MovieChat Forums > Impostor (2002) Discussion > Should there have been an Alpha Centauri...

Should there have been an Alpha Centauri character in this?


Part of the artistic point of this movie seems to be the dystopian portrayal of a totalitarian, jingoistic police state. But given the humanity-fighting-for-survival setup we're given (relentless air strikes against civilian populations by an alien race with superior technology), a seige mentality and military dictatorship almost seems like a rational response, even if one of the side effects is a refugee class who live outside the dome due to resource constraints (not enough/big enough domes, even hospital space for injured soldiers was in short supply).

I wonder if the presence of some kind of sympathetic portrayal of an Alpha Centauri character revealing Earth attacked first or representing some kind of political resistance internal to the Alpha Centauri world, etc. would have added anything or at least made the Earth government actions seem less an act of overt desperation and more driven by a desire to cover up their culpability in the war.

It wouldn't be necesssary for the AC character to know the replicant identities, but they could have been either turncoats helping identify the replicants as a means of resistance against AC's government or double-triple (how many twists do you want) agents whose true motivation is uncertain until the end.

reply

The Centaurian's were a ruthless species with the goal of destroying mankind. It was mentioned that Earth tried to make peace with them but with no avail. Think of today's ISIS, do you think they have any other goal then to kill all of the worlds Jew's, Christians and any other group that does not believe the same way they do?

In Star Ship Troopers the enemy thought the same way.

So why would you believe that Earth had to have started the war? Why would you want to portray the enemy of Earth as sympathetic?

reply

So why would you believe that Earth had to have started the war? Why would you want to portray the enemy of Earth as sympathetic?


Mainly to add a little moral ambiguity to the storyline. If Earth and the survival of mankind is at risk, it's kind of hard to see some kind of totalitarian military dictatorship as much less than a necessity to marshall resources for the survival of mankind. The Earth government doesn't seem 'evil' when the things it does are out of sheer desperation and necessity.

In a way, it kind of reminds me of Avatar. The mining interests were just cartoon character bad guys -- greedy, violent and brutal without any added dimension. Their actions and the conflict between them and the natives would have been much more interesting if "unobtainium" had been some kind of vital substance for Earth, which would have given their motivation to obtain it a purpose beyond just greed.

reply

What if the Centauri were told the same thing about Earth? The movie only looks at the battle from one point of view. The rest is left to our imagination.

The other thing is time. Often they have to cut out a lot of scenes just to keep the movie from running to long. Adding another story arc about the Centauri might have us looking at a three hour movie. But I get your point. It's a one sided story.

reply

Yeah, I know there's issues with runtime, cost, etc, but it drives me nuts. It seems like so many movies, especially science fiction movies, have this obvious and simple minded lack of moral complexity.

I'd guess that it's more about the typical viewer being simple minded and unable to grok anything more sophisticated that good guys versus bad guys.

reply