9. Conclusion

                After watching these eight movies I learned a lot of things about how posthumanism affects film and how society views posthuman concepts through film.

1.       Alternate Realities- There are plenty of ways to create an alternate reality, rather it be through dreams, machines, games, or medicine. Alternate realities are very dangerous. They are often used as an escape for people struggling to cope with life. This is a terrible reason to escape. We were put into this reality for a reason. Instead of giving in and running, fight back and improve your life. Alternate realities are also dangerous because of the thought of what is reality. People become different in different realities. Different realities have different sets of rules to abide by. The problem starts when people can’t separate those rules from different realities. Alternate reality separates you from being a human. Sometimes there are people who enjoy the alternate reality so much they will do anything to not have to leave it. There is a case to be made though for someone who is physically unable to enjoy this reality due to limitations. In that case it’s understandable to at least let them have some enjoyment of being able to do things they otherwise couldn’t. In the end though it’s this reality that makes us human and that’s what we have to remember.

2.       Technological increases for medicine- We’re living in a time of massive technological growth. If this continues who knows, we may be able to see some of these things. Some of these ideas could be very helpful medical advances. Artificial organs and robotic limbs can help people recover from sickness and injuries that normally people wouldn’t be able to. They can help prolong lives to lengths that before would be inconceivable. If someone has artificial parts though are they still human. How much of them has to be “real?” Who is going to control these inventions? If the private sector gets ahold of them they can set a very high priced market which would price out all but the elite. This would increase the divide between the haves and have nots. The second danger is the concept of immortality. How long should people live? It’s impossible for everyone to live forever. There simply aren’t enough resources to sustain an ever-growing population for eternity. How do you decide who lives and who dies? These technological advances can further medicines by leaps and bounds, but it also creates a struggle for power and resources. Humans aren’t meant to live forever, even if we have the means to.

3.       Other technological advances- We also see that there are other forms of technology that can be created. How far is too far in technology? We could end up creating things that we later regret. Everyone doesn’t need to be connected at all times. Too much technology keeps us plugged in. We need to get out and experience things. If we don’t we will lose our humanity. We’re already slowly becoming dependent on technology. If we had robots that could do our bidding we’d fall even more under technology’s spell. In a way we could create that which is our downfall.

4.       Humans not being on top of the food chain- Multiple times I saw instances where humans were no longer the dominant species. Usually it was because of a virus. It’s possible that the next step in being post human is to honestly not be a human anymore. Humans could evolve into something like a zombie, vampire, or machine.

5.       This could happen very soon- In the eight movies I watched they were set in, 2025, 2035, 2054, 2169, and four movies which were set in “present day.” It’s crazy to think about it, but these ideas were developed in futures that are, with the exception of 2169, very near. It shows that these ideas aren’t completely farfetched and could happen soon.

6.       People are intrigued by posthuman themes- People love seeing this kind of thing. Box office receipts clearly show that.

Movie	The Matrix	Inception	Repo Men	Daybreakers	Minority Report	28 Days Later	I, Robot	In Time	TOTAL
Budget	$63 Million	$160 Million	$32 Million	$20 Million	$102 Million	$8 Million	$120 Million	$40 Million	$545 Million
Total Gross	$463 Million	$825 Million	$18 Million	$51 Million	$358 Million	$83 Million	$347 Million	$174 Million	$2.319 Billion
Profit	$400 Million	$665 Million	$-14 Million	$31 Million	$256 Million	$75 Million	$227 Million	$134 Million	$1.774 Billion

People come out in droves to see most of these movies. All but one of them made a profit. All but two of them made a $100 Million profit. Half of them made a quarter billion dollars. For them to make that much money a lot of people have to see them. This means that people know the subject of posthumanism now. It’s showing that the idea is infiltrating mainstream society in a big way. Everyone watches movies. This is becoming such a large subject matter that it’s become very hard to find someone who hasn’t seen one of these eight movies. If anyone hasn’t it’s still a safe bet that they’ve seen a similar movie.

Works cited

"28 Days Later." Box Office Mojo. Ed. Ray Subers. IMDb, n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=28dayslater.htm>.

"Daybreakers." Box Office Mojo. Ed. Ray Subers. IMDb, n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=daybreakers.htm>.

"I, Robot." Box Office Mojo. Ed. Ray Subers. IMDb, n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=irobot.htm>.

"In Time." Box Office Mojo. Ed. Ray Subers. IMDb, n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=now.htm>.

"Inception." Box Office Mojo. Ed. Ray Subers. IMDb, n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=inception.htm>.

"Minority Report." Box Office Mojo. Ed. Ray Subers. IMDb, n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=minorityreport.htm>.

"Repo Men." Box Office Mojo. Ed. Ray Subers. IMDb, n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=repossessionmambo.htm>.

"The Matrix." Box Office Mojo. Ed. Ray Subers. IMDb, n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=matrix.htm>.

2. Inception- Revised

                I originally had other ideas for what I was going to write about for Inception. Then we watched eXistenZ in class. I noticed a lot of parallels between the two movies so I decided to redo my entry on Inception.

When you strip each movie down they are both about the same thing, multiple levels of reality tucked inside each other. For Inception it was levels of dreaming, by the end of the movie they were three levels deep in a person’s dream. In eXistenZ they used a video game that created a game within the game.

Both dreams and games offer the same medium though. They both are typical ways for people to escape reality. In a game you are literally given another character to be. One of the most popular types of games is a role-playing game. In these you assume the role of another character; your life is fleshed out for you. The only limitation is the game system. In dreams you are still you, but you can do whatever you want in a dream, your only limited by your imagination. In the end, both act as ways for people to escape the everyday struggles of life.

Both movies also address what happens when an artificial reality becomes so strong it blurs the lines between what’s real and what isn’t. Mal’s death happened because she had spent so much time in limbo she wasn’t sure what reality was anymore. She believed that dying would wake her up to the real world, but she was in it all along, her mind had just been corrupt by spending 50 years’ worth of time in dream world. We also see toward the end of eXistenZ the main characters slowly lose touch with what is a game and what isn’t. As there is a battle going on Allegra and Ted aren’t sure if they’re in reality or the game still. This doesn’t stop Allegra from killing people without a second thought though. Her excuse was all based around this being in a game. For her being in the game meant a loss of human morale. She wasn’t 100 percent sure she was in the game though so to keep that morale in what could have been the real world is slightly disturbing.

The ending of the two movies is where I see the most overlap between the two. In eXistenZ we see everyone wake up from the game (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3f521sUTaE). This seems to be the highest layer of reality now. As the shooting goes off though the very last shot is the man who played the waiter saying “aren’t we still in the game?” This is very similar to Inception’s ending scene (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnsahVaa_0Q). We see Cobb get back to the plane which is the highest level of reality and he gets to return home to his kids. He goes to spin his top and we see the top waver, but we never actually get to see if it falls down. This gives the idea of is Cobb still in a dream? Both these movies end with that same question of what is truly reality. This blurs the lines between realities even more. Throughout the movies we assumed that they were at least in control of their alternate realities. That is something that could be done one day in real life. Extreme alternate realities could be created. These end scenes bring up the question of how do you control these realities? Can you even control these realities?

That’s the mystery of these two movies. The plots are very different. This shows that it’s not just one sort of alternate reality either. Dreams and games are completely different. The underlying themes are the same though. Alternate realities are dangerous. They have their own sets or rules. Most importantly though, what happens when the realities start to blur? Or worse, what happens when the artificial reality becomes more desirable than the real one?

movieclips "eXistenZ (10/10) Movie CLIP - Are We Still In the Game? (1999) HD" Online video clip. YouTube. YouTube, 2 Oct. 2011.

Nolan, Christopher, dir. Inception. CD-ROM.

thequizandquestions "Inception - Ending Scene Full (5/5) (HD)" Online video clip. YouTube. YouTube, 7 Mar. 2013.

8. In Time

                Of all the ways I’ve looked at of modifying humans I think the most interesting, and least likely to happen is the technology of In Time. In this universe people stop aging once they’re 25. On their 25^th birthday a clock on their arm starts ticking down from 10 years. When your clock hits all zeros, you die. Time has replaced money as currency. That’s the only way to live past that decade. Now you are literally working to keep your health, and paying with your health to get anything.

                What this has also done is create a social divide. The poor live very short lives because they can never get much time to extend their clocks. The rich are able to live basically forever. They’ve built up millennia of time. They’re gaining time faster than they can use it.

