Oh my God, did this movie rock. Yeah it’s stylish and pretentious (Franke assured me of that) but it works.
The year is 2057 and the crew of the Icarus II has been sent to restart the dying sun. A mission that is undertaken because the Icarus I disappeared seven years previous. What happened to Icarus I? Will the crew of Icarus II be able to complete their mission?
I don’t quite get the comparisons to “2001” (or “Solaris” for that matter) that have been made. This is sci-fi but not quite “arty” sci-fi like those films are. For me, “Sunshine” doesn’t have some greater message to put forth other than “the few sacrificing for the many.” Plus, I suspect folks are trying to read a little too much into the religious theme that pops up late-ish in the film.
The script gives us a nice set of believable characters and the cast of the film is excellent in these parts (especially Cillian Murphy and Chris Evans). And the special effects/visuals are quite awesome considering the small budget of the film.
I will say that I am a little disappointed with the fact that Searle’s character didn’t head where I thought it was going to. I figured that he was gonna turn into what ultimately Pinbacker is when he makes his appearance late in the film. It would have been nicer (and a wee more streamlined) to have had that religious element come from Searle and not some rogue element.
But with that minor quibble aside, I will say that I, for one, *loved* it.
Where oh where is that gun of mine?
Pfffffffffft!
Alright…I do listen to both you guys when it comes to movies, etc…but I’m going with Chas on this one and heading out to the theater sometime soon to see it. If it sucks, though, I’m sending you my ticket bill.
I liked the movie – and I agree with Chas that it would have been better if Searle had just developed his own God complex instead of Pinbacker returning. It would have made the sacrifice of “god” for all mankind even more poignant.
I think it’s reaeching to say this was some kind of deicide. That might’ve been interesting — god must die so man can live — but if they’d intended that as a theme, it remains so under-developed as to be essentially non-existant. Yes, he was babbling some manifesto about god — but, after all, he was a psycho killer, so he had to babble about something. Giving him a god complex must’ve seemed quite logical to Danny Boyle, given that he’s nursing one of his own.
My problem is that they didn’t introduce the heavy until Act 3. What the hell kind of way is that to write a screenplay? If you did that in screenwriting 101, you’d fail the fucking class.
The heavy is the force that moves the plot–and consequently, Act 3 is the only part of the movie that actually feels like it’s going anywhere. (Unfortunately, the place where it’s going is utterly absurd — Oh, here comes the *sun* to rip me to shreds, but I’m just gonna reach out and touch it ’cause it’s so pretty…’ What*ever*).
So, yes, I agree entirely that one of the crew should’ve gone crazy and started killing people on his own–because at least that would’ve given the film *some* semblance of a plot.
Giving the heavy a God complex seems totally logical as the Icarus crew(s) are *technically* playing God with their mission. Fail and the human race dies. But I really don’t think it’s meant to be the major theme in the film.
The introduction of the heavy late into the film is problematic … but I was already hooked by that point so it’s didn’t totally destroy the movie for me. It still would have been nice (and more streamline) if Searle became the heavy.
And, I totally disagree with you saying the ending is absurd. The “reach out and touch it ’cause it’s so pretty” worked for me because Capa is actually getting the see the results of his work when the payload goes.
I think you need to re-watch “Sunshine” to get a better appreciation for it. I am *so* buying you the DVD for your birthday!
I’m agreeing with you guys that the idea that they were playing god should have been the counterbalance here — but not one articulated solely by a psycho killer introduced 30 minutes before the end of the movie.
There’s a serious, interesting counterargument to be made for *not* completing this mission (think Stephen Falken’s argument for letting nuclear war happen in War Games–“nature will start again, with the bees probably”), but the movie fails utterly to make it.
And I agree that it’s not the major theme of the film (though I would ask you: what *is* the major theme of the film?) — it’s not even a minor theme. It’s just not there at all, because any reasonable audience member will completely disregard everything the psycho killer has to say (as he is a psycho killer).
Maybe if he sat down and calmly talked about it, and THEN went all bug-fuck on them, we’d put more stock in his manifesto… but they didn’t play it that way. (I get the feeling these guys didn’t do the required research… i.e., dozens of very similar Star Trek episodes… before deciding how this would play out. If they had, they’d’ve saved themselves a lot of mistakes.)
One of my biggest beefs with the film is that I think it profoundly mistakes — or lies about — human nature at several points. This was one: I don’t care how crazy the other captain is. He’s just spent 18 months in solitary, and there are people here. He would *reveal* himself to them, not hide from them. (If he was *that* crazy, he’d already be dead… by his own hand. That he managed to save himself–from himself–says part of him retained a bit of sanity.)
He’d reveal himself, go over there, get cleaned up, have a meal, and tell them his story. He’d be evaluated by the shrink (as Chris Evans was). They’d suspect he’s lying about what happened to the crew… and they’d investigate. They’d come up with proof that he’s lying. And *that’s* when the shit would hit the fan.
Of course, doing the other captain’s arc properly would necessitate introducing the character earlier–which irons out that problem, too.
The other big lie was Cillian Murphy reaching out to touch a million degrees of heat and radiation as it rushed toward him. Horse shit — It’s *killing* him. It’s literally microwaving his cellular structure from the inside and melting him from the outside. At that point, *instinct* would take over and cause a person to flinch, to attempt to protect himself.
What do *any* of us do when we get burned? We don’t think, “oh, the pretty flame — my life’s work, fulfilled!” We think, “OWW!!! Fuck!!!” It’s not a matter of choice.
After so *nailing* human nature in 28 Days Later, I was really surprised and disappointed to see them modulate back to the very pretentious Euro Art Trash point of view for this picture.
Well, see … I think we ARE meant to totally disregard what Pinbacker has to say. I will agree that there would some interesting counter arguments for not completing the mission … but I really don’t think that the filmmakers wanted to explore that or they would have.
I will state again that I think the theme of the film is “the few sacrificing for the many.” The appearance/actions of Pinbacker is just another obstacle to the crew completing the mission. So, I don’t think realistic “human nature” plays any part where Pinbacker is concerned.
Same can be said for Capa … I doubt in any realistic terms that flying into the sun with an exploding bomb that you would even have time to flinch/react. So his reaching out is, as you would put it, “pretentious Euro Art Trash.”
“28 Days Later” nails human nature in broader terms because of the bigger cast of character whereas “Sunshine” is concerned only with the eight crew members of the Icarus II.