First of all, determine my basic position . If you sneer and have no interest in discussing it at all, you don't need to read this film review. . .
1. Although the director has not read the original, the influence of the original party should not completely correspond to the content of the movie
2. I think the key to the ending is whether it is Lena herself who escaped
3. Of course I don’t know how you define the difference between hard science fiction and soft science fiction, but in my opinion, this movie is a soft science fiction
Definition of open ending
According to the definition in Robert McGee's "Story-Material, Structure, Style, and Principles of Screen Play":
If the climax of a story leaves one or two unanswered questions and some unsatisfied emotions, it is called an open ending
As for Annihilation, the climax of the story should be when Lena found the remains of Sergeant Kane and ended when the lighthouse caught fire.
In this part, I think the puzzle and emotional catharsis are very complete, the only question is whether the person who escaped is Lena herself
Lena's life and death
The copy has been copying all of Lena's movements, and it is not a complete mirror copy, but there will be a correction after the obvious movement is not uniform. This dance-like confrontation expresses that the copy wants to completely copy Lena. I want the same consciousness as Lena. Therefore, we can regard the replicator as an independent individual, not as an ideological existence.
And this kind of duplication will continue to deepen, and from the outside to the inside, there are external memories and actions to the heart, so there are two possibilities
1. What Lena said is false
That is, Lena’s memory was tampered with, and Lena who escaped was a duplicate. The hug when meeting Kane at the end confirmed that both of them were duplicates.
2. What Lena said is true
Many people would question whether the clone burned by the white phosphorous bomb touched Kane’s body and inferred that it was Lena herself. I think this is actually the result of the clone copying into Lena’s heart, and it does not escape, either. Reproduced the self-destructive thoughts that existed in Lena's heart, and then as the refraction magnified, this thought burned to the entire surrounding crystal tree, the entire flashing area, and finally the flashing area disappeared.
in conclusion
In the end, the film did not indicate which is the truth, but in my opinion, if Lena were a copy, the whole story would be reduced to a third-rate science fiction conspiracy novel. Only Lena was alive and destroyed with her self-destructive thoughts. Shining area, and then recklessly accepted Kane who was not Kane, and this idea of annihilation was sublimated.
Also mentioned in Robert McGee’s "Story"
An open ending will end with a question mark of thoughts and feelings, but "opening" does not mean that the movie is left halfway through. Everything is hanging in the air... Everything described above must lead to clear and limited choices that make certain choices. A degree of closure is possible
So in my opinion
1. Lena who escaped is not a duplicate
2. The movie is not an open ending, but a closed ending
It's a story about an annihilated idea, magnified by refraction, from marriage, to Kane, to Lena, the five-man team, and even the entire flashing area.
After watching the movie, what touched my heart is whether we also have the idea of annihilation. Will this idea be refracted, amplified, and then destroyed because of some strange factors. . .
After chatting with a friend, I will add to the interpretation of the meaning of the flash in Lena’s eyes. The meaning of this flash should refer to the impact of the copy on Lena. The director uses a question of Lena’s identity to make viewers feel uncomfortable. This kind of identity confusion echoes our own confusion.
View more about Annihilation reviews
