What does it mean to be human? More specifically what does it mean to be a person? How do we find meaning and purpose in an apparently absurd universe?
It boggles my mind that critics could rave about how “Moon” (2009) is brilliant science-fiction that everyone must see – and yet the film was released only in Los Angeles and New York City. In other words everyone needs to see a movie that almost no one can see.
For months I have ached to see it. Finally January 12 arrived and my family gave it to me for my birthday. Watched it with my younger daughter. She thought it was sad and depressing. I do not disagree but would phrase it differently. It is both profoundly disturbing and profoundly moving.
The sets and visuals are persuasive – all the more impressive when one realizes that “Moon” was filmed on a mighty small budget. The background music is exquisite. One of my pet peeves in many American films is the loud music that tells us how we should feel at every given moment. But in “Moon” several important scenes have no music. And when music is present it is elegant delicate and haunting. It enhances rather than forces the emotional impact of key scenes.
“Moon” tells the story of Sam Bell – the always enjoyable Sam Rockwell provides an exceptional performance – who is only two weeks from the end of his three year contract. His job is to maintain the equipment that mines the surface of the moon for Helium-3 (an isotope used in fusion to generate energy back on Earth). He is completely alone. Well except for the constant companionship of the robot helper Gerty (voice by Kevin Spacey). The communications satellite has been broken all this time so he cannot have live conversations with his family back home. He can only watch and send back recorded messages.
The years of loneliness and isolation appear to be taking their toll. But he is going home! “Two more weeks buddy!” Sam says to Gerty while eating breakfast (which is “the usual” – a nice touch that reinforces the sense of isolation and monotony).
Already the film raises important issues about the human need for companionship. How does a human being survive complete isolation? Sam appears to enjoy his work. The monotony of checking and reporting how many miles a harvester covered each day is occasionally broken by a full H-3 canister which Sam must retrieve and then ship back to Earth. But even Sam still has plenty of free time which must be filled somehow. He cares for and talks to his plants. He carves wooden models of people and buildings back home. He watches old television reruns.
But notice the pattern. Sam is utterly alone. He must talk to somebody. To Gerty. To his plants. Even the lunar harvesters are given names. A person needs relationship with another person. Even if the other is a substitute. (See also Tom Hanks in “Cast Away” and his relationship with “Wilson”.) This raises questions about the extent to which we engage in substitute personal(?) relationships. Virtual pets. Video and online computer games. Again we confront the interior-exterior distinction which is so important in Orthodox Christian theology. We are created for relationship – but relationship with persons.
I do wonder “would God be enough?” If for whatever reason I was completely alone would the presence and companionship of the Triune God – who himself is three persons in relationship – be enough to keep me from going insane? The answer is probably yes when one considers the stories of monks and saints from Christian history.
But even then – the idea of escaping from the world is to bring back to the world the spiritual resources we gain during our time in the wilderness. Sam’s three years alone is a struggle but it also changes him for the better (confirmed by one of the recorded messages from his wife Tess).
But back to the struggle. One evening Sam is making coffee when he sees a teenage girl(?) sitting in his chair. We wonder, Have the 3 years been too much? Is Sam losing his mind? Who is this teenage girl that Sam thinks he sees?
The next day Sam once again goes out to retrieve a full canister of Helium-3. And something happens that changes everything.
***WARNING – SPOILERS AHEAD!***
One can read a summary of the plot here.
But in a nutshell Sam has an accident. And when he wakes up he finds that there is another Sam Bell with him at Sarang Base. Oh and someone took down all his pictures and erased everything he wrote on the wall in his bedroom.
Or you could say Sam goes out to a stalled harvester and finds another Sam Bell in a crashed rover.
Which is the “real” Sam Bell? Is the other Sam Bell a hallucination? What is going on here? And is Gerty part of the conspiracy?
Meanwhile the “first” Sam Bell is not doing so well. His health begins to disintegrate. Headaches nosebleeds fevers and vomiting.
And the two Sam Bell’s at first do not get along. Each distrusts the other. Each insists he is the real “Sam f****ing Bell!” Each insists the other must be a clone.
The dreadful powerful moment comes when the first Sam Bell asks Gerty directly “Am I a clone?”
And Gerty tells him. Yes he is a clone. And his memories of life back on Earth with his wife Tess and his daughter Eve are all implanted from the original Sam Bell. His entire life his entire world is a lie. (Later in the movie it gets worse when Sam is finally able to call Earth.) It is cheaper for the company to use clones than to train and send – and later pay – a new person every three years.
It is a quintessentially existential crisis. The world is absurd - in this case it is literally a fabrication. Now what? Give up? Or create one’s own meaning?
Without giving away all the details neither Sam Bell gives up. They make decisions. They push back against the intolerable situation in which they have been placed. And in a way they each achieve victory.
Why is it so offensive to discover that one is a clone? An issue which I come across more and more as I read Orthodox Christian theology is the central importance of personhood. See Being and Communion by John Zizioulas and The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church by Vladimir Lossky. In which a theology of the Christian church and a theology of the Trinity are constructed largely around person.
Why would a clone/copy of Richard Wright be so offensive? That I am no longer unique? This is an issue which my old friend and classmate John Davenport (professor of philosophy at Fordham University) has explored in some of his writings.
And yet would the clone/copy have no value of his own? The two Sam Bell’s do find meaning and value in the decisions they make. “I choose to go outside when Gerty says I must not. I choose to sacrifice myself for the other. I choose to return to Earth”. Even Gerty chooses to tell Sam the truth and to help him. Will and decision-making are also important themes in Davenport’s work.
Just as Sam Bell (which one? you need to see for yourself) is about to head back to Earth Gerty says that he and the newly awakened clone will continue with their programming. Sam turns back to Gerty and asserts “We are not programmed. We are persons”.
Precisely.