                This brings up the big question of the film. Should people be allowed to live forever? More than any other system this one keeps you the most human. The only thing that has changed really is the aging process. If you’ve earned the right to live forever by hard work and gaining that time should you keep it? We see this in the beginning as Henry, a man with centuries of time decides he’s lived long enough and gives all his time to Will, who lives in the ghetto. Will then uses that time to try to make things right and becomes basically a time-bandit version of Robin Hood.

Henry’s speech to Will (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDCWEJK5r6k) sums up the problem with this new society. “For a few to be immortal, many must die.” Humans have evolved to the point that very few actually care about others, they’ve lost that part of themselves. All they care about now is themselves. Which is why the few and the privileged have built barriers to keep the meek and poor out. This way the poor dies so they don’t take up precious space.

Overpopulation really does threaten to be a large problem, not just in this movie, but also in real life. The population may be growing, but the world itself isn’t. The world can only sustain so many people. That is the problem with immortality. You may be immortal, but resources aren’t. Also, as Henry says, eventually you’ve just seen it all and are ready to die. It’s something that’s inevitable.

Works cited

movieclips "In Time #4 Movie CLIP - Cost of Living (2011) HD" Online video clip. YouTube. YouTube, 22 Nov. 2011. 

Niccol, Andrew, dir. In Time. CD-ROM.

7. i,Robot

The concept of having real robots that display human characteristics is slightly frightening. I,Robot does a great job at illustrating the concept of robots integrating with society. Could that be where society is heading? Could robots be a part of society?

I think the most interesting part of I,Robot is the three laws. First, a robot must never harm a human, or allow harm to come to a human. Second, a robot must obey human commands unless it violates the first law. Third, a robot must protect itself unless that violates the first or second law. These laws show that someone must have programmed them to install these laws. More so they programmed them to attempt to keep humans on top. I also find it interesting that the rules have a hierarchy. The first law overrules everything. The second law overrules everything besides the first law. It shows where importance is placed. The robot is only allowed to save itself if it can guarantee that no human will be harmed first. By only having those three laws it does allow for a range of possibilities for the robot to operate under since nothing was clearly laid out.

The scary thing becomes what if something happened to those three laws? What if a robot didn’t have to obey them? This theory gets tested when the main character Mel meets Sonny, a robot who belonged to the creator of robots before his death. Sonny ends up being friendly, but the central intelligence is not. It becomes sentient and wants to take over the humans. This brings up the scary conclusion that humans created the machine that tried to overthrow them. Does this mean we have too much power? I think it’s more that we’ve gone too far in technology. It’s scary to think that one day we could in effect be our own downfall.

I think this can connect back to the idea of at what point is something still considered a machine? These robots are capable of making decisions based on circumstances to determine if they’re in accordance with the three laws. They’re capable of thought and conversation. It’s as if they’re closer to being human than to being machine.

We also once again see the concept of a sympathetic main character. A year prior to the events in the movie Del lost his arm saving a little girl. They replaced it with a robotic arm. Robotic body parts have a lot of potential even today as a form of prosthetics. It raises the question though of how much of you has to be human to still be human? If someone lost both of their legs and an arm and had them replaced with robotic limbs, are they still human? I think so since those arms and legs may be mechanical, but the soul is still real. Robot parts aren’t something to define someone; it’s something to assist someone.

Works Cited

Proyas, Alex, dir. i, Robot. CD-ROM.

6. Minority Report

                How far is too far when it comes to technology? This is one of the major questions that Minority Report asks. In 2054 Washington D.C. has what is called a PreCrime police force. They can detect murders and arrest people before they even happen. They do this by using three people who have been trained to see the future. Their memories are then saved and uploaded onto the computer where Captain John Anderton and his team use plenty of futuristic gizmos and gadgets to analyze the memory and determine where and when the murder is going to happen.

                This means though that basically the government can always see what we’re doing, before were even going to do it. The main theme of the movie is fate versus free will. Free will is a trait that defines us as humans. We have the ability to make choices. Yes, we have to live with the consequences, but we have the choice. The government now has a machine though that can see what choices we make before we make them. Are we still in control then? Or is big brother really in control?

                The deeper problem is when you find out what your future is. Are you still making the choice if you’ve been told already you’re going to make that choice? Is there any way to change that future? This is what John has to deal with when one day a vision comes up of him committing a murder.

                I think this is where things get taken too far. Free will is important. The future should be left unknown. If you know the future that ruins the journey to lead us there. It could even alter that journey if you know too much. Plus should we as society allow the police and the government to creep that far into our lives that they know things about us that even we don’t? No one knows us better than ourselves. If that isn’t true anymore than we don’t have anything to call ours. Everything about us is out there for everyone to know. That sense of having something about you that is inherently yours is important.

Works Cited

Spielberg, Steven, dir. Minority Report. CD-ROM.

5. 28 Days Later

                28 Days Later is another look at the idea of how the human race could end. In this scenario humans are no longer humans, but are now zombies. For now the outbreak has been contained to England. This movie is all about how humans survive when they are no longer on top.

                The scariest part of this movie isn’t the zombies though. It’s what the survivors do. Any women that the survivors find are captured. They’re then forced into basically sex slavery as a way to repopulate the country. Anyone who objects is instantly killed. Also one of the soldiers has been infected by the virus. Instead of doing the humane thing and killing the guy to put him out of his misery and to protect him from spreading it, they chain him up out back to study him. The movie is about zombies but I think the virus also infects those who aren’t zombies. It infects them by turning them into a darker version of themselves.

                Zombies in general are interesting from this point of view. Society has moved away from the Night of the Living Dead type of zombies lately. Gone are the days of slow walking zombies just wanting brains. No more do zombies come out of the ground as undead, reanimated corpses. In this movie the zombies are still alive. They could be considered human still. Technically they are human, just infected with a very strong and fast acting virus. They still have a brain and strong motor functions because deep down they’re still human. This has been the new trend in movies. Make zombies evolve from viruses rather than from magic.

                The most interesting part is where do you draw the line at still being human? These zombies are humans still. They’re just infected. Sick humans are usually considered still humans. These humans are so sick though that the virus has taken complete control of them. It’s almost as if the virus has become the active personality and the human, while still technically alive, is now dormant. If that human part is dormant are they still human? Or has the virus evolved them to a posthuman stage of rage zombie?

               

Works Cited

Boyle, Danny, dir. 28 Days Later. CD-ROM. 

4. Daybreakers

                Daybreakers is another movie that deals with altering humans physically. The main reason is in this universe posthumanism for 95% of the world’s population is vampirism. These vampires have most the normal “rules” for vampires, just with twists. They can’t be exposed to light. A stake through the heart is death. Most importantly, they need blood. The problem is supply and demand. When things start its estimated that only 5% of the population is still human. If vampires go too long without blood they degenerate from their human-like state to a savage man-bat creature called a “subsider.” This has led the vampires to experiement with ideas such as human farming and creating a blood substitute. None of these things are working though. The main character, Ed, is the head hematologist at one of the world’s major blood suppliers. He’s in charge of many of these experiments.

                Eventually Ed (who despite being a vampire is a human sympathizer) ends up in league with a colony of humans. One of these humans is Elvis, who used to be a vampire. He’s discovered that just the right amount of sunlight will actually reverse the vampire process turning a vampire into a human. It’s also discovered that if a vampire feeds on someone who has been cured they will become cured as well. Unfortunately by the time this is discovered Ed’s employers finish a recipe for synthetic blood. If these other cures get out then there’s no profit in synthetic blood so a war between the vampires and humans is sparked.

                I found this movie interesting from a posthuman point of view because it not only shows humans becoming something more than humans, but it also shows that humans do not maintain the top spot on the food chain once that happens. In most things the humans are considered the main part of society while those who are different are outcast. In this case those who are different are so much more that it’s actually humans in this case that are considered the separate lesser society. We also see the main character, even though he is part of the new normal society, sympathizes with the outcasts. He’s already post human, but he leads a revolution to reverse that posthuman process and create another new society which was a new once again human led society.

 I think it’s also interest to look at that until this point everything I’ve looked at that modified humans was done through a technological process. This time humans are altered due to a simple virus. It’s not humans that are purposefully altering humans. It’s a virus that happened to get into society that changed humans into vampires. Humans had no control over this. It shows just how little we as humans have control over. We’ve seen viruses have devastating effects throughout history. One devastating virus and humanity could be put in a very bad postion.

Works Cited

Spierig, Michael, and Peter Spierig, dir. Daybreakers. CD-ROM.