As with all of my critique, this post contains SPOILERS for Tomorrowland. Possibly also 1984 and The Lord of the Flies.
Where to start? This movie has so much going on. Let’s start by saying that Casey (Robertson) has been recruited by mysterious forces to save the future. She’s challenged by the disenchanted, the greedy, and the inflexible, but aided by her robotic companion Athena and the disgruntled Mr. Walker (Clooney). The trio ventures into an alternate dimension, a futuristic utopia, to save our world, but when things aren't as wonderful as they seemed, they turn to violence to change their fates. That brings me to my first issue with the film: a lot of stuff explodes. Basically every time we would have a down tempo moment, where emotional revelations aren't being made or fantastic jet-pack battles aren't being had, something randomly explodes. Casey blows up crane controls, Walker blows up the wall between worlds, and Athena blows up just about everything she comes in contact with. In a high octane movie, these explosions wouldn't feel out of place. The real issue is that between explosions, everything isn't car/jet-pack chases and shooting - it’s weird theoretical physics, Sherlock levels of deduction, and mystique. The two clash, making the pacing closer to that of a typical novel - chapter end highs - than a movie. The plot sags at several points- Casey literally takes a nap, when a simple cut would've sufficed. This is generally in service of both the bizarre framing mechanic of two people (Casey and Walker) telling the overarching story, and filling the audience in on an overwhelming amount of exhibition. This may sound contrary to the mystique the film strives towards, but this is evaded because all of the exposition reveals that you actually know very little about the rules of this film’s universe. What are the rules governing interdimensional travel, robotic intelligence, and the altering of the future? There don’t appear to be any consistent ones, making the suspension of disbelief highly difficult, especially during the film’s ultimate scenes, which tend toward the absurd. This is compounded by the amount the film is trying to achieve - it’s a story of hope, redemption, coming of age, love, and the corruption of society, but not told from two or more points of view over 500 pages, but by a camera, in a little over two hours. Casey, Walker, and Athena are an awkward trio, two experts and an ingenious amateur, who do not function as a group of three on any level. it’s awkward, and makes for underwhelming off moments.
So, if the plot is unfulfilling, maybe the writers room managed to fit a meaningful message into the film. I certainly believe they tried, but I don’t believe they succeeded. Firstly, I had begun trying to decipher the film’s motives by about an hour in, and half an hour later was still undecided. There was an obvious frustration with society’s fatalism and apathy, an admiration of idealism, and a thought that optimism and freedom will ultimately prevail. This is contrasted, however, by an awkward elitism and determinism that muddies the message from something of a “Disney does Interstellar” to more of a “Disney likes Engineers.” Apathy is the villain of Tomorrowland, and that’s an interesting, high level concept that is handled fairly impressively. It infects our heroes and enemies alike, and mirrors our reality nicely. The fact that it had to be artificiated is awkward- one would imagine that modern society does not need a giant brainwashing machine to resign itself to inevitable destruction. The destruction of Tomorrowland is credited to the special people that populate it giving up - much like Irrational Rapture, Tomorrowland is in ruins when our hero arrives - but it could have just as easily collapsed under the weight of a world that didn't believe in it. It is times like these that I miss the fairy plot device. Those special people are another issue with Tomorrowland’s theme. Instead of being a land of idealism and broad appeal, or even the happiest place on Earth, this Tomorrowland is an exclusive club, a secret dimension that only the best and brightest are invited to. This is maintained throughout the movie, and never challenged. Of course the special people get privileges. It’s only fair, right? I imagine the hands on this script were those that had been told from a young age they were destined for greatness, naturally intelligent, creative, talented. They work at Disney, after all. There isn't a hope of integrating the world with Tomorrowland, of making the future a reality - only of making sure that all the special people get access, instead of the more select few that were already there. This couples with determinism. The first evidence of determinism is the idea that recruits are children - the most frequent age appears to be late high school / early college, though a few older and few much younger people are invited. This, along with the utter lack of redemption for the films hastily introduced and disposed of villains, make for a very rigid view of people’s personalities. The characters are flat, with our perception of Walker changing, but his internal feelings are never truly challenged. (There might be an argument that Athena’s last acts are signs of development, but I believe they are consistent with her prior actions.) This is coupled with the dealings of the future - although variance is permitted, the future, especially short term, has almost no degree of change. This is broken in three key moments, one of which allows for a very cliche sacrifice to occur. The determinism debases the fundamental message of “be hopeful, and work hard, and the future is open to you” to something akin to “the smart will prevail, and save the masses out of the kindness of their hearts.” The underlying theme of the movie, then, is to have faith in the future - someone smarter than you has already seen it, and they can make it real. This implies that one must try their hardest, fulfill their part, and avoid fatalism and apathy. The line specifically that “the future of destruction asks nothing of us today” reveals that we should be helping, although the film never explains exactly how. The opening image of the disassembly of the NASA platform gives us some indication that we will need to pursue science more focusedly in order to save ourselves, while conserving our resources and maintaining peace are also shown as desirable traits from the masses. Society’s “race” toward the apocalypse, the modern fascination with desolation, is scorned, revealing a failure to appreciate that the apocalypse is a highly convenient setting to deal with extremely heightened personal drama. The Walking Dead, Borderlands, Y: The Last Man all use intense and insane post-apocalyptic settings to amplify already relevant themes of trust, humor, and sexism. Ultimately, I believe Tomorrowland fails to deliver its theme of optimism in favor of one of elitism, though being heavy handed enough to display both openly.
