Skip to main content

Sir, I have one question. Where do all the tubes go?

The Island
(2005)

(SPOILERS) Michael Bay would probably have been better advised to remake the Michael Caine The Island, which has just the kind of excesses that would better suit his tastes. Instead, he attempted to tackle a nominally cerebral actioner and so strove to expose that it really has little going on under the hood. The Island, set just over a year ago (it begins on July 19, 2019) is at its best when it’s focusing on the plot rather than the rather rote spectacle. Which is to say that the second half of the picture becomes something of an endurance test. Michael Bay films are too damn long!

By this point, Bay had already turned the events of Pearl Harbour into a rousing action fest (when an Oliver Stone-esque conspiracy tale would have been considerably more interesting. But then, Stone didn’t even go near that with his The Secret History of America documentary series). Perhaps he fancied proving he wasn’t just the guy who could out-excess himself with Bad Boys II. It’s hard to figure for certain, as The Island is visually amped up to eleven even in conversational scenes. Perhaps Bay was making up for his undercharged leads.

McCord: Oh no, why do I get to be the guy who tells them there’s no Santa Claus.

Ewan McGregor and Scarlett Johansson are entirely bland presences as clones – or Agnates – Lincoln Six Echo and Jordan Two Delta. You might suggest that’s the point, but if so, that’s why you need actors with more natural presence. Hollywood quickly got the message with McGregor, who wouldn’t be headlining a big studio production again until last year (although, arguably the star of that was Stephen King, while the CGI bear was the main attraction in Christopher Robin). In fairness, he is quite good as his Lincoln’s human original, an unapologetically libidinous weasel…

Johansson had just segued to adult roles, and would soon segue to Black Widow; she’d never have a problem getting good parts, but would face much bigger problems in making an indelible impression. Both actors being swallowed up by a Bay production bears noting; while the subject matter definitely didn’t play to the director’s strengths in this case, he undoubtedly needs leads who can anchor his maximum carnage. The strange thing is, the likes of Mark Wahlberg and Shia LaBeouf are able to do this.

The Island has a sprinkling of notable supporting presences – Kim Coates and Steve Buscemi, with Ethan “Neelix” Phillips proving just as annoying sans prosthetics – but mostly fails across the board. Sean Bean is forgettable renta-villainous-scientist Doctor Merrick, presumably cast because he could deliver competent action moves at the climax rather than because he makes a convincing genius. As the guy employed to retrieve the clones, Djimon Hounsou is possibly the least discreet operative since… well, the last Michael Bay movie. Michael Clarke Duncan meets a grisly fate. The consequence is that, with the rare exception, the movie feels very one-note, pedestrian and uninvolving, particularly once the second half has devolved into inconsequential action.

The Island was Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci’s first credited screenplay. Caspian Tredwell-Owen came up with the idea, although DreamWorks settled with the creators of Parts: The Clonus Horror (1979) for coming up with a very similar idea. That itself is interesting, as I’m unsure how much The Island is really about cloning. Kurtzman and Orci had graduated from TV, notably Alias, and would soon be widely loathed for their contributions to/crimes committed against Star Trek and Spider-Man; Kurtzman is still wreaking carnage on the former (although, it’s rumoured such wanton desecration may soon end).

McCord: The life you think you has before” the Contamination”? It never happened.

The Clonus Horror concerns an isolated desert facility where clones are bred for the elite (including a US President). They are intermittently awarded the honour of going to “America”. Sound familiar? It’s pretty undeniably similar to The Island, just not as upbeat for the main parties. But you’d be forgiven for thinking the set-up of isolated innocents in a sealed environment fed a lie about their world and eventually acceding to a reward or change of status isn’t so dissimilar to Logan’s Run (for going to the Island, read the rite of Carrousel).

Essentially then, one might very easily see The Island a reset tale, illustrating how easy it would be to raise an oblivious populace (as Cristof says in The Truman Show: “We accept the reality of the world we’re presented. It’s a simple as that”). In this case, it’s as simple as telling the tale of the Contamination. It takes someone capable of seeing the limitations of the lie (Lincoln) to disrupt the enforced order of things and seed others’ doubts (most amusingly, the confusion over where all the tubes go).

Lincoln is the equivalent of a Flat Earther, or a Truther (like Orci). Winning the Lottery in this environment becomes the equivalent of religious salvation or retirement (significantly, the clones have no knowledge of sex or spirituality: “What’s God?”). The Island “is the one thing that gives them hope…. Gives them purpose”. It represents something to invest oneself in above all else. Knowledge and understanding are withheld, such that the clones are “educated to the level of a fifteen-year-old". So pretty much as we are, give or take.

There are some nice touches here, Kurtzman and Orci recognising the struggle to make sense of a world that does not. Phillips’ Jones Echo Three uses numerology to attempt to make order of the processes controlling his environment (suggesting that those selected for the Island can be predicted). Unfortunately, his system is so convoluted it comes out as nonsense (in a world where the conspiratorially minded can have a tendency to brandish rudimentary numerological or gematric tools wherever one looks, to “make sense” of things, that sounds about right).

McCord: Well, just because people want to eat the burger, doesn’t mean they want to meet the cow.

But from the cloning point of view, the movie doesn’t have too much to say. The Island uses the classic Hollywood set up of a bad seed going out on a limb (meaning order will be restored once the picture ends). We’re asked to believe the Department of Defence is unaware that Merrick has been breaking the Eugenics Law of 2015, which instructs that clones may only be grown if they remain in a persistent vegetative state (such a precondition is an all too believable “safeguard” for permitting such activity). This at least acknowledges the prospect of public objection to such unethical behaviour; Never Let Me Go, another cloning pic, leaves it as an unaddressed elephant in the room. 

Employee: Looks like we have a fine product.

According to Merrick, it was discovered that clones could only become suitable donors for their rich doubles through being grown fully conscious. He and his employees, aside from Buscemi, maintain a dissociative state towards their humanity, as one would expect. “It’s a product… not human” and “They have no souls”. Desensitisation is such that they are in fits of laughter at the traumatic escape attempt by Starkweather Two-Delta (Duncan).

Lincoln: A dump? Take it where?

There’s no real attempt to investigate the identity of the clones beyond these markers, though, or the process by which Lincoln develops the memories of his original. Once Lincoln and Jordan escape the facility, much of the potential is dropped in favour of hyperbolic action sequences and determined escalation, such that by the third act, Lincoln is delivering a more than serviceable impression of his human counterpart.

Perhaps Orci and Kirkman’s reticence is because, in contrast to their 9/11 parable Star Trek into Darkness, they feel the jury’s out on actual cloning. It is, after all, one of THE big conspiracy theories, with frequent evidence of glitchy clones breaking down cited on YouTube, be it Hillary, Eminem or numerous news anchors. Equally, there’s dispute as to whether what we are seeing in many of these cases really does represent clones; maybe they are variously deep fakes, doubles, or MKUltra subjects springing a leak. Or something else besides. You have a line of this kind of duplicate narrative running from The Beatles through to Dave Chapelle. It could be another smoke-and-mirrors psyop, masking what is really going on. After all, it wasn’t so long ago that Donald Campbell’s explanation for celebs and politicians’ prominent black eyes related to lurid tales of Vrill/aliens possessing them (soul scalping), in tandem with accounts of underground cloning centres/fight clubs. Currently, that has been supplanted by association of the black eye with adrenochrome – which, not dissimilarly to The Island, also promotes the elite cannibalising victims to sustain their youth and vitality.

Guard: You two, watch your proximity.

Then there’s the side of The Island that may represent predictive programming. It’s set in 2019 and concerns secretive and illegal activities that favour the elites. Those subjugated are required to maintain a safe distance from each other and fed lies about the dangers of their environment (the idea of global contamination “keeps them fearful of going outside”).

Lincoln: Why is everyone wearing white all the time?

Ultimately, though, The Island offers slim pickings. There’s some nice production design from Nigel Phelps (Bay didn’t like his big train, but the Coma-esque room where clones are indoctrinated with key words – “You have a very special purpose”; “I want to go the Island” – is memorable). Unfortunately, though, Bay’s frenetic style and Mauro Fiore’s complementary cinematography tend to avoid letting anything stand out. Sometimes such an approach can distract from the issues with plot, but in The Island’s case, it shows up that everything is pretty shallow.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright (1950) (SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright ’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

Do you know the world is a foul sty? Do you know, if you ripped the fronts off houses, you'd find swine? The world's a hell. What does it matter what happens in it?

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) (SPOILERS) I’m not sure you could really classify Shadow of a Doubt as underrated, as some have. Not when it’s widely reported as Hitchcock’s favourite of his films. Underseen might be a more apt sobriquet, since it rarely trips off the lips in the manner of his best-known pictures. Regardless of the best way to categorise it, it’s very easy to see why the director should have been so quick to recognise Shadow of a Doubt 's qualities, even if some of those qualities are somewhat atypical.

I think you’re some kind of deviated prevert.

Dr. Strangelove  or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) (SPOILERS) Kubrick’s masterpiece satire of mutually-assured destruction. Or is it? Not the masterpiece bit, because that’s a given. Rather, is all it’s really about the threat of nuclear holocaust? While that’s obviously quite sufficient, all the director’s films are suggested to have, in popular alt-readings, something else going on under the hood, be it exposing the ways of Elite paedophilia ( Lolita , Eyes Wide Shut ), MKUltra programming ( A Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket ), transhumanism and the threat of imminent AI overlords ( 2001: A Space Odyssey ), and most of the aforementioned and more besides (the all-purpose smorgasbord that is The Shining ). Even Barry Lyndon has been posited to exist in a post-reset-history world. Could Kubrick be talking about something else as well in Dr. Strangelove ?

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.