Sunshine is the best sci-fi movie you never heard of

The science fiction genre is booming. From acclaimed, Oscar-winning films like Denis Villeneuve’s Dunes to ambitious and original entries such as Jordan Peele’s latest film, Nope, the genre is experiencing what fantasy went through in the 2000s: an outpouring of enthusiastic industry and public support. Television is also in the science fiction game, with hits like stranger things and Breakup score with critics and become fan favorites among viewers.

Yes, the genre is more popular than ever, and we could very well be heading for a true sci-fi renaissance in television, film, and literature. Maybe if Danny Boyle is underrated Sunshine had it come out in this sci-fi loving environment, it could have been recognized for the masterpiece that it is. In place, Sunshine came out in 2007, a period of spectacle and mind-numbing escapism where audiences didn’t feel its thought-provoking, almost philosophical brand of sadness and doom. And so Sunshine slipped through the cracks, barely making an impression in cinemas. Sunshine reported a disappointment $34 million against a production budget of $40 million. It’s a flop if there ever was one. And it’s not like it gained a new life on DVD; on the contrary, Sunshine dead, much like the sun in its daring plot, and no heroic bomb or crew saved it from its doom.

And what a shame. Sunshine is far from a perfect movie, but it never tries to be one. He eschews face-to-face storytelling, opting instead for evocation, trying to elicit intense emotions in his reluctant audience. But audiences didn’t want to see a movie that ends with [spoiler alert!] the death of the entire main cast – some of whom went on to become stars – and an equally depressing and hopeful farewell message.

Born to bloom, bloom to perish

Capa watching Sunshine intently.

Sunshine wasn’t Boyle’s first crack at science fiction. Six years earlier, his breakthrough hit, the zombie apocalypse horror film 28 days laterwowed critics and audiences to a $85 million international box office against a meager budget of $8 million. The film cemented Boyle as a scrappy director who could put on a big-budget spectacle on a shoestring, making him an obvious choice to helm a major Hollywood sci-fi film.

Fox’s specialty brand, Fox Searchlight Pictures, paired Boyle’s unique style with the awe-inspiring words of Alex Garland, who also wrote the screenplay for 28 days later. Combine the two key components of 28 days later with five times the budget seemed like a surefire way to get five times the zombie movie box office, right? Not enough. Say what you want about Garland and Boyle, but their approach isn’t really “commercial”.

Indeed, Boyle’s blatant attempts to make commercial films – Sunshine, 127 hours, Trance — haven’t lived up to expectations, mostly because Boyle can’t seem to reconcile his interests with the nature of blockbuster entertainment. Ironically, those projects in which Boyle is shamelessly Boyle – Slumdog Millionaire, the two Trainspotting films, and, surprisingly, Yesterday — became sleeper hits at the multiplex.

Sunshine (2007) – Trailer

Sunshine found himself caught somewhere between Boyle’s interests as a storyteller and his ambitions as a filmmaker. The film features a slightly more demanding plot than your average blockbuster – Garland is a notoriously difficult writer, but Boyle does very little to make his words more digestible. Even so, it’s not like Sunshine is intentionally difficult or provocative. Sunshine is not Annihilation, and he never tries to be. However, it is also not Armageddonor even Contact That is. Not quite author-focused, but not exactly commercial catnip, Sunshine is a strange attempt to reconcile the two. Suffice it to say, it fails.

Even though Sunshine fails from a narrative standpoint, there’s no denying that it’s a runaway triumph from a visual standpoint. Sunshine looks and feels beautiful, impressive, grand and impressive. At a time when $250 million blockbusters objectively look ugly and underwhelming, Sunshine stands out as a technical marvel, proof that magic can happen when a talented filmmaker receives a decent budget.

They say visuals are the key to a successful blockbuster, so why didn’t they help Sunshine to succeed? There’s a big conversation going on about auteur filmmakers and their place in blockbuster cinema. The recent release of The Batman and Dunes seems to suggest that there are; however, the argument goes back to square one when movies like Matrix Resurrections and The man from the north flopped at the box office.

Not a person, not yet a star

The cast of Sunshine with the scorching sun behind them.

