clones and relatives of deceased astronaut struggle with existence
Links: AFFF / imdb
It is frowned upon by serious people who know better to describe something in terms of other somethings of similar origin. Or, to refer to Russian "Solaris" or a dash of "Gattaca" when trying to describe the mood would be utterly wrong. It would be, really, since referring to those films probably gives you the wrong idea anyway. This film was so much slower, as Asian films tend to be, stretching shots into forever without hardly any (camera-)movement. So much more "meta" in subject and story.
Wonderful, intriguing film. What is the self, is it unique, and if so, in every aspect? How "real" is a clone of something unique? How unique? It is suggested that a clone keeps the soul from entering nirvana, pulling some part of it back. Yet it is not created out of the very same uniqueness?
Who are we to tinker around with the very existence of a human, cloning him at will. Because we can, doesn't mean we should. What is it that we want back when a beloved one dies? Why are humans scared of clones, if they enable the dead to return? What difference makes the knowledge whether a person is a clone or not?
Humans: often over-exposed backgrounds (windows etc). First clones: darker backgrounds, third clone, the one who seems "free" from a bonding with the soul; more over-exposed backgrounds again.
This whole entry is rubbish since I was quite impressed with the film but I haven't found the right phrasing yet. Later, when everyone has moved on to more recent entries, I come back and change it into something better.
Rating: 9
This entry was posted on 14:00 and is filed under
review
,
the-clone-returns-home
. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
0 comments: