"Lingering Questions About Oblivion" Topic

(Spoiler Alert).

"Did you like 2001: A Space Odyssey, Wall-E and Independence Day? Then Oblivion, the Tom Cruise vehicle from director Joseph Kosinski (Tron: Legacy) that opened this weekend will certainly seem familiar. That's not to say it's derivative — it's definitely got it's own story and voice — but in the melee of plot twists and sci-fi homages, there are more than a few questions that go unanswered.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, because it's fun to mull and debate a movie's finer points and Oblivion is a solidly fun sci-fi flick. But there are a few things in the movie that get left hanging (unless we missed something). And now that the movie is in theaters and a lot of people have had the chance to see it (Oblivion brought in $38.2 USD million at the box office this weekend) it only seems right that we talk about it. Did anyone else think some questions were left unanswered? Were they distracting, or just amusing? Are we taking this thing too seriously? That's what we're here to figure out.

But first a primer for those who haven't seen the movie but want to read this and don't mind being spoiled on Oblivion. The latest imagining of the end of the world takes place some 60 years after Earth has been destroyed in an alien war. The planet has been largely evacuated to one of Saturn's moons, and the desolate planet is now policed by drones while gigantic outposts turn the planet's sea water into energy for the distant human colony (or, at least, that's what we're led to believe at the onset). Jack (Cruise) and Victoria (Andrea Riseborough) handle drone maintenance. They're due to finish their tours of duty when Jack discovers a band of humans led by a man named Beech (Morgan Freeman) that still lives on Earth.

What Jack unearths — literally and metaphorically — is that those he had been led to believe were alien "Scavs" are not extra-terrestrial squatters but human survivors and the great Sally in the sky (Melissa Leo) may not be who he thinks she is. Also, Jack has found a woman named Julia (Olga Kurylenko), whose vessel was called down to Earth by the Scavs and whom he recognizes from his dreams.

Along the way to Jack's discovery of the truth are myriad thoughts and questions that arise for viewers. None make Oblivion any less enjoyable — it's still a wicked fun ride — but they're hard to shake after leaving the theater. Here are a few we're still pondering…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

Saw the movie… and the author of those questions apparently did not pay attention when they watched it

SPOILER (whole post, ignore if you have not seen movie and want to)

The only one not answered was the second, but it was phrased wrong. Why would a race that can build combat robots and get the whole way to our solar system NEED a bunch of human clones – they certainly could have maintenance bots too…

As for the water, once again the aliens are ignoring all the easy to get water outside of the Earth, aliens have a fetish for the liquid variety I take it…

Finally – the movie is good, even with my quips above.

My wife and I both liked it, especially the 'aerial fight/flight' sequences! A really WILD ride!

I hate gaping plot-holes as much as the next guy but I always wonder why people expect Hollywood movies to have substance and logic. Or worse, historical accuracy.

"easy to get water outside of the Earth,"

You mean the ice in orbit of places like Saturn? Rock solid at near Absolute Zero, where you have to enclose it in something, raise the pressure of the atmosphere inside so it doesn't simply sublime then use energy to melt it? Or the water in comets, mixed with other gases that explosively evaporate at temperatures just below the melt point of the water?

Yeah, easy to get :(

Good points CW :) I was not even touching the Science holes in the article..

However several of the items mentioned were covered with explanations in the movie.

i.e. they dressed that way to fool the drones (which only worked sometimes)…

I do not want to fill this with spoilers, but here is a clue… When Morgan Freeman is in a movie, listen to him, his job is to explain complicated stuff :)

I agree w/Dynaman. All of the questions were answered by the movie..if one paid attention and has more than a 3rd grade education. My wife like the movie and she's not a big fan of SciFi, but she was amazed that some women in the restroom didn't understand the movie (clones).

It's SciFi not real. Get over it.

My only issue was when the thrusters didn't align with the aircraft movements, but then I'm a nerd (as my wife is always telling me).

Sorry to disagree with most of you, but my wife and I thought the movie was a *huge* waste of our time. It reminded me of Prometheus: visually and aurally beautiful, but derivative, poorly scripted, cliche-ridden, and indifferently acted. ("Watch now as Tom Cruise does what Tom Cruise does best!")

Any fan of sci-fi who was confused by what happens in the movie just wasn't paying attention. (However, you're perfectly justified in asking *why* what happens in the movie, happens in the movie.)

As better critics than I have said, if you liked 2001, Wall-E, Tron, Silent Running, The Road Warrior, The Matrix, Inception, the original Planet of the Apes, or any of half a dozen other sci-fi flicks . . . you'll like parts of Oblivion, too.

"easy to get water outside of the Earth,"

You mean the ice in orbit of places like Saturn? Rock solid at near Absolute Zero, where you have to enclose it in something, raise the pressure of the atmosphere inside so it doesn't simply sublime then use energy to melt it? Or the water in comets, mixed with other gases that explosively evaporate at temperatures just below the melt point of the water?

Yeah, easy to get :(

Yes, it *is* easy to get. Dynaman is absolutely correct.

Liquid water: There are thought to be literally *oceans* of non-terrestrial *liquid* water in the solar system, mostly under the surface of icy moons. Titan, Europa, Callisto, Ganymede, Rhea, Titania, Oberon, Triton, Pluto, Eris, Sedna, Enceladus, and Orcus are all thought to have oceans of liquid water, based on recent observations and fly-bys. Titan might even have oceans of *hydrocarbons*.

Icy water: I suspect that a race that could construct the Tet and the ocean-suckers and *blow up the moon* would have no problem building a giant ice-bucket, exposing it to, I don't know, maybe *sunlight*, and melting a little ice.

But why mess with water or ice at all? If the ocean-suckers are fusion reactors, fusing hydrogen atoms deuterium and tritium to produce helium, neutrons, and lots of excess energy, then why mess with water at all? The Sun certainly doesn't, and it's one gigantic fusion engine.

Let's see, where else could we find hydrogen, the most abundant element in the universe, in the solar system? Oh, yeah, that's right, Jupiter alone is more than 300 times Earth's mass, and more than 1300 times Earth's volume, and it's *90% hydrogen*.

Come on, guys, this is science, but it's not *rocket* science. All of this information is readily available in a basic science book, not to mention the internet.

In short, there should never again be *any* sci-fi book or movie that posits an alien race invading or making war on Earth to steal our planet's resources. Everything we have is much more abundant on other planets, moons, and comets.

Then again, I remember reading a short story in the '70s in which many different species of friendly, peaceful aliens come to Earth, trading high-tech devices for the one thing we have that no other lifeform in the universe has: Irish whiskey. Now *that* I can readily believe. (Might have been by Spider Robinson, but I don't think it was a Callahan story.)

:)

Thanks guys, you answered CW far better then I was planning to…

I wanted to go see this movie, despite Tom Cruise… as I think the concept has a lot of potential. However, even the 'good' reviews are a bit damning: cliches are okay if done/presented well, but this does not seem to be the case… a combination of poor writing and missed opportunity it seems. Oh well, I don't think I can handle watching Mr. Hanks anyway… why must celebrity actors always play themselves? Besides the paycheck I mean…

When I saw Morpheus telling Neo, I mean, Beech telling Jack that all is not what it seems I decided to wait 'til I can rent it from Red Box for a dollar.

Tim

I thought the clone thing was a bit silly but even so, I still enjoyed the movie and feel that Tom Cruise did just fine…

I took the mass of clones and the limited duration of the Techs stay on maintenance duty – only 2 weeks and we can leave – and the constant asking from control – "are you an effective team?' – to indicate that the clones figured things out and needed to be killed/replaced often – like when they asked questions or began to ignore orders and break down as they remembered stuff from their 'parents' lives – & that the power processing was not almost complete but Tech 46 & his partner would be replaced in 2 weeks – before they were expected to go haywire – who cares if they start to remember the truth – have the drones kill them and send in a new pair – over and over and over – until Morgan Freeman comes to the rescue

Saw it tonight, quite enjoyed it and agree the lingering questions are from a person who wasn't paying attention. Not perfect but far from the dross I was half expecting from the reviews.

It would have helped if they'd showed a bit more wit when it came to making the trailer since that blew most what were supposed to be the big plot twists. I guess having paid for Morgan Freeman they were determined to get their moneys worth. It's not dross, the visuals are nice, it's watchable, the plot has no more holes than most scifi films, but the characters are cardboard cutouts and scrip has no bite. It's a film written by committee carefully tailored to appeal to as many demographics as possible. Basically it's a good film to have on in the background when you do some painting.

D, I agree with most of what you said, I wonder if a directors cut would help, as I think there was a great film stuggling to get out.