Oct. 5, 2010, 12:07 a.m. CST
this was a wonderful flick.
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:11 a.m. CST
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:14 a.m. CST
5 million opening weekend? I guess my perception of reality was distorted from all the AICN hype for these 2 films.
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:18 a.m. CST
I thought this was a Let Me In review lol
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:21 a.m. CST
It's cool to imagine what Romanek's Wolfman could've been. He seems so adept at exploring some pretty heavy inner dichotomies. He has a great baroque aesthetic.
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:40 a.m. CST
Not being rude, but just wondering and a bit cynical when people say comments about a brilliant book. <p> Have read it and I thought it was pretty brilliant, well written. <p>
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:43 a.m. CST
I love Romanek's work, and this movie is gorgeous to look at...but it's a bore and offers nothing new, and I never once cared for the characters.
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:49 a.m. CST
But does anyone actually care what Harry has to say anymore...let alone read his reviews anymore? Doesn't he seem like the ultimate sell-out? It may just be me...seriously. If I'm wrong, let me know. I love this site and don't want to believe it...but Harry just seems like such a tool now. Again, if I'm wrong...please correct me and show a review from this year that Harry has been spot on about...because I really want to believe.
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:54 a.m. CST
and boring. Boring's the worse crime a film can commit.
Oct. 5, 2010, 1:05 a.m. CST
Oct. 5, 2010, 2:30 a.m. CST
love mark romanek. why isn't this in wide release? too arthousey for the general public?
Oct. 5, 2010, 3:10 a.m. CST
It seems he's had a long run of really shitty luck in movies. Will definitely check this out.
Oct. 5, 2010, 3:48 a.m. CST
Oct. 5, 2010, 3:49 a.m. CST
Oct. 5, 2010, 3:50 a.m. CST
Oct. 5, 2010, 3:50 a.m. CST
Oct. 5, 2010, 3:54 a.m. CST
Oct. 5, 2010, 4:17 a.m. CST
...let me go!
Oct. 5, 2010, 4:21 a.m. CST
No Norman Wisdom obit? Really?....Really!
Oct. 5, 2010, 5:29 a.m. CST
Big in Albania, where he provided the one ray of comedic sunshine against the gloom of communism.
Oct. 5, 2010, 6:03 a.m. CST
...that came out in July 2005, four months after 'Never Let Me Go' was published?
Oct. 5, 2010, 7:17 a.m. CST
fuck you, harry, how can you not mention that movie? either way, fuck you and ishijapso. american audiences will recognize the similarities and boycott this derivative garbage.
Oct. 5, 2010, 7:56 a.m. CST
Could we possibly have any more spoilers in there? holy jeez, i feel like i just read the cliff notes.
Oct. 5, 2010, 8:38 a.m. CST
Oct. 5, 2010, 8:59 a.m. CST
Harry, that was a superb take on the film. For me, that was your best review ever. I seriously believe that your trademark child-like, reminisicent take on things helped you see the film in a unique way, to recognize and fully embrace its message. Understandably, the performances touched you as they touched me. But I think they touched you even more. <P> True, everything about this movie has been done before. Everything. Questions about the soul, love triangle, questioning the morality of cloning. But I can't think of a movie doing it better and making itself more relevant to our lives. That's why I continue to be haunted by it. I can't wait to see it again and again. <P> This is no sci-fi tale, so potential viewers be warned. This is a movie that was aptly described by Harry. It's a tale about humanity, love, guilt, redemption, fate, friendship, duty. All that and more. It's the best film of the year, if that even means anything. For me, it was simply one of the best films I'd ever seen. Even if you think Harry gives away everything in his review, you'd be doing yourself an injustice by not seeing it for yourself. The brilliance of this film lies not in its plot points and story but in the performances and execution, and how they make you FEEL. It embodies the power of cinema like few films do. Mark Romanek can rightly be called a master.
Oct. 5, 2010, 9:07 a.m. CST
See the disclosure at the end of this piece? With your reviews, we can't tell if you truly like something or have been paid. http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/10/01/highlights-from-the-social-network-press-conference
Oct. 5, 2010, 9:19 a.m. CST
Pull my finger.
Oct. 5, 2010, 10:11 a.m. CST
No need to tell the whole plot, Harry.
Oct. 5, 2010, 10:25 a.m. CST
did you not see the spoiler box around the article link?
Oct. 5, 2010, 11:01 a.m. CST
All you people whining about how Never Let Me Go is a copy of The Island...The Island was a blatant rip-off of Parts: The Clonus Horror. "The big-budget 2005 DreamWorks production The Island, also about a colony that breeds clones to harvest organs for the elite, mirrors Clonus in a number of ways. The makers of Clonus filed suit, claiming copyright infringement. On August 25, 2006, the court presiding over this case ruled that it could proceed to trial. According to a 2007 interview with Clonus screenwriter Bob Sullivan, DreamWorks and Clonus Associates reached a settlement, the specific terms of which are sealed.
Oct. 5, 2010, 11:04 a.m. CST
Are cookbooks. It's like porn for him. <p> Fat fuck ginger sell out!
Oct. 5, 2010, 11:11 a.m. CST
Yeah, I did, but Jesus, people can review movies without having to tell every friggin' plot point. It got to where it read less like a review and more like a long synopsis.
Oct. 5, 2010, 11:21 a.m. CST
why is that? and more importantly, does HK even CARE? To me it seems like he doesnt. The direction of this site has really taken a turn for the worst. I remember WAY BACK WHEN I looked forward to the big Guys reviews, NOW they are just self absored, incoherent blatherings about jacking off into a sock. What a disgrace. The only thing I read regarding Harry is the venom spewed on the TB's. I stopped taking Knowles seriously a LONG time ago (Godzilla? Phantom Menace?)
Oct. 5, 2010, 11:54 a.m. CST
What happens to those who don't mildly accept their fate? There will always be those who buck the system. Without showing that, especially in a situation like this, it is "Gone With The Wind" with human organ banks instead of slaves, happily serving the needs of their masters with no thought for their own needs and futures. Pure upper-class fantasy.
Oct. 5, 2010, 11:57 a.m. CST
It's been weeks now, Christ!
Oct. 5, 2010, 11:57 a.m. CST
What did it for me was his Inception review, or lack thereof. He intentionally waited because he knew he'd have nerd backlash against him. And I don't trust his reviews at all since he doesn't disclose you pays for advertising or travel. This is an outdated site with submarginal news - there are much better sites, like Slashfilm. So why am I posting this? Because its been a habit of mine to check aicn for over a decade and I hope Harry can solve the sites problems. But in reality, this site is so far behind the times and has lost so much credibility.
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:44 p.m. CST
they have Thor pics, info about the new Landis movie.
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:47 p.m. CST
I just reserved the book at the library.
Oct. 5, 2010, 12:50 p.m. CST
"Do they ever show what happens to those who don't mildly accept their fate?"<p> Thank you for nailing what creeps me out about this movie, same as Speilberg's MINORITY REPORT creeped me out a while back...what seems to be the unquestioning acceptance by the director of an ugly premise.<p> (In MR's case, the notion that people should be found guilty and sentenced for a crime that never actually happened wasn't really questioned, just the idea that someone could manipulate the system to their own ends)<p> Thus, the comparison to BLADE RUNNER is bullshit...the core of that movie is an angry rejection of the notion that an intelligent being should be confined to a mayfly existence for the comfort and luxury of another...this movie seems to be shrugging at that inhumanity. Jeezus, even THE ISLAND had a fairly harrowing scene where the seemingly big, tough linebacker played by Michael Clarke Duncan loses his shit at his imminent, unfair demise...are they telling me that this critically-lauded flick can't even be that honest?
Oct. 5, 2010, 1:16 p.m. CST
My wife's reading the book now. Me next. Really anxious.
Oct. 5, 2010, 1:17 p.m. CST
I'm a huge Ishiguro fan, and the book really stayed with me. I suppose the highest compliment I can pay the author is that his novel made me want to live life to the fullest (no doubt this was Ishiguro's intension). My problem with the film version is that, right from the beginning, it strikes such a constant and unwavering note of sorrow and woe that by the climax I'm all sorrowed out. Whereas the end of the novel moved me to tears, the end of the film left me feeling oddly spent and unmoved. To put it in visual terms, it's like a subject so shrouded in shadow that you can't make out the edges, and are therefore unable to discern the contrast between the two. Whether you're talking about good and evil, sorrow and sadness, anger and hate, or life and death, it's hard to appreciate one without having a sense of the other. It's the contrast that gives them their power. The film gave me so much grief and so little light that, after a while, I stopped being able to feel the grief. Don't get me wrong; Romanek is a talented director, but I wish his every artistic choice had not been so earnestly calculated to remind me of how sad I should be (God knows the tediously doleful music didn't help). I know not everyone will agree with me, but I strongly suspect that had the film given us one or two moments in which the doomed characters were shown enjoying their brief lives it would have made their premature demise register more deeply and profoundly. As it stands, Romanek's adaptation of the book left me with the feeling of having attended a funeral for people I never knew.
Oct. 5, 2010, 1:28 p.m. CST
It's been discussed around the web. Some people have a real problem with it. I didn't, and don't think you should either. <P> Yes, there is a reference in the film (and presumably the book, too) that Harry pointed out. A mythology created by the clones to give themselves hope to defy their lot. So that sense of rebellion against circumstance is portrayed. I think the problem is is it's not portrayed in a way people want. <P> But that's not a problem with the story. Understand that these people were conditioned from infancy to accept, to obey. They are brainwashed. And they have bracelets that, I believe, would do them great harm should they not follow the rules. It's not explicitly stated in the movie, but there were enough scenes involving the bracelets to suggest that they play a huge part in the clone control system <P> The comparisons to Blade Runner and The Island are remote. Don't go in expecting a 'clone' of those movies. This is something completely different. It's also far better. <P> I think one would immediately assume that it's part of human nature to rebel against the kind of cruel tyranny these clones live under. I think that's a fair assumption. But I also think that in the real world, those who live under such extraordinary circumstances cope by following along. It's a survival mechanism. And you have to understand that for them, the very basic drive to survive, to simply live, is paramount. <P> So no, they don't run like the Replicants or ScarJo and Ewen. But what they do is just as logical and, sadly, painful to witness.
Oct. 5, 2010, 1:36 p.m. CST
I get what you're saying. I think there's a fine sprinkling of lightness in the movie but it is overwhelmed by sorrow and impending doom. But for me, as someone who didn't read the book yet, it was effective. I'm not saying I enjoyed it, but I did feel as though I had a powerful experience watching it. <P> I did mourn Ruth because of her attempt to redeem herself (and she did). I did mourn Tommy because he died so soon after declaring his love for Kathy. There was simply no time for them to experience a life together, but just enough to share a first kiss and a night together. That was fucking heartbreaking.
Oct. 5, 2010, 1:40 p.m. CST
Oct. 5, 2010, 1:43 p.m. CST
This movie is fantasy pure and simple if history has taught us anything about real life it this...people won't calmly wait to be butchered if they know its coming. You might drug them or cage them but you will have to do one or the other...the idea that a young man or woman in the prime of life will allow themselves to be harvested is revolting, we will die for family,country,honor or just a abundance of testosterone but to let a stranger live we have to die..bullshit.
I think Isiguro should be applauded for having the courage and imagination to tell a story about people who accept their fates as opposed to defying them. Granted, the theme of accepting one's fate flies in the face of Hollywood's escapist mentality, but the fact remains that human beings frequently find it easier (safer) to play the hand they've been dealt in life rather than brave the unknowns of defiance, escape or rebellion (sadly, this is something the Nazis understood very well). People on this planet live with doomed marriages, horrible jobs, intolerable injustice, etc. everyday, and they do so on a massive scale. The fact that Isiguro decided to focus his story on those for whom escape is apparently not a psychological option in no way diminishes the power of that story. One may not agree with the philosophy of accepting one's fate, but to fault the writer for wishing to explore so human a theme seems unreasonable. For one thing, the tension created by the characters' seeming ambivalence regarding their disposable lot in life is one of the things Ishiguru uses to hold our attention. More importantly, the themes of spiritual, psychological, or political impotence are as relevant as they've always been. I realize there are those who would like to have seen some sort of sci-fi "mythology" inserted into the film so as to better understand the character's actions (or lack thereof), but to me that feels like the sort of tedious, expository hand-holding that makes so many modern sci-fi films feel forced and artificial. Sometimes less is more.
Oct. 5, 2010, 3:36 p.m. CST
Harry: "nor do they wash you’re clothes" damn_dirty_ape: "You're not alone. This site used to be superb..." Jesus guys
Oct. 5, 2010, 4:55 p.m. CST
...you really aren't gonna do an obituary for one of the most celebrated comedic actors in the history of movies?! nice one! well done choppah, if you keep filling the gaps i'll keep visiting :-)
Oct. 5, 2010, 5:11 p.m. CST
Great book from 96 and Speilberg bought the rights to it way back but dont expect itll ever be made.
Oct. 5, 2010, 5:52 p.m. CST
Harry's busy eating.
Oct. 5, 2010, 5:53 p.m. CST
No big deal, Harry. Just one of the finest animated films of all time. It's cool though, take your time.
Oct. 5, 2010, 6:47 p.m. CST
It'll tell you there's plenty of times throughout recorded history where innocent people have waited to be slaughtered. Happens a lot. Whole families will sit there and accept their 'fate'. More than families even. Don't just spew something to sound cool and knowledgeable, you just showed your own ignorance. Look at the Balkans. Look at World War 2. Yeah plenty of people run. Plenty fight, too. But there's plenty who sit there waiting for the axe to fall too.
Oct. 5, 2010, 6:54 p.m. CST
Its a bit rushed towards the end and the book is better but tis still great.
Oct. 5, 2010, 7:28 p.m. CST
The problem is that, although generally wee-cast, the characters never come to life onscreen. In the book you can't help but care about them; in the film they're just going through the motions of being the walking dead, and the net effect is pretty dull (the sole exception is Keira Knightly, who plays a beautiful bitch beautifully). That said, the book is superb. Pity the film is such a stiff, but I still think Mark Romanek shows promise. Dude just needs to lighten up. Hell, even his obvious idol Kubrick had a sense of humor.
Oct. 5, 2010, 8:23 p.m. CST
to each his own i thought the characters were handled beautifully for the most part. I'm surprised you site Kiera Knightely since her character is the most underwritten and while shes good the character doesn't work nearly as well as the two leads.
Oct. 5, 2010, 10:52 p.m. CST
Cause they serve man and they are fucked from day one and they dont fight back, and no one ever questions that. we eat em, we eat em all! Clones fo rparts wont happen. We have machines that can use our own cells to make parts, and soon like ECM we will also be able to make parts that dont have a genetic footprint and the body will just accept it and infuse it with out own DNA. this bus has passed. The future is ceetinand no clones will not be needed. Be smarter than our limits. thats how science fiction should be.
Oct. 5, 2010, 11:16 p.m. CST
The book had that one clearly defined moment of happiness for Kathy and Tommy, and they cut it out of the movie. I really do hate to be one of the types to complain about something left out of an adaptation, but I feel like even just having that one scene where (*****spoilers) they go to look for a tape in Norfolk (end spoilers****), would have made the ending more powerful. Still enjoyed the movie, though.
Oct. 6, 2010, 12:27 a.m. CST
by Star Hump
Oct. 6, 2010, 1:33 a.m. CST
"The comparisons to Blade Runner and The Island are remote. Don't go in expecting a 'clone' of those movies. This is something completely different. It's also far better."<p> If its fans are saying shit this stupid, I'm glad it bombed. THE ISLAND, whatever...BLADE RUNNER? Try not to embarrass yourself in public, if you can help it...<p> These clones sure sound like some serious pussies...if I were one of them, I'd be breaking thermometers and gulping down mercury when my time came near. Fight the power, bitch.
Oct. 6, 2010, 7:08 a.m. CST
Oct. 6, 2010, 7:20 a.m. CST
by The McPoyle Clan
it provides absolutely no context for the opening paragraph, nor is that conclusion supported in the review.<p><p>Did it bomb at the box office? I had to verify that on my own.<p><p>And while the audience may have been small, how does Harry come to the conclusion that the audiences that did watch the movie not come to comprehend or empathize with the characters? <p><p>The American audience at large may not have been attracted to the characters and thematic elements of the film, but considering the veil of secrecy obscuring the subject for those who weren't already familiar with the book, how could they know what they were ignoring, intentionally or unintentionally?
Oct. 6, 2010, 9:38 a.m. CST
Look, I don't wanna talk up this movie too much. I think I already did that. But if you saw it, and then disagreed with me about it being better than Blade Runner, then I'd accept that. But really, this is not a film you can make assumptions about without experiencing it. In any case I think you've already sabotaged yourself from truly appreciating it. I went in with no knowledge of the story, no expectations. I think that's the best way. <P> I don't know, maybe you'll catch it in a few months on DVD with less skepticism. I hope you do. I don't care if this tanked at the B.O. or not, it is still one of the best films I'd ever seen.
Oct. 6, 2010, 9:59 a.m. CST
come on, dude. you're stretching a little bit here, aren't you? i believe the last "book" you read was the penthouse forum you jerked off to.
Oct. 6, 2010, 10:02 a.m. CST
more like fuckwad. fuck you. okay, according to your logic, ishijapso's novel is a rip-off of your "clonus" horseshit. either way, it's a rip-off. go fuck yourself.
Oct. 6, 2010, 10:05 a.m. CST
totally agree with you, dude. both the novel and the film are complete rip-offs of "the island". besides, scarlett is way hotter (and can act rings around) both those boy-girls assley and assigan put together.
Oct. 6, 2010, 10:15 a.m. CST
100% is a fantasy. It has no relationship to the way human beings actually are. 99.9%? Sure. But SOMEONE will buck, and you can't point to a single social tissue in all of human history where this hasn't been true. To not touch on this is either blindness to human nature, or narrative laziness. I am also worried that it is a point of view held primarily by the privileged class: "why, they like the way things are!" I've heard this from every ruling class, whether financial, racial, class-based, or whatever. It is always an illusion they promote to feel comfortable with their privilege. Just show me what happens to one single rebel, and I'll believe you haven't taken the blue pill. Otherwise, it's like a Brahman talking about how the Untouchables are happy with their lot, and that is simply bullshit. One...single...rebel.
Oct. 6, 2010, 1:22 p.m. CST
...they would have also soon found a way to either keep said clones alive and unconscious in vats or even to just grow the body parts themselves in vats and use those. It's too much upfront money to make multiple clones of people, feed, clothe and shelter them for 20 years, only to chop 'em up for spare parts.
Oct. 6, 2010, 2:13 p.m. CST
The man is a legend of cinema. And if you've never seen his films then you should because he's right up there. C'mon Harry. Pull your finger out. A lot of AICN readers deserve to have their pleas heard.
Oct. 6, 2010, 2:41 p.m. CST
Thanks for your intelligent comment. Your insightful discussion really added to the talkbalk. Sorry if you don't understand this comment, since I did not use any curse words.
Oct. 6, 2010, 3:05 p.m. CST
Your posts tell us more about your own political agenda/ social biases than they do about either the novel or film being discussed. You've admitted human beings are capable of either accepting their fate of defying it. Ishiguro decided to tell a story about the former, and I for one welcome the approach. God knows Hollywood loves to make films about those who escape from whatever prison they find themselves in. For obvious reasons it's a popular theme. It's also been done to death. You seem to think Never Let Me Go would have a better narrative had the writer raised the issue of "running." I disagree. By focusing exclusively on three characters who confront their fate head-on the author forces each of us to ponder the question of how we want to spend our pathetically short lives. It's not about escaping the fate of our death, for that isn't an option (so far as I know). It's about making the most of life before we die. That's what both the film and the book are concerned with. If you want a story in which characters escape or "defy their fate," God knows you can take your pick. Just don't accuse Ishiguro (one of the world's best novelists) of "narrative laziness" simply for having the sense to know what his story is (and is not) about.
Oct. 6, 2010, 6:18 p.m. CST
Actually, the makers of THE ISLAND were forced to settle out of court to the creators of a 70s low-budget movie, PARTS: THE CLONUS HORROR for what was pretty much an identical plot to NEVER LET ME GO (although the clones in PARTS attempt to escape, as in THE ISLAND).<p> PARTS was a pretty shoddy movie (the best way to see it is with the MST3K sendup), but all the same, original. Finding out that this is in fact a third generation rehash not crediting the original creators doesn't exactly make me want to rush out and see it...
Oct. 6, 2010, 6:32 p.m. CST
Please see my preceding post...plagiarism is the ultimate form of "narrative laziness".<p> And I just know someone's going to try and employ the old, "But in that case, STAR WARS is just a rip-off of STAR TREK, FLASH GORDON, BUCK ROGERS, etc" sleazeball lawyer defense...
FWIW, Never Let Me Go was published in 2004.
Oct. 6, 2010, 7:12 p.m. CST
I'm a little unclear re: who you're accusing of plagiarism. Are you suggesting that Ishiguro stole the plot to his novel from PARTS: THE CLONUS HORROR? Because if so you may be onto the greatest literary scandal since Clifford Irving tried to cash in on Howard Hughes.
Oct. 6, 2010, 9:44 p.m. CST
When cloning was first raised as a possible thing around the late 90s there were some who viewed it as "do they have their own souls"? Which is the foundation this movie and book are based on. But really I can't imagine anyone thinking like that these days anymore than they'd think an identical twin has no soul. The whole premise of this movie, of society treating them that way, is laughably impossible.
Oct. 7, 2010, 8:32 a.m. CST
All I'm saying is, get a copy of PARTS and tell me if the story doesn't seem startlingly...familiar:<p> http://tinyurl.com/29f7yjs
Oct. 7, 2010, 2:06 p.m. CST
Having seen Parts: The Clonus Horror I very much doubt that anyone who's bothered to read Ishiguro''s book would accuse him of cribbing. Just as it's okay for post-H.G. Wellsian authors to pen stories involving time machines, invisible characters, and invading aliens, so too is it okay for contemporary writers to pen stories about farming parts from clones (a sci-fi concept that made the literary scene years before Clonus, btw). And besides, NLMG isn't really "about" parts farming. The backdrop of Ishiguro's novel has been dominating the discussion, but it's really just backdrop.... a devise the author uses as a means to explore themes of friendship, betrayal, sacrifice and loss. The whole clone farming thing is barely touched upon, and from a dramatic standpoint it remains the least interesting thing about the book. Ishiguro isn't interested in affairs of the state... he's interested in affairs of the heart. I agree with those who feel Romanek's movie falls short of being an artistic success, but Ishiguro's book is both haunting and moving. For those who like that sort of thing I can't recommend it highly enough.
Oct. 7, 2010, 3:18 p.m. CST
is that most of the posters are now complete and utter douchebags. I remember when these people (we called them 'trolls') were the minority and talkbacks often had reasonable, interesting discussions and sharing of experiences, despite the fact that a small handful would degenerate the conversation to insults and cock measuring. Nowadays it seems that these assholes are the majority. Look at this talkback. Harry offers an interesting, thoughtful review of a challenging film. And with a few exceptions, he gets insults, challenges, complaints. If you hate Harry so much and this site, then please go away and leave it to people who actually like being here. I wish Harry was as fascist as some of you paint him as being, so he would ban everyone who makes a stupid fat joke, insults his reviews, accuses him of payola, bitch, bitch, bitch. If you want to talk about films and media, then this should be welcome territory. Just like the voices of extremism are taking over this country's discourse, this site is being overrun by assholes who probably scare off intelligent folk who actually want to have discussions, instead of yell at each other.
Oct. 7, 2010, 3:43 p.m. CST
This is the first time I've posted on AICN since, lemme see... I think" A.I." had just been released. Sad to say, based on this thread, it appears things have only gotten worse.
Oct. 7, 2010, 4:23 p.m. CST
Harry says Mark Romanek's NEVER LET ME GO is truly Fantastic!<P> yes but is it outrageous? Truly...truly...truly...truly outrageous?
Oct. 7, 2010, 9:23 p.m. CST
Yeah, well, I've looked over this Talkback, and I have no idea what you're talking about. There have been a few acidic comments, but by and large, I just see a number of skeptics (like myself) who aren't sold on the premise of this movie or its originality. That's not to say there aren't TBs that have degenerated in to petty, vicious squabbles, but this isn't one of them.<p> Maybe you just can't handle debate and free expression. Apparently, Harry can, or these TBs wouldn't exist at all...
