Despite the slow plot development reminiscent of classic movies, The Fly manages to pique my interest enough to make me see it till the end. While I managed to suspend my disbelief, its stereotypical 50's interpretation of science still felt off-putting, leaving me with a bad taste by its conclusion. Its message, compared to the rest of the film, sounded so contradictory.
The film circles around the mad scientist Andre, going beyond normal science and inventing a matter transporter. Andre then goes on to conclude that his invention will end shortages and conflict. Well, that escalated quickly! I'd say its exaggeration was done purposefully; later on, the scientist abandons the notions of careful, methodical science and tests on himself, where his errors become the central plot of the movie. Strange, really. By the end, the rest of the cast smile upon Andre, telling of him to be one who searched for the truth. Such a benevolent act! Yet portrayed in such drama and non-science.
The Fly felt like it tried to incite morality into viewers, but you can glimmer some overdramaticism mixed in. I think only incited fears on how rapid technology was progressing at the time. Colored TV's, the discovery of DNA, atomic submarines, Sputnik's launch into space -- surely something has to go awry, right? Yes! His transporter does, in such a horrid manner.
In the end, I think I'm criticizing too much on what supposedly is a sci-fi thriller. While, for me, The Fly entertains, it leaves a lot of misleading thoughts and questions to ponder about science. Search for the truth, become a hideous beast? All part of the job! By the end, it's all up to the viewer how to paint his image of science; The Fly encourages you to paint it grisly, but beautifully.
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento