The island??? - Never Let Me Go (2010) Discussion

[–] greg-233 12 years ago

"So basically, this is "The Island" set in the 1960's in Britain?"

Not quite. Never Let Me Go isn't set in the 1960s, although it is mentioned at the start of the film that by 1967 life expectancy had risen to 100 years, thanks to a medical breakthtough made in the early 1950s. The story itself is spread out over a number of years. The first part of the film, which shows us the children at Hailsham, is set in 1978. Then it cuts to 1985, before finally finishing in the early 1990s.

I haven't seen The Island but I believe the clones in that film only had a limited natural lifespan. Seven years or something like that? The clones in Never Let Me Go would have had the same kind of life expectancy as ordinary people if they didn't have to donate their organs. The Island is presented as a futuristic sci-fi action film, with a Logan's Run style "escape the authorities" premise. Never Let Me Go is a bit more subtle than that.

reply

[–] [email protected] 12 years ago

I haven't seen The Island but I believe the clones in that film only had a limited natural lifespan. Seven years or something like that?

That's Blade Runner. The clones in "The Island" were intended to be spare parts--wouldn't be very useful to have your spare parts die before you did.

reply

[–] gibbonici 12 years ago

No, not even remotely.

reply

[–] blupblup 12 years ago

The Island ripped off and copied many, many sources.

**The creators of the 1979 film Parts: The Clonus Horror, which was also about a colony that breeds clones to harvest organs for the elite, filed a copyright infringement suit.[15][16] According to a 2007 interview with Clonus screenwriter Bob Sullivan, DreamWorks and Clonus Associates reached a settlement, the specific terms of which are sealed.[17]

The controversy surrounding the lawsuit opened the floodgates to more criticism and accusations. Michael Marshall Smith's 1996 novel Spares, in which the hero liberates intelligent clones from a "spare farm", whose clients are told they are not conscious, was optioned by DreamWorks in the late 1990s but never made. It remains unclear if the story inspired The Island, and so Marshall Smith did not consider it worthwhile[18] to pursue legal action over the similarities. Paramount (once sister studio to DreamWorks after its parent Viacom purchased DreamWorks in late 2005, then spinning it off again in 2008) was in talks to option the novel after DreamWorks' rights expired, but declined after The Island was released. Marshall Smith considers it unlikely a Spares film will ever be made.[citation needed]

Tessa Dick, former wife of the late science fiction writer Philip K. Dick, referred to the film as "another PKD rip-off", accusing the filmmakers of plagiarizing Dick's 1964 novel, The Penultimate Truth, as well as several other works of fiction (Tessa Dick's opinion was originally published on her blog, "Tessa Dick Presents: It's a Philip K. Dick World!", in 2008, but, as of June 2012, the post has been removed):

{{quote|I'm watching this film, and I realize that everything in it is derivative of someone else's work. ... The basic premise is outright stolen from ... The Penultimate Truth. Everybody lives in an underground shelter because, they are told, the Earth is contaminated. ... They do throw in some action scenes from Blade Runner, which rips off Ridley Scott more than it does Phil. [Blade Runner is based on Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?."**

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Island_%282005_film%29#Copyright_infringement_controversy

Walter Sobchak: Am I wrong?
The Dude: You're not wrong Walter. You're just an a**hole.

reply

[–] One_of_Us_is_the_Killer 11 years ago

At least you get it.

'The Island' ripped off so many other films which implemented the same type of narrative philosophy, yet it failed so hard in explaining its scientific position. The fact that so many people constantly reference to this film on here just goes to show how shallow their overall knowledge is in films that date back to the 60s and 70s.

reply

[–] bron-tay 12 years ago

Only superficially. The Island is an action/thriller with a Hollywood ending, this one is a pensive tear-jerker.

~~~~~~~
Please put some dashes above your sig line so I won't think it's part of your dumb post.

reply

[–] fotis86 12 years ago

That's exactly what I thought myself. A few similarities:
1) The devices on their wrists, featured on both films.
2) Carey Mulligan's character looking for her clone or sponsor in the magazine, just like the characters in the island were looking for their sponsors.
3) The question in both films, whether the clones "have a soul".
Maybe someone read the novel and turned that idea into a sci-fi film, though, that's kind of hard since the novel was published in 2005, the same year the movie "the island" was released...

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Zerose 11 years ago

About that 3):

'Never Let Me Go' was heavily inspired by the UK national controversy of Dolly the Sheep in 1996.

The controversy over Dolly the Sheep was, among many issues, whether it was inhumane to clone animals. People debated whether animals have souls. This led the debate to whether human clones could acquire souls--hence, the Church of England's stand against cloning of an animal or human.

That debate also brought up a question whether it would be amoral or noble to clone humans, purely as organ harvesters, to save people's lives. Some pundits were concerned that Britain's deeply-set class system (a recurring theme in Ishiguro's novel-writing) would put the human clones in a class of their own that could alienate them even more than they already may be.

Carey Mulligan's character looking for her sponsor in magazines is a direct reference to the doppelganger legend. It's believed that you'll experience an emotion if you saw your doppelganger: a strong sense of belonging. Like, you're not alone and you won't die alone because there's another you around.

reply

[–] scorpionplanet 9 years ago

Lol its basically a really boring version of The Island. This movie was painful to get through.

reply

[–] zanity 9 years ago

DUH- I would have though by now everyone would know 'The Island' was an ILLEGAL copy of 'The Clonus Horror'- a much earlier movie that the writer of 'The Island' copied to the smallest detail. So, when you TRY to be clever, LOC, at least attempt to get your snark correct.

There is always one dribbler who tries to suggest that there can ONLY be one original film about any given genre concept. Rather like the same idiot suggesting that you can only have ONE original Western, because every other one is 'obviously' a copy of the first.

The concept of DELIBERATELY raising identical twins (because that is ALL Humans clones are), in order to use them as sources of medical material is a VERY real moral issue. There are parents in the USA who, for instance, specifically have new children in order to harvest them (non-fatally, of course) for treatments that will help cure earlier children that have serious medical issues. Here the new children are not 'clones', but may have enough genetic compatibility for their blood/bone marrow/skin/kidney/lung tissue or whatever to be a suitable match for the older child.

Illegal organ trading is a foul curse on our planet- but is driven by wealthy clients from America, Israel and the Middle East scouring the planet for compatible genetic material. The NHS in the UK, for instance, attempts to gather DNA information on all UK residents to actively assist this trade.

Ordinary organ transplant recipients in the UK can expect their new organs to have come from third-world supplies, while UK organ donors can expect THEIR organs to end up in the body of a wealthy client in, say, Saudi Arabia. The consequence of this was highlighted a few days ago, when two Brits died when their new Kidneys proved to have a 100% fatal worm infection, and had been sourced from a victim that had died from the same. This worm infection is UNKNOWN in the UK, but is one of the many nasty diseases unfortunately common in the third world. Sadly, the NHS ensures donated British organs go to 'worthier' (and vastly more profitable) clients in the organ-trading private sector.

reply

[–] lucianolvr 9 years ago

There are parents in the USA who, for instance, specifically have new children in order to harvest them (non-fatally, of course) for treatments that will help cure earlier children that have serious medical issues. Here the new children are not 'clones', but may have enough genetic compatibility for their blood/bone marrow/skin/kidney/lung tissue or whatever to be a suitable match for the older child.

First, I'm not sure it's just done in the good ol' USA. Probably in all first world countries. Second, I know a family who did this. Never could get my mind around it, as it seems unfair to the second child. What if they refuse? Then they disappoint everyone.

Love me some Waltons

reply

[–] prplayer 7 years ago

yes, but this is way more tedious to sit through

The Island atleast had some good scenes

so many movies, so little time

reply

[–] MNRebecca (762) 6 years ago

Major plot differences:

1. In THE ISLAND, the clones don't know they are clones.
2. In THE ISLAND, the clones anticipate a better life, not an early death.
3. In THE ISLAND, the number of clones is limited because they are a luxury for rich people, not part of the National Health Service.

I think that third point could make a fascinating thread all its own.

reply