(Warning: spoilers follow. Consider watching the movie first. Even the trailers are spoilers. I
personally enjoyed the movie very much and wouldn’t have enjoyed it as much if I
already knew what will happen next.)
Summary
It is about clones isolated in a compound, tricked into thinking that
the outside world is contaminated. Their only hope was to get picked by the
lotto to go to "The Island" (they were tricked into thinking it's a
paradise-like place). After Lincoln Six Echo (one of the clones) learns the
compound inhabitants are clones used for organ harvesting as well as surrogate
mothers for wealthy people in the outside world (when one gets
"picked" to go to the Island, that is when their sponsors need to
"access their insurance policy"), he attempts to escape with his best
friend Jordan Two Delta and expose the illegal cloning movement.
Pay attention to what you see, feel, hear.
How does the director use framing, lighting, music, pace, scene-setting and the like?
The opening was lacking in colour, with white smoky cloud and water
that was black with white reflection on the left and land was on the right. The
music began with the suspense type of repetitive tone, then turned into a creepy
medieval choir type of singing. A beautiful blonde with white fabric floating
and covering her from time to time came into scene and we see a boat. The
camera started approaching an island.
The woman seemed relaxed but suddenly the man got pulled into the water
and some very strange scenes started flashing up, like a strange man talking
about “the island” and what seemed like memory fragments. In the water, the man
was full of fear while the blonde woman wasn’t. The coloured remained a black
and white and blue type of colour as we realised that all these strange things
were the nightmare of the main character, Lincoln Six Echo. I think the name is
extremely strange.
Then we are introduced to a very strange type of institutional communal
environment where everyone was dressed in the same type of white uniform with a
lack of freedom, eg. food choices. There were “brainwashing” slogans, eg. “A
healthy person is a happy person.” These people were constantly being monitored
and there was intervention when someone displayed even mildly disruptive
emotions or got a bit intimate with someone of the opposite gender.
As soon Jordan Two Delta entered the scene, it was clear that she was
the woman on the boat, and the mutual attraction between Lincoln and Jordan was
clear.
We are also introduced to a Dr Merrick, who seemed to be overseeing
everything as he knew about Lincoln’s nightmares and intimacy with Jordan, and
Dr Merrick was the strange man in Lincoln’s nightmare right at the opening. In
this conversation, we can see that Lincoln asking many questions. Then Dr
Merrick started running some studies on Lincoln’s brain, which I think is
unusual as there doesn’t seem to be any form of informed consent for it.
I feel very puzzled seeing how the people were helping with some sort
of science laboratory and there was a “newcomer” who was very baby-like despite
having an adult body and that there was a contamination of some sort where the
people had to be decontaminated from when they first came.
The pace of the movie became very fast as soon as Lincoln discovered a
moth in the off-limits power facility of his friend, technician James McCord.
All the answers became immediately obvious: the people were probably clones and
they were also the ones unknowingly made to labour for the laboratory to
produce more clones. The conversation between Lincoln and Jordan about the moth
seemed like the conversation between two children. We see that Lincoln is very
smart, despite his child-likeness. Soon we know that the institution was a
surrogate mother and organ harvesting facility for the rich and famous, and
these institutionalised people were clones. These things were done in extremely
brutal fashions, with the workers getting entertainment out of watching the
clones run away in fear etc. Meanwhile the sponsors didn’t know that their
clones were fully alive people who gets killed when they access “their
insurance policy.” And we learn that Jordan’s sponsor was in trouble and
Lincoln and Jordan had to escape to stay alive.
Lincoln and Jordan encountered culture shock as they explored the world
outside the institution, and are highly anxious as they learn more about what
is happening. There was even an “Adam and Eve” like scene when the couple
encountered the first snake they met in their lives.
The scene changed to that of the city when the couple tried to find
their sponsors. It was clear that Lincoln’s sponsor Tom was very different from
Lincoln in that Tom was not a nice person at all. Tom was shorter than Lincoln,
probably because Lincoln had the best nutrition in his controlled environment
and had been free from temptations that lead him to behaviours harmful for his
health both physically and mentally. Tom seemed jealous of Lincoln as he
observed the intimate relationship between Lincoln and Jordan.
The shooting of Tom by Albert Laurent, the person hired by Dr Merrick
to “sort things out” was in slow motion. Lincoln’s placement of the clone’s
wristband onto Tom happened so quickly that it was easy to miss what happened
(I saw a hand doing something but it didn’t occur to me that it was the clone
wristband). Nevertheless, it soon became clear that Lincoln survived and Tom
had been killed accidentally.
When the scientists try to get rid of the clones, it looked as brutal
as a mass genocide.
In the final fighting scene, Lincoln exclaimed in protest, “my name is
Lincoln” when Dr Merrick called him “Six Echo”.
When all the clones were released from the institute, it looked like a
mass exodus of joy as they ran out to the Arizona desert. Laurent is one of
African ethnicity, so it reminded me of the theme of “freedom from slavery” as
he walked alongside the excited clones.
There was the scene of Lincoln and Jordan on the boat again, which
reminds me of the opening of the movie.
What mood does that generate?
There’s plenty of suspense, fear and anxiety.
How does that impact what you see and head and how you process it?
The suspense in the beginning makes me very curious, because the
institution is so strange. The characters don’t realise they are in the
strange environment but we as audiences know there is something very
off-putting.
The movie quickly picks up pace when Lincoln discovered the insect. I
like the fast pace because it keeps me interested and worried about the main
characters getting caught by the enemies. However, this movie may be a bit too
fast, and there is a lack of depth in the characters.
Is there a character that carries the ‘voice' of the movie, or from
whose perspective and experience (and moral point of view) events are told?
Although there isn’t anyone narrating this movie, it is clear that we
are viewing it from the perspective and experience of Lincoln.
Is there a specific dilemma explored in this movie? How would you
describe it?
One lie will lead to more lies to cover it up, until things get out of
hand. If what we created through our technology end up displaying human
characteristics (be it genetical engineering or even artificial intelligence
showing signs of conscious awareness), and the situation got out of hand
because there are too many of them, what do we do? Clearly we can’t try to kill
them like that science institute did! Where do we place them? Can they ever be
integrated into society?
Are there social values explored or evident in it?
Yes.
What are they?
Equality vs power : The rich, famous, powerful people are the ones that
can access this expensive cloning technology, so there is lack of equality. If
there’s already lack of equality then forget equity: the most weak and
vulnerable are the least likely people to access the help they need.
Human rights: The clones are treated like products/livestock, not humans.
They are all destined to be slaughtered one day (even if the “insurance holder”
end up not needing to utilise their clone, the institution will probably kill
the clone rather than spend money keeping the unnecessary clone alive).
However, they display all the characteristics that define a human.
Autonomy and informed consent: Informed consent is required before an
autonomous decision can be made. The consumers of this technology cannot give
informed consent because they don’t even know their clones are alive.
Money: Dr Merrick’s desire for money is so strong that he’s willing to
lie to the consumers, and go to the extreme of creating clones who are fully
human and slaughter them like animals for the consumers.
Knowledge: Dr Merrick is obviously trying to up his game. He monitors
the clones like lab animals. There are different generations of the clones. The
genes of the clones seems to be modified in some way so that instead of being
babies, they came to the world with adult bodies. It also seems like if a
certain “model” of clones come up with an “undesired” trait, eg. the “Echo”
clones’ ability to question, the scientists destroy them (“recalls them”) and
make another “model” which doesn’t do that.
How prevalent are they in your social context?
Very prevalent.
How do they relate to the general values of your community?
Money: Doing unethical things for financial gains.
Power: The less powerful people works under the more powerful people.
It is not uncommon for powerful people to oppress the less powerful. Sometimes
we don’t even realise we are the oppressors. For example, some of the products
we buy are made by workers working under slave-like conditions in developing
countries.
What virtues or vices are exemplified in it?
Virtues: love, courage, justice.
Vices: iniquity, wickedness, corruption, jealousy.
How would you describe them?
Love: Caring about someone enough to taking risks to help that person
even if there is no personal gain from doing so.
Courage: To be willing to face dangers.
Justice: Justice for the oppressed.
Iniquity: Why are some humans not treated like humans?
Wickedness: Getting entertainment out of inflicting pain upon others.
Corruption: Dishonesty or criminal activity by an organisation
entrusted with a position of authority.
Jealousy: Unhappiness to see someone else having something which you
don’t have.
How are they portrayed?
Love: Between Lincoln and Jordan. Also Lincoln’s friendship with McCord
which resulted in McCord getting killed for helping Lincoln and Jordan.
Courage and justice: Lincoln and Jordan’s willingness to risk their
lives to return to the institution to free other clones. Laurent choosing to
follow his own morality and side with the clones.
Iniquity: The clones not being treated as humans.
Wickedness: The workers getting entertained watching the clones getting
killed.
Corruption: The science institute in the movie.
Jealousy: Tom’s jealousy of Lincoln and Jordan’s loving relationship,
probably because he has never had such a relationship before.
How are they evaluated?
The virtues ultimately won over the vices at the end of the movie.
Is there an overarching approach to ethics (theory and/or practice)
evident in the movie?
Sanctity of life.
How would you describe it?
Everyone is fighting for their right to live in this movie.
Paradoxically, some people’s fight for survival infringes with another person’s
right to live, eg. Sponsors having clones made to survive accidents etc. But
then this will involve killing the clones.
How prevalent is it in your social context?
Prevalent. Can be seen in issues to do with organ transplants vs organ
trafficking, embryos produced by IVF technology, etc.
To what extent does it line up and/or conflict with your
understanding of Christian ethics?
The theme of love and sacrifice in this movie line up.
The theme of oppression, iniquity, wickedness, and corruption conflict.
In what ways, if any, have social values influenced the development
and/or use of technology in this movie?
The desire for money has led to the development of this institute. The
people who developed it knew there is a market out there, with the consumers
being rich and powerful people.