Movie stars are essential to the success of Hollywood. Today’s cinematic landscape proves that movie stars are still needed, especially since today they are rare and selective. Sandra Bullock’s Star Power The lost city at $190 million worldwide, including an impressive domestic gross of $105 million. And Tom Cruise’s brand of bold deeds helped Top Gun: Maverick defy all expectations, grow $1.3 billion and cash.

It’s never wise to overlook the importance of movie stars, especially when it comes to original ideas and thoughtful cinema. Would have Arrival have exceeded the $200 million Didn’t Mark have starred Amy Adams? How important was Matt Damon to The Martianit’s gargantuan $630 million box office? Same with DiCaprio in Creation and Bullock (again!) in Gravity. Movie stars are crucial to original films, and Sunshine had zero. Nothing. No.

Cillian Murphy is a gifted and charismatic actor, but he’s not a movie star, despite Hollywood’s best efforts. The actor is an excellent supporting role and an ideal TV lead. However, he lacks the charisma to be a proper movie star. The film’s supporting cast is full of recognizable faces that would go on to become a big hit later – Michelle Yeoh, Rose Byrne, Benedict Wong, Mark Strong, scary Chris Evans. The names follow one another, one familiar face after another. But none of them were movie stars then; heck, most ain’t movie stars now.

Chris Evans as “Mace” in Sunshine (2007)

Yeoh and Evans were the most famous of the lot – funnily enough, they’re also the most famous now. However, their roles play the supporting role of Murphy’s character, and the film makes it clear that they are, if not disposable, at least useless for the third act. Everyone else is ostracized even more, with only Byrne and Strong standing out; she’s the closest thing to a female lead, and he’s Mark Strong, so he’s logically playing the bad guy.

Maybe it was Sunshineis the real error; not having a movie star who could shine as bright as the sun in the movie. How different would things have been if, instead of Murphy, there had been a DiCaprio or Denzel Washington in the lead? SunshineThe budget would not have been $40 million, let me tell you. However, someone like Orlando Bloom – then in the middle of his Pirates of the Caribbean fame and with enough power to help Ridley Scott’s 2005 epic kingdom of paradise cross the $200 million brand – might make more sense. Maybe the extra $10 million was worth it.

The perfect sci-fi?

A Man Standing in Front of the Sunshine

In six words or less, Sunshine is an almost perfect film. Captivating, thrilling, profound and ambitious at will, Sunshine is a climbing exercise. Moving away from classic sci-fi tropes, the film presents a deeply humanistic look at a tech-obsessed genre.. Sunshine features humanity’s struggle against itself, concluding with a decidedly dark third act that manages to drive the point home, even if it escalates into the same tropes it initially tries to subvert.

So why is it Sunshine so underrated? The film had a fate worse than infamy because Sunshine is forgettable. No one talks about it or even remembers it, and it’s a real disservice to science fiction, especially in a decade when the genre offered few worthwhile entries. By opting for a more grounded and reflective approach, Sunshine shot himself in the foot and condemned his prospects and his legacy. Because who wants a quiet introspection of a sci-fi blockbuster? Few people back then, and even fewer now.

And it’s Sunshineit is a defect. It’s almost perfect, but by choosing restraint and prioritizing humanism over technological ideals, it puts itself at a disadvantage, especially in the massive, escapist world of science fiction. SunshineThe fault of is a distinctive lack of vanity and spectacle. Even though he succumbs to the stereotypical storytelling in the third act, he can’t get over his initial coy approach. In a cruel twist of fate, what makes Sunshine unique is what dooms it to oblivion.

Quentin Tarantino in Sunshine [2009]

Even so, the film is worth your time. Movie buffs and sci-fi aficionados will have already watched; indeed, a famous film buff has praised it and argued for its place in the pantheon of sci-fi classics. But casual viewers tanned the movie due to its forgotten status. If you are ready to pay the $3.99 on Apple Where Amazon and give this movie unicorn a chance, you probably won’t regret it. Sunshine is singular and quite memorable once you give it a chance to wow you with its unique approach.

What if it lacked the tense, claustrophobic quality of Ridley Scott Extraterrestrial or the timeless quality of Stanley Kubrick 2001: A Space Odyssey? Sunshine has other things going for it, including a distinctive take on sci-fi dystopia and an ending so bittersweet it will leave viewers feeling a knot in their stomachs. And who wouldn’t want to look this?

Editors’ Recommendations

Source link

Related Posts