling a lot when GERTY was on screen.
Duncan Jones (David Bowie's son) did an amazing job with his first film. I was particularly impressed with the pacing. There wasn't one useless scene. The cinematography was a genuine work of art. The score by Clint Mansell was fantastic.
I really liked this movie.
Though earth and man are gone, I thought the cube would last forever. I WAS WRONG.
It was largely based upon James' glowing review that I sought this movie out.
I found it a little above average, but nothing to gush over. I thought it lifted too many ideas from other, better, films -- Blade Runner, in particular -- and the obvious debt to 2001, of course, in GERTY.
And then there was that weird vision he had of some girl. It bugged me that it had nothing to do with anything. What was up with that?
Good performances, and worth a watch, but I did not "get" this film to the same extent that some of you other guys did, I guess.
I thought it lifted too many ideas from other, better, films -- Blade Runner, in particular -- and the obvious debt to 2001, of course, in GERTY.
I haven’t seen this yet. At first I thought it sounded really good, then the more I learned about it, I thought it sounded like another 2001 wannabe.
I’m tired of filmmakers who try to imitate Stanley Kubrick. Worse, they fail to understand what made the man so great. It was his uniqueness. I’ll never understand how a filmmaker can admire the uniqueness of another filmmaker and then try to duplicate the style. It’s so contradictory.
I’d still like to see this but I have a feeling I’m going to sigh at the lack of originality.
I really enjoyed this film. I'd heard good things, and I wasn't disappointed -- I found it to be haunting and affecting, one of those great sci-fi films that really taps into the loneliness of space and the fragility of a human life.
I'm also very excited about the sequel, Mute. If Moon is 2001 (obviously the Kubrick film is a reference point, but then is that such a bad thing?), then Mute is Blade Runner; the plot is about a mute bartender investigating the disappearance of his girlfriend in futuristic Berlin. Good sci-fi films are so rare nowadays (Inception was great, but it wasn't sci-fi), and I think this was a very promising debut.
I thought this film was well shot, well acted, but dear god is it ever slow, I think maybe it would work better as a short film or an episode of the twilight zone, but there wasn't enough going on for a full length feature. I don't think this even comes close to other sci fi's like the early star wars, alien,aliens, minority report, e.t, close encounters, blade runner, the thing, or the last star trek. the director does show talent and i'm sure he's going to get better with more experience, so he is someone id definitely look forward to.
This is a strong albeit flawed debut from a fledgling director. Who knew David Bowie's kid could make movies?
**SPOILERS**
I wish there was more interaction between the Sams. I was repeatedly frustrated when they would unravel clues independent of each other. Maybe there was a point to it, in my mind it just dragged out the plot. Clone Sam having a vision of the adult daughter just made me scratch my head.
Overall, I dug it and like to see more smart sci fi pictures. Sam Rockwell was strong all around and I own the soundtrack by Clint Mansell.
LATEST NEWS CineVita Films is producing a short based on my new feature!
Beautiful movie on every level. My most favourite movie I have seen this year so far.
It made me weep with sadness. if there is a spark of truth in what this movie was trying to say about lethal radiation in space then we the human race are fucked and will never get off our little mud ball called Earth. That is a truely depressing idea and when you consider that a star (or our sun for that matter) is just a hydrogen nuclear explsoion times a million then. . . ah shit I get choked with tears just thinking about it.
Radiation in space is one of a host of problems with space habitation. It's not insurmountable though. You just need shielded habitats.
I'd imagine we'd eventually use Von Neumann probes...robots that land themselves, disassemble themselves into mining and building machines which then use natural resources to build a habitat. Then we turn up when the job is already done.
And then there was that weird vision he had of some girl. It bugged me that it had nothing to do with anything. What was up with that?
Quoted Text
Clone Sam having a vision of the adult daughter just made me scratch my head.
I thought the film clearly established these reasons. I wasn't confused at all. Also, while GERTY could (fairly) have HAL comparisons, I didn't see this as "ripping off Kubrick" at all. Hey, the director is David Bowie's son, Ground Control To Major Tom and all that
Anyway, way I understand it: (spoilers ahead)
The "real" Sam was cloned with at least a thousand or so clones. With each clone, a 3 -year lifespan. GERTY is programmed to keep an eye on Sam (clones) and keep Sam's mind on the work at hand. Each "Sam" has a kicker memory of being in "an accident' which is why he wakes up on the medical cot. On first viewing we might actually think he was rescued, possibly by GERTY. However the previous clone, having not much more than two weeks to live, is presumed dead. GERTY woke up a new clone.
All clones have the memories of the real Sam. The real Sam did, in fact, spend three years on the moon (probably getting cloned) the messages from Earth, aside from one, were taped and played back. So every "Sam" dreams of returning home to his "wife". The "interference" and the "technical problems" bother Sam's clones- but this is to keep him from discovering the truth. However, when new "Sam' wakes up and rescues 'Old Sam', Old Sam continues to play back the recorded messages in an order. One of the last messages from his wife is that she fears that she will be 'leaving' him. We draw the assumption, as New Sam does: she does not like his time away from her, she thinks its too dangerous up there etc. she has found another man. We find out the sad truth later- her fears of 'leaving' was her early stages of her illness.
Both Sams think the other Sam is a clone and "they" are not. The Old Sam figures out a way to knock out the interference, and contacts his home, where he finds out, in surprise, that his wife had passed on for a number of years, his daughter is in her late teens...and being cared for by the real Sam who asks "Who Is It?" off screen Given the timeline, it is suggested that 19-21 years have passed between Original Sam and the clones. There have been at least four to five clones known to have activated during this period. (*although it may have more of a mindblower if it was more like 70, where a whole century could have nearly passed!) One (or two?) clones were seen on "the monitors" as a record of disposal. Then we got Old Sam and New Sam, then, one more to be awakened.
Moon was never boring with me I also thought the FX were impressive for a small budget. Sam Rockwell playing off Sam Rockwell was neat- but GERTY stole the film a tad bit more.
Are you Duncan Jones? All that sounds spot on to me. Watched it again the other night. I really must get out more...
Spacey was class as gerty. Without him or that it wouldnt have worked. But, then again, without Sam Rockwell there wouldn't be a film. Deserves Kudos galore for that one. I still love it.
The new 2001. Pity most haven't seen it and care not a jot. They're missing out.
Spot on Darren, I was amazed after watching this and going over to IMDB how many people did not realise that the "real" Sam was actually a clone too.
I thought it was a brilliant film, and really enjoyed it. It to be was not so much reminiscent of Kubrick (though of course the influence is there too see) but of Rod Steriing and The Twilight Zone. In fact it is a story that could have come right out of the Twighlight Zone and would certainly have worked as a 20 minute play but the way that this film was paced was just perfect for what it was trying to achieve.
One thing that surprised me greatly after watching it was that Sam Rockwell did not play both clones. There is another actor credited as playing the "new clone". I was sure, all the way through this film that both were played by Sam Rockwell, even though there were some differences in features I thought this was done intentionally.
I can only assume that Duncan Jones did not want to use effects and have sam Rockwell up against himself, as this is often really hard to pull off well (in terms of acting not cgi).
I actually liked the leisurely pace this film had. It wasn't in a hurry to spill out all the details and instead doled them out piece by piece. I saw bits of 2001, Blade Runner and especially Outland in the story. Still, it had its own tale to tell and I found it well-conceived and clever. I think they could have done more with the ending, though.