Sometimes, the fact
that I have seen so many movies lessens the experience of watching certain films.
Oblivion, staring Tome Cruise, is one
such film. There are spoilers throughout this review, so just be aware.
Oblivion has many facets that feel like bits and pieces taken from other science
fiction films that came before it. 2001,
The Matrix, Terminator, Wall.E, Moon, Star Trek/Borg and even the 1980s cartoon, Thundarr the Barbarian. Having aspects or elements in any story
that are reminiscent, gleaned, borrowed, homaged, or otherwise ripped off from
someplace else is nothing new. All of the aforementioned obvious sources were
themselves borrowing from earlier stories. Even the great Stanley Kubrick
himself never wrote original work, but would always use source material as the
jumping-off point for a fresh, new take on an already seemingly overdone topic;
ie, war, horror, sci-fi, etc. So yes, Oblivion
is not entirely original. The film did suffer from feeling too cobbled together
form various sources. But more importantly, was it any good? From my
perspective as a science fiction loving geek/nerd...yes. It certainly could
have been better. It was not perfection, but it did have aspects of it I
enjoyed greatly and it lacked some of the more typical and often overused
elements in science fiction films—which is a good thing. First, there were no
slimy aliens running around trying to eat humans. Second, there were no giant
space battles. Third, there were no crazed, dark antagonists hell bent on chaos
and destruction. Sci-fi films are overrun by those elements, and I was happy to
see none of them present in this movie.
The film was often
quiet and took its time. I liked that too. Many science fiction films never sit
still and just feel panic-stricken. There were a few too many chases and action
scenes tossed in that I could have done without, but not too many that it
caused the film to drag. Even the film’s end, with the flashback/climax,
managed to steer clear of the typical Michael Bay SFX computer-generated
fructose tsunami that usually ends many a sci-fi film.
The trailer is
partially to blame, leaving some of the spontaneity missing from the film. I
knew that there were no flesh and blood aliens and that is was a group of humans
led by Morgan Freeman. I also knew there was a robot/AI/whatever behind what
was going on. The trailer could have helped this some by not showing the
underground humans at all. Too much was revealed, to me, before I even saw the
film. The reveal in science fiction has become more important than the film itself.
Oblivion definitely contains a substantial
reveal, it does not rely too heavily on it.
Ultimately, I came
away having enjoyed the film. It has rewatchability, and that is more than many
films these days can say. I'd never sit through Looper again. It was also stunningly beautiful, and cinematography is
a category in cinema that is often overlooked. Just being able to sit back and
gorge one’s eyes and mind on beautiful photography, accompanied by a great
score, seems absent from what is expected from films these days. I think
Terrence Malick's Tree of Life woke up many filmmakers, and I am
beginning to see traces of it in other films. Oblivion, Prometheus, and
even the upcoming After Earth seem to
take note of the importance of great cinematography in a film. SFX junk is just
a tool, and all the explosions and space battles in the world will not make a
film any better. But something that is gorgeous in and of itself, even if you
were deaf or did not know English, still has vast merit. Oblivion scores high here. The music was great too. I noticed it,
which is more than I can say for 98% of what I see these days. Years ago I used
to fall in love with so many films scores. Today film music is rarely even
worth a one-sentence blurb. Music is very important in a film. Great music can
aid a film tremendously. Why this is overlooked more and more and just slapped
on is a mystery to me. Films take humanity’s great artistic achievements and
incorporate them all together. When done well, the end is greater than the sum
of the parts. Blade Runner is a prime
example of great music accompaniment. Without the Vangelis music, Blade Runner would not be the same. The
music in Oblivion fit the film and
had me considering picking up the score—a rarity these days.
There were aspects
of the film I did not like and/or was also unclear about. The clone thing was
not needed, and was already done recently in Moon. The opening voiceover was not needed. It felt added on. Show me,
don't tell me. It just felt a bit like misguided filmmaking to me.
The iconic New York
locations were lame. It looked cool, but seriously, what are the odds that the
film’s protagonist, a diamond-in-the-rough of clones, would also be located near
the most famous city ever? Sci-fi needs to steer clear of big cities from now
on.
Couldn't the drones
have other drones to fix themselves?
Sally/Tet was
revealed as so powerful that the number of drones seemed inadequate compared to
amount it could have produced.
I was unclear why an
army of M/F clones were needed. An army of drones to kill all the humans would
seem to me to be more efficient. Maybe this was unanswered on purpose.
Was Sally/Tet an
alien originated AI, or was it of human origin? I guess it's OK that this is
unanswered, or if it is answered I missed it the first time around. The sucking
up water thing was lame. Water is made of two relatively common elements,
hydrogen being especially common. No advanced anything would need it, nor travel here for it. A more real,
well-thought-out purpose was needed for the Borg/AI in this film. If the AI was
of human origin, then the water thing needed more explanation. The idea of having
the AI of human origin and created for a goal humanity set out is interesting.
It carrying out some earlier order to collect water to be taken elsewhere by
humans is interesting. If the AI went nuts and killed humanity, and continued
blindly drying out earth for an old standing directive, well, that is cool too.
Either I missed something, or perhaps—and I hope this is the case—that the film
was intentionally left open-ended enough for my theory to find a home. When
everything is explained perfectly, then only that explanation is what you will
come away with. When a film is slightly open-ended, then the sky’s the
limit.
For me, Oblivion was a strong 6 out of 10. The
SFX, music, acting, and photography were strong and helped the film become
something beautiful that need not be enjoyed or disliked on the strength of the
writing alone. And that’s a good thing, because the writing was lacking. A
slightly better screenplay could have aided this film a lot. I do want to see
it again, so it’s possible that some of my questions might be answered. It was
still one of the stronger non-comic book science fiction films to come along in
a while.