Oct. 7, 2010, 10:14 p.m. CST
"The whole clone farming thing is barely touched upon, and from a dramatic standpoint it remains the least interesting thing about the book."<p> If that's the case (and to be fair, I'll make the effort to read the novel), then the author has seriously blundered. Here's why:<p> A Harvard biologist named Marc Hauser* devised a number of moral dilemmas he put to a group of survey respondents. Long story short, in general, people can abide with collateral damage in a tragic situation, but not the unconsenting exploitation of another. Re-routing a runaway train onto a track where it will kill one instead of five is permissible, but pushing an innocent bystander in front to stop it isn't, even if it spares the five. Dropping a bomb on a terrorist that inadvertently kills five innocent family members is tolerated by most, but abducting one of the same innocent family members and turning them into a suicide bomb would be considered monstrous. And while five people dying from the lack of a vital organ is considered tragic, snatching a healthy donor from the street and chopping him up to provide those organs would be murder in the first degree.<p> This is one of the basics of human morality, and to sidestep it to get to the emotional "goods" is a mistake. If Ishiguro had instead made his novel about a set of terminal disease-stricken patients, he could have achieved the same dramatic tension. Bringing in the vicious exploitation of the same set of individuals for their body parts heavily complicates the emotional situation...this is more than just an unfortunate dilemma, this is an actual crime against humanity.<p> In summation, it CAN'T equate with your typical person's uncertainties about mortality and the future. To pretend it does is to contradict current moral standards.<p> * I borrowed this from Richard Dawkins THE GOD DELUSION, but I don't want to get into a boring "atheism vs religion" argument...it's just the source.
Oct. 8, 2010, 1:56 a.m. CST
Unfortunately, it didn't start until half way down the page after all the hate-spewing idiots calling Harry a sellout and a fat cunt. That's about the 30th post, when BSB finally says something intelligent, as he often does. But the bullshit didn't end there. There was still more bitching about the site and insulting Harry after that. That's way more than a 'few acidic comments.' It's getting this way on almost every talkback and I'm getting sick of it. Maybe you haven't been on the site long and you don't remember when every other post wasn't an insult or a complaint, or maybe you only started reading after your own posts. But dude, open your eyes. Did you even read what I wrote? Why would I not 'be able to handle' debate when that's the thing I said was missing. Kudos to you for being one of the few to actually engage with the site intelligently, but you're in the minority. Get used to it. I know Harry can handle it, otherwise he would have banned most of these fuckers aeons ago.
Oct. 8, 2010, 8:52 a.m. CST
Oct. 8, 2010, 11:34 a.m. CST
You seem determined to fault the author for not having written the story you wanted him to write. With all due respect, that's not his job. It would be like me criticizing Peter Benchley for failing to examine the moral & ethical considerations of killing sharks in Jaws. Killing a member of an endangered species may be immoral, but under the circumstances I'm willing to give the author a pass for not dwelling on the philosophical implications. At any rate, it seems silly to debate the finer points of Ishiguro's novel with someone who hasn't read it.
Oct. 8, 2010, 2:06 p.m. CST
"wash you’re clothes" = "wash you are clothes".<br><br>What the bloody hell? It makes no sense at all! And i'm berated for my poor english language skills? At least i'm portuguese, what's the americans' excuse?
Oct. 8, 2010, 3:09 p.m. CST
by Giant Ape Balls
Why is it taking so long to come out in the UK?
Oct. 8, 2010, 4:16 p.m. CST
"Lost me there, BurnHollywood"<p> Yeah, I guess I did, but I tried to explain in a systematic and scientific fashion why this story makes my stomach unsteady. These aren't (to borrow Harry's phrasing) "servants" who need to "embrace" a dire future (any more than Holocaust victims were guests" of the Nazi government)...they're murder victims.<p> Then again, I suspect it was Ishiguro's intent to convey the banality of evil. In that case, you're very wrong to say it was "only" the background, any more than the dystopia of Oceania in "1984" is "merely" the backdrop to the love story between Winston Smith and Julia. This novel/movie may in fact be flying over more than a few reviewers heads...
Oct. 8, 2010, 4:19 p.m. CST
Gotcha, but your first post was a bit open-ended in its targets...yeah, I'm also a little sick of immature posters who think this is a free-fire zone because the banhammer doesn't come down that often...
Oct. 8, 2010, 5:35 p.m. CST
I might be more sympathetic had you actually read the book you find so unpalatable. Certainly your “systematic and scientific” analysis would carry more intellectual weight. Forgive me for saying so, but given your lack of familiarity with the material, a statement like “This novel/movie may in fact be flying over more than a few reviewers heads.” manages to be simultaneously ill-informed and condescending. I generally have no objection to a contrary opinion, but if you're going to trash one of the decade's best novels at least have the common courtesy to first give it a read.
Oct. 9, 2010, 3:50 a.m. CST
And I'd have more respect for YOU if, instead of trying to pull the "you have to read the book" trump card, you'd actually quantify where I'm in error, because if all your arguments hinge on the "you hadda be there" line of defense, I'm seriously in doubt of whether it's worth the time or effort. After all, I've seen a lot of schlock hailed as the "decade's best" fall by the wayside over the years...<p> And it still reeks of CLONUS.
Oct. 9, 2010, 11:13 a.m. CST
Given that you haven’t bothered to read the book you so confidently and assuredly find fault with, you lack the frame of reference required to understand why your criticisms lack merit. I’ve tried to explain why your logic in this case is faulty, but given your ignorance of the subject matter it’s like trying to explain the power of the 9th Symphony to someone who’s decided it sucks without the benefit of having given it a cursory listen. Yours is the most childish kind of fanboy arrogance; you expect your opinion to be taken seriously, but you’re too stubborn or lazy to do the critical homework required to inform that opinion. Instead you accuse others of pulling “trump cards” for having the nerve to call you on your mindless bullshit. Guys like you demand “respect,” but how much respect can one have for those who trash books without having read them? I suppose we should be grateful you were able to muster the "time and effort" required to watch The Clonus Horror.
Oct. 9, 2010, 11:24 a.m. CST
by Fist Dirtbox
Seems like a good choice of subject -and it is a GREAT story- for Romanek, I remember his first feature Static having similar mortal concerns.
Oct. 10, 2010, 12:56 a.m. CST
It's freaking fantastic. Tore me apart in a way no movie has since Dancer in the Dark, and maybe Grave of the Fireflies before that. The book store was closed when I got out of the theater, or I'd be reading the book right now.
Oct. 10, 2010, 4:36 p.m. CST
Not sure where you got that from. The movie made it pretty clear that these people were clones of scum bag-types. Their organs went to anyone, not to their originals
Oct. 10, 2010, 4:37 p.m. CST
the ending kind of creeped on me....pretty emotional stuff
Oct. 10, 2010, 7:15 p.m. CST
Again, instead of saying what my supposed arrogance is "like" and giving your thesaurus a workout, why don't you give the rhetoric a break and explain how SPECIFICALLY I'm wrong?<p> See, I'm trying to figure out if this is worth reading/watching, but if the only sort of people who enjoyed it are of the type who can only say what's "great" without explaining why (it's just great, that's all), it seems well worth passing up.<p> And if you'd bothered to actually read my posts instead of making a quick glance and then giving your keyboard a workout, you'd have heard me mention that I caught CLONUS on MST3K. If you're such a pretentious git that you don't think MST3K is worth the investment in time, than I definitely have no interest in your opinion...<p> Finally, the term "fanboy" has a very specific definition (i.e. the overly finicky fan of a given title that insists that any adaptation be 100% true to the source), so simply tossing it into the middle of a rambling attack makes you look desperate and a bit of an ass...
Oct. 11, 2010, 6:40 a.m. CST
Oct. 13, 2010, 12:26 p.m. CST
by Fist Dirtbox
Robert Crumb way back in the 70's. Its certainly what how he used to refer to his over zealous followers back then.
Oct. 16, 2010, 10:05 p.m. CST
and it sucked and sucked hard. There was a premise here and a setting that could have been mind blowing. It fell short in every way imaginable. I feel like everyone who calls it brilliant are basing it off of what it COULD have been and not what it actually was. I really wanted to see the movie once I heard about who starred and directed it but no more. It might be a late night watch for me but not gonna go out and see it in a theatre.
Oct. 24, 2010, 6:48 a.m. CST
...I was actually thinking "The Island" (and "the Clonus Horror" it stole from) without the running, explosions, "Chase mentality", blatant product placement and general Bayhem it got buried under. The Island is basically a very high tech version of the school in "Never Let me Go"...completely diff tone that concentrated on CHARACTER but the basic premise is FAR closer than Blade Runner (much as I LOVE Blade Runner...). But agree, a very strong, sad but life affirming movie.
Feb. 24, 2011, 7:29 p.m. CST
Film is great. Survives a second viewing too. All three main actors should have award noms. Especially Mulligan. Deal with it. Yo.