In what ways, if any, has the development and/or use of technology
influenced social values in this movie?
This technology led to an increase in vices as leaders of the institute
cover one lie with more lies and get enjoyment out of watching the clones
suffer.
Does the movie raise new questions for you? What are they?
How far will people go in their fight to beat death? Morally? Research
wise?
Did it generate new insights? What are they?
What is happening in the movie is just an exaggerated illustration of
what is happening in the real world.
Reflection after reading the other students’ movie responses
“Never Let me Go” and “Me Before You” were the films which the other
students watched.
(Warning: spoilers follow. Consider watching the movies first before
reading on. I didn’t have the time to watch these movies because I had too many
assignments due at Morling.)
What things did both/all the movies raise? In other words, what are
the common themes?
I read the Wikipedia synopsis and trailer for “Never Let Me Go” and “Me
Before You,” but didn’t watch them. I think the common theme is sanctity of
life.
What was specific to your movie?
My movie is different from the other two in that it is an action movie
with people really fighting for their right to be alive, and ends on a more
hopeful note. The other two seem very depressive and involve people either
getting killed (I don’t know what brainwashing they did in Hailsham, but I
thought it was strange why the characters didn’t just ran away?), or choosing
to die (euthanasia in “Me Before You”… but I find it paradoxical that the one
who is choosing to die wrote a note to another saying “just live”).
How do these movies inform your understanding of the cultural
context/s of bioethical issues and the debates surrounding them?
The cultural contexts do affect the bioethical issues: for example, in
collectivist cultures, there can be a lack of boundary between people, and
parents think their children are extensions of themselves etc.
Although the movies are all Western movies, the authors/makers of the
movies come from different backgrounds, and I think the different cultural backgrounds
of these authors/makers in turn impact on how they picture the bioethics of
their stories. So I am taking the approach of looking more deeply into the
background of the authors/makers.
Kazuo Ishiguro, the author of the novel “Never Let Me Go,” is a Japanese
who grew up in the UK. The Japanese culture is very polite and hierarchical.
The Japanese culture is widely known to be a repressive culture: people don’t
tend to speak their true thoughts openly. Although the characters in the novel tried
to find ways to survive (eg. Trying to demonstrate a love relationship etc),
there weren’t clones working with other clones to put up a fight. In fact, they
are just doing their individual things and hurting each other deeply.
Jojo Moyes, the author of the novel “Me Before You,” is British. As a
high achieving woman in the more individualistic Western World, her mind might
be more open to the thought of the individual rights and control over their own
lives, including that of euthanasia. Ie. Something along the lines of “ live
your life to the fullest (which can mean very different things for different
people, depending on what their values are), and you have the right to end it
when it no longer allows you to do so”…?
Michael Bay, the director, co-producer and co-writer of the Island
(unfortunately there isn’t much on the internet about the other co-writer, Caspian
Tredwell-Owen), has a very interesting background. He was born in Los Angeles.
He was raised by adoptive parents Harriet, a bookstore owner/child
psychiatrist, and Jim, a Certified Public Accountant (CPA). Furthermore, he was
raised Jewish. He is well known for directing and producing big-budget,
high-concept action films. I don’t know if it is because of his Jewish
background, I noticed several scenes with Biblical symbolisms: the Adam and Eve
like scene with the snake, and the exodus out into the desert similar to Moses
leading the people out of Egypt in Exodus. And victory at the end could only happen
because people were helping each other: it couldn’t have been achieved if done by
one single person.
How does this discussion inform your reflections on the dilemmas,
policy issues, virtues/vices related to the movie, and those in society?
Sanctity of life: People will all eventually die one day. The movies
about the clones depict how some people fight death to the extent of
artificially producing life with the sole purpose of destroying it. Creating
life and ending life should be in God’s hands, why are human so keen to usurp
this authority? Although the clones wouldn’t have existed in the first place if
there weren’t people needing to utilise the clones, this doesn’t justify the
torture and killing of the clones once they are created, treating as if they
don’t have souls, because they do! Just like IVF babies are “made” and not
“begotten”, and these lives wouldn’t have existed via the “natural method”, but
they are definitely human and someone wanted them in this world (or else why would
their parents/parent want to go to such a painstaking task?). Louise Brown, the
world’s first IVF baby, is only 40 years old now, but I already know so many
people in my age group or slightly younger, who were born by IVF, and some of
my friends are having babies by IVF! This technique got utilised so quickly!
There may still be some unseen effects from the IVF procedure, because so
little time has passed, that might not be evident until 100 years’ time (eg.
Further loss to the stability of the human DNA/worsening quality of the DNA).
Does it raise matters for further reflection, or challenge your
prior thinking? How?
I feel ambivalent about IVF/ART. I am at the age where I should either
freeze my eggs now if I want to go down that path, or don’t bother, because
once I get past 35, my egg quality will not be worthwhile freezing. After
watching these films, I feel sure that I won’t be utilising the egg freezing
technology, and will try to conceive by natural methods when I get married,
even though I am already in the “advanced maternal age” group now (defined as
35 years old or above).
