Moonshot
September 10, 2010 7:19 AM   Subscribe

Q&A with Duncan Jones, the director of the recent Hugo winner Moon plus Gavin Rothery - concept designer and VFX supervisor, Barrett Heathcote - visual effects editor and Hideki Arichi - art director (MLYT) (1,2,3,4,5)
posted by fearfulsymmetry (27 comments total) 19 users marked this as a favorite
 
God I love Moon. Clint Mansell's soundtrack, as well. We're Going Home is the song I listen on the way to work every day. Zowie Bowie's done good.
posted by griphus at 7:25 AM on September 10, 2010 [1 favorite]


I never knew Duncan Jones was the son of David Bowie. I've been in the same room with the guy (granted, it was a public q&a . . . but still). Now I can say I'm only once removed from David Bowie by association. How cool am I people? How cool am I?
posted by Think_Long at 7:29 AM on September 10, 2010


Now I can say I'm only once removed from David Bowie by association. How cool am I people? How cool am I?

Exactly as cool as I (also sporting a Bowie Number of 1, in two different directions), therefore pretty cool.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:33 AM on September 10, 2010


I follow Jones on Twitter and the other day he made a very specific reference to Blood Bowl... I just hope it played it with his dad. If only just the once. As that would be beyond awesome.
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 7:34 AM on September 10, 2010


That's odd. I was just using the Moon soundtrack as scratch music in this movie I'm working on.
posted by fungible at 7:38 AM on September 10, 2010


Is this where we come to talk about how much we loved Moon? Because for me, it would be "a lot".
posted by quin at 7:46 AM on September 10, 2010 [10 favorites]


Friends and coworkers aside, there are few creative professionals who I root for as sincerely and wholeheartedly as Duncan Jones. My entire household celebrated when he won his Hugo, and I hope that award proves to be the start of a long and well-earned success story for him and his crew.
posted by Narrative Priorities at 7:54 AM on September 10, 2010


Oh, also, don't get the soundtrack before watching the movie. The track titles are pretty much a list of spoilers. Not quite as bad as the track titled "Qui-Gon Jin's Funeral" on the released-before-the-film original score to The Phantom Menace, but still spoilery.
posted by griphus at 8:09 AM on September 10, 2010


Yeah that totally ruined Phantom Menace for me, what a shame.
posted by shakespeherian at 8:11 AM on September 10, 2010 [12 favorites]


I was somewhat disappointed with Moon. Rockwell is great but otherwise I thought that the direction and production design was pretty generic and that the ending was a cop-out. To recycle a comment I made in the Metafilter Film Forum, it seemed like an extended episode of the '90s iteration of Outer Limits.
posted by octothorpe at 8:28 AM on September 10, 2010


searching for long-range comms / failure on long-range comms
posted by gac at 8:33 AM on September 10, 2010 [1 favorite]


Exactly as cool as I (also sporting a Bowie Number of 1, in two different directions), therefore pretty cool.

Keep in mind that, unless you know Bowie directly, your Bowie number is actually 2. Bowie himself has a Bowie number of 0.
posted by invitapriore at 8:42 AM on September 10, 2010


I've got Moon in my Netflix instant queue. Since I gather there are spoilers to be had, should I bookmark this for after I watch the movie?
posted by immlass at 8:49 AM on September 10, 2010


Yes... Actually, I don't know what's in all of them yet, but as someone who knew little-to-nothing about Moon other than it was highly recommended, you should avoid even a mini-spoiler.

However, I'm sure, that it would hold up to being spoiled. I think it's tremendous. But still, I recommend no spoilage.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 9:23 AM on September 10, 2010


Will you stay in our lovers' story?
If you stay, you won't be sorry
'cause we believe in you
soon you'll grow so take a chance
you'll direct the film Moon
and go to Sundaaaa-aaance

posted by anazgnos at 9:23 AM on September 10, 2010 [1 favorite]


Thanks, MCMikeNamara. I'm normally not one to care about spoilers, but I'll wait to watch these and let them be the "DVD extra".
posted by immlass at 9:32 AM on September 10, 2010


Yes, please, no "Moon" spoilers. It was a great movie and I did not see it coming. You know what I'm talking about. I was at one site where some unutterable ass threw out the big spoiler and when I upbraided him for it I was sneeringly informed that it was "obvious". Oh, fuck off, you smug, presumptuous get. Maybe to you. Not to everyone.

God, I hate spoilers. Anyway, Great film.
posted by Decani at 9:56 AM on September 10, 2010


Maybe to you. Not to everyone.

I don't know, I think it was pretty obvious that Sam Bell was an alternate-reality death-vision of Captain Ahab as he drowns, tethered to Moby Dick (represented by the moon.)
posted by griphus at 10:04 AM on September 10, 2010 [2 favorites]


I was hyped to watch Moon. The trailers led me to believe it was going to be a psychologically tense sci-fi (e.x. a man coming to grips with an anomaly in his reality). I even managed to convince my wife to sit through it with me.

When it was over, I tried to reconcile this with what I actually watched. It was anything but. A friend of ours who came over to watch it fell asleep in the first 5 minutes, and in the end I was the only one left awake.

For those that haven't seen it yet, avoid the trailers like the plague. Moon may be a cinematic masterpiece, but whomever marketed for it for theaters outright misled the audience.
posted by NBJack at 10:04 AM on September 10, 2010 [2 favorites]


MeFi Film Club discussion of Moon is here (spoilers).
posted by shakespeherian at 10:06 AM on September 10, 2010


Moon was too slow for me. The story was interesting, but there just wasn't enough of it, like a 30 minute Twilight Zone episode slowed down to last 90 something minutes.
Also the two note soundtrack got irritating after a while: Neeeeeeeeh-NAH all the bloody way through the movie.
posted by w0mbat at 11:09 AM on September 10, 2010


I thought the slowness of the movie worked well given the setting, and even helped contribute to the general atmosphere they were going for. Three years by yourself with nothing to talk to except a computer and some plants? That first month would seem to be an eternity as it is, much less the 35 that follow. You kinda get a sense for that by the pacing.
posted by mysterpigg at 11:24 AM on September 10, 2010


refreshing, smart, simple, subtle sci-fi.

** spoiler ahead **

I didn't understand the feasibility of a huge stock of clones. That shot seemed thrown in for dramatic wow moment. The amount of fuel it would take to get them their is ridiculous. Why wasn't there a small, economic one-at-a-time clone growing machine?
posted by asfuller at 12:01 PM on September 10, 2010


I thought the slowness of the movie worked well given the setting, and even helped contribute to the general atmosphere they were going for.

Yeah, there's a reason why Moon is "slow". Not every movie needs to be jam-packed with action action action. Much of the emotional punch of the later scenes comes straight from the deliberate pacing during previous scenes.

Besides, there's more than enough going on in every scene, especially if you're paying close attention. Moon's combination of spaciousness and detail amply rewards re-watching.
posted by vorfeed at 3:00 PM on September 10, 2010 [1 favorite]


I was very pleasantly surprised by Moon. It was (in a good way) a classic sci-fi experience for me. Not prone to the excessively flashy, avoided a bunch of unneeded wiz bang, and simply analyzed a possible future theme and how it impacted an everyday guy.
posted by Samizdata at 3:10 AM on September 11, 2010


Keep in mind that, unless you know Bowie directly, your Bowie number is actually 2. Bowie himself has a Bowie number of 0.

Good point.


I can only surmise that most of the world has seen a different movie called Moon than I have. I was with it until the Big Reveal happens --

** spoilers ahoy **

-- at which point some unholy melange of the script, the direction, and Rockwell's performance kicked me out of the film. After three years alone, someone else inexplicably turns up in the crashed rover and, by god, it is himself. The minimal amount of surprise he (both versions) displays at this shocking turn of events made it impossible for me to take the narrative seriously from that point forward. Perhaps the lack of affect was supposed to indicate how benumbed he has become, but it did not work for me.

Moon wears its 2001 stripes proudly for all to see, but even the notoriously closed-off astronauts of 2001 have some recognizable human emotions upon discovering HAL's perfidy.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 6:33 AM on September 11, 2010


** spoilers ahoy **

The minimal amount of surprise he (both versions) displays at this shocking turn of events made it impossible for me to take the narrative seriously from that point forward. Perhaps the lack of affect was supposed to indicate how benumbed he has become, but it did not work for me.


I wouldn't have described either Sam's reaction as "lack of effect". They spend the next half-hour sulking and yelling at each other.

That said, I took their lack of major surprise as an indication that they live in a world where clones aren't surprising. If they replaced the CPA with a computer at work, I might be mad about it, but the last thing I'd do is clutch my hair and exclaim that a man had been! replaced! by a calculating! machine! Likewise, the Sams are pretty clearly familiar with the idea of clones. They're each upset by the idea that they might be the clone, and thus not the original, not by the idea that there can be two of them.
posted by vorfeed at 7:26 AM on September 11, 2010


« Older How a bike tyre is made   |   Deaths in MotoGP Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments