 |
| Universal Pictures |
Beyond the stylish production, Oblivion features solitude, artificial intelligence, and among other things, amatory clones. Jack Harper (Cruise) is stationed on a depopulated planet earth, with very little human interaction, repairing drones, while yearning for the pleasures of home. Was the film aiming to make a point about solitude? No. If it was, that point was not perceptible. Rather, the main character endured solitude as a condition elemental to the story, and the plot, in which intelligent drones, blasting with effulgent lasers were on the prowl.
Replete in the film is the idea of advanced robotic intelligence being the nemesis of humanity, serving as a basis to suggest, more likely the film was exploring the notion of artificial intelligence surpassing human intelligence, commonly referred to as the technological singularity.
Not only does artificial intelligence surpass human intelligence, it is adroit enough to create humans, but does this mean artificial intelligence has the right to control humans, since it created them? But is it practical or prudent, to perceive artificially intelligent beings as eligible for having rights ? In contrast, would they "care" about human rights? Essentially, the film suggests, they would not care about human rights, although they have designed humans without removing their capacity to experience feelings such as the ones customarily identified with love.
And from this arises the question, would the feelings commonly
 |
| Universal Pictures |
associated with love be recognized as less significant if they were to occur amongst clones in real life? Such a question may possibly emerge from the perception, clones are artificial, in contrast human beings are authentic, coming into existence through parturition; therefore, clones are not as important because they are artificial in their humanity.
Although the plot was slow to develop, Oblivion was an entertaining film, with a good story, accentuated by visually impressive scenes, and a fractured narrative, satisfactorily explaining it all. With a production budget of $120 million, more action would have been nice. Not bad. I'll give it a 79. Stay tuned. Movieporium.blogspot.com.
 |
| Paramount Vantage |
The indelible, the infamous, the shrewd, and morally obtuse Daniel Plainview, adjectives describing a character remembered for usury, and his disdain for people. But why did Plainview dislike people so much? In associating with people he saw nothing worth liking. Perhaps the reason why he saw nothing worth liking, was an understanding of his own penchant for manipulating others. Plainview may have been projecting is own detestable qualities onto the people he encountered. Knowing the distrustful acts he was capable of, he became vigilant and suspecting of others. Interestingly, if Plainview has this view of people, being a human being, it's a wonder, how he feels about himself ? Does he see himself as trustworthy, or someone not worth liking?
Aside from any introspective capacity, Plainview's dislike for people, was possibly born from his perspicacity, integral in making observations about human nature, in concluding that people are pure crap. That being the case, Plainview felt no compunction, and also felt justified in using "these people" to get what he wants, especially in recognizing Eli Sunday as a charlatan.
Although Plainview despises people, he recognizes communicating with people, and understanding how they think is functional in achieving his goals, which is well noted in his public relations skills, in describing himself as a "family man", and purporting to be a simple person, in saying, " I believe in plain speaking ", as if he is a member of the common folk.
Notwithstanding his inclination for usury, Plainview is not so monstrous that he is incapable of showing compassion, evidenced by his confrontation with Abel Sunday about hitting his daughter for not praying. While Plainview is prone to usury, and manipulation, he is not fond of being subject to it. When a stranger who pretended to be his brother Henry, took advantage of his compassion, Plainview's reaction, There Will Be Blood indeed. To Plainview's credit, this betrayal was a painful confirmation that people are indeed not worth liking.
One question surrounding Plainview's moral character, is whether or not he cared about his son? If he did, one has to reconcile Plainview's propensity for manipulation with the supposed love he had for H.W Plainview. If he did not, one has to acknowledge that human emotions are complex, and even if H.W was just an asset that he used to buy land, this does not necessitate he did not develop a genuine paternal love for H.W. Again, Plainview's conception of human nature is justified when this "bastard from a basket", betrayed him, and became his competitor by starting his own company.
