From the start, Sunshine looks like another disaster movie, in particular Armageddon. So if you're looking for a feel-good movie about how the ingenuity of humans can save the human race, you are in the wrong place.
Sunshine starts off while a team of eight astronauts are already on their way toward the sun and lets you pick up the background story as the film progresses. Basically, 50 years from now, the sun is dying and a team has been sent to re-ignite the sun by guiding a huge chunk of fissionable matter into the sun's core. Sunshine is at heart a science fiction film and so has many conventions of that genre, such as techno jargon, space suits, and a talking computer system. The grim setting, as well as that of the mission, is conveyed very well, and the gravity of the mission starts to set in as the crew send back video clips to those they left behind on Earth. What starts out as a simple plot begins to grow in complexity as life onboard the space vessel begins to be fleshed out. A notable device used here is the inclusion of a ship psychologist, who acts as a partial narrator during the first half of the film to tell of the state of mind of the crew.
As the reality of traveling in space for several years begins to take a toll on the crew's enthusiasm, the unexpected begins to occur. The conflict in the film seems to stem from the cruelty of outer space and the fight of the crew to stay alive amidst this harsh environment. But almost at once, the producers appear to have taken liberal licenses in drawing out a plausible future event. This detracts from the immersion the film provides so well and really requires a suspension of disbelief for the movie to be enjoyable. For example, with constant communication with headquarters back on Earth, why is the crew so easily disheartened? Another question may be, since the ship practically runs itself, what have the crew done with several years of their time in space? This latter point sticks out near the end when there's a discussion of the different roles each member plays and so who are the more vital members. But with so much time on their hands, it would be expected that all of them should be equally knowledgable about the spacecraft.
Halfway through the film, the tone suddenly changes. It is as if two different directors shot the two sections and mashed them together. The second half is horrendously bad! Not only do the plethora of bad sci-fi film cliches appear simultaneously, but the film suddenly switches into a thriller genre. I don't get into the specifics of how that occurs, but trust me when I say that the plot device used for the switch is pretty ludicrous. With the two contrasting tones comes two separate views of humankind, one where man is good and human will will always triumph and one where man's basic nature is inherently brutal primitive. Which is the correct view? The film seems to suggest both camps, but in proposing the second, negative view, some of the characters starts to "go nuts." But I ask this: if the fate of mankind is at stake, would the crew not give up all personal desires to complete the mission? Or more likely, would each member of the crew not have been tested to ensure maximum compatibility with each other before the mission launched? The producers surely didn't read over the scripts before production and the end product is a lot of potential that led nowhere.
Pros: Good premise; some likeable characters; good buildup of environment
Cons: The plot; the unrealistic aspects of the film; the entire second half
Conclusion: Watch the movie late at night so when the bad part comes on you're already too tired to care...
Score: 3/5