Where to start? This movie has so much going on. Let’s start by saying that Casey (Robertson) has been recruited by mysterious forces to save the future. She’s challenged by the disenchanted, the greedy, and the inflexible, but aided by her robotic companion Athena and the disgruntled Mr. Walker (Clooney). The trio ventures into an alternate dimension, a futuristic utopia, to save our world, but when things aren't as wonderful as they seemed, they turn to violence to change their fates. That brings me to my first issue with the film: a lot of stuff explodes. Basically every time we would have a down tempo moment, where emotional revelations aren't being made or fantastic jet-pack battles aren't being had, something randomly explodes. Casey blows up crane controls, Walker blows up the wall between worlds, and Athena blows up just about everything she comes in contact with. In a high octane movie, these explosions wouldn't feel out of place. The real issue is that between explosions, everything isn't car/jet-pack chases and shooting - it’s weird theoretical physics, Sherlock levels of deduction, and mystique. The two clash, making the pacing closer to that of a typical novel - chapter end highs - than a movie. The plot sags at several points- Casey literally takes a nap, when a simple cut would've sufficed. This is generally in service of both the bizarre framing mechanic of two people (Casey and Walker) telling the overarching story, and filling the audience in on an overwhelming amount of exhibition. This may sound contrary to the mystique the film strives towards, but this is evaded because all of the exposition reveals that you actually know very little about the rules of this film’s universe. What are the rules governing interdimensional travel, robotic intelligence, and the altering of the future? There don’t appear to be any consistent ones, making the suspension of disbelief highly difficult, especially during the film’s ultimate scenes, which tend toward the absurd. This is compounded by the amount the film is trying to achieve - it’s a story of hope, redemption, coming of age, love, and the corruption of society, but not told from two or more points of view over 500 pages, but by a camera, in a little over two hours. Casey, Walker, and Athena are an awkward trio, two experts and an ingenious amateur, who do not function as a group of three on any level. it’s awkward, and makes for underwhelming off moments.
So, if the plot is unfulfilling, maybe the writers room managed to fit a meaningful message into the film. I certainly believe they tried, but I don’t believe they succeeded. Firstly, I had begun trying to decipher the film’s motives by about an hour in, and half an hour later was still undecided. There was an obvious frustration with society’s fatalism and apathy, an admiration of idealism, and a thought that optimism and freedom will ultimately prevail. This is contrasted, however, by an awkward elitism and determinism that muddies the message from something of a “Disney does Interstellar” to more of a “Disney likes Engineers.” Apathy is the villain of Tomorrowland, and that’s an interesting, high level concept that is handled fairly impressively. It infects our heroes and enemies alike, and mirrors our reality nicely. The fact that it had to be artificiated is awkward- one would imagine that modern society does not need a giant brainwashing machine to resign itself to inevitable destruction. The destruction of Tomorrowland is credited to the special people that populate it giving up - much like Irrational Rapture, Tomorrowland is in ruins when our hero arrives - but it could have just as easily collapsed under the weight of