Re: *** Official SUNSHINE Discussion Thread
well, John, let me guide you out of the forest here.
I was and am (I think understandably) wary of taking the discussion here not only because of the religion aspect, but for the very reason you listed here: editorializing, harping and going overboard. Your posts have contained phrases like
Quote:
sick, feeble aspirations
serious when you say this is hard or adult SF? Excuse me!?!
it is nothing but the seed of an idea that is horribly realized. |
That tone doesn't exactly suggest an openness to discussion. But, you know, we like movies, we don't like movies, & we can get passionate about them. So, thats great. Lets have the discussion and let the mods make the calls.
When considering Sunshine, you have the story of a self contained group of of astronauts and scientists. The opening narration explains that the "sun is dying" - but not why the sun is dying. Only that "the mission is to re-ignite the sun". We are heading out on an existential journey in more ways than one here: On the plot level, failing the mission is tantamount to an eventual extinction of humanity. Its even pitched in apocalyptic tones: "that payload is the last best hope". We are on a journey that others have taken before, and failed. We are exploring without certainty ("we don't know if its going to work".) We are discussing and arguing what the best methods are. We are trying to improve on our knowledge of why the predecessors failed. When confronted with thorny moral questions, we make choices based not based on majority rule, but on trying to determine what is the most rational approach given our available knowledge.
All throughout the film there is a simple and basic attention paid to the sensual. We're staring at bright light. we're listening to crashing ocean waves, the voices of children playing, seagulls. We're splashing water on our face and digging in the dirt for vegetables. We're wrestling in anger with bared teeth and banging into walls. In a poignant moment, were pausing to marvel in wonder at the orbit of a planet in space. Why? These scenes may be developing the characters, but they are not advancing the plot. So what are we doing here? Why are these scenes important and necessary?
Humanism, is defined as (according to wikipedia) "a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities—particularly rationality.It is a component of a variety of more specific philosophical systems and is incorporated into several religious schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for truth and morality through human means in support of human interests. In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, Humanism rejects the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine origin. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality of the human condition, suggesting that solutions to human social and cultural problems cannot be parochial"
I know people hate wikipedia, so here is a shorter definition from my ancient copy of the American Heritage dictionary: "A philosophy or attitude that is concerned with human beings, their achievements and interests, rather than with the abstract beings and problems of theology."
This film is an expression and example of humanism. Particularly and pointedly Secular Humanism, or some may prefer the term Atheism. We aren't looking for a saviour in this film. We are saving ourselves. The movie provides a big canvas display of the fragility of human life, and more pointedly the
endurance of human life in the face every possible natural and man made force. There is an open sense of wonder and fascination and joy at the awesomeness (in its true sense, not the eddie izzard hot dog sense) of the universe and the resilience of nature. We make mistakes. We sacrifice. We are attacked. We fall. But, we pick ourselves up and accomplish, and we propel ourselves forward no matter how vast the void is.
This is the message that you described alternately as: feeble, weak, or without purpose. I disagree.
I don't think it is in any way accidental that the tone shifts with the introduction of the Pinbacker character. We're calling him "Pinbacker". His body is grotesquely and horrifically damaged. He is responsible for the failure of the previous crew. He is strong and aggressive. He is murderous. His is not the goal of life, but the goal of death. He is claiming to have "spoken with god". This is not exactly subtle, or ambiguous here. Why is it fascinating and engaging as the crew are problem solving and debating, and frustrating and jarring when they are reduced to fighting for survival against Pinbacker? That's the demonstrative advocacy going here; the frustration that we are forced to battle this insanity, especially placed in the context of an extinction, is the point.
You may disagree with this interpretation of the film. Great. I'd like to hear what your take was, if it was not this.
As I mentioned before, if the film was only presenting a humanist parable, (as interesting as I might find it) that itself might not be enough. I.E. its not what the film is about, its how its about it. But, this is why I feel Sunshine is an admirable success. In showing this story there are moments in the film that blend visuals and sound in such a powerful, sad, and hopeful crescendo that it becomes so beautiful... its nearly painful to look at it. The challenge that is often leveled at this philosophy is one of nihilism and sadness, or even despair. This film does not despair. Yes, the end is incredibly sad, but its not a Pyrrhic victory. Its a celebration of discovery, of knowledge and perseverance.
ok, thats enough. Your turn.
). But to each his own.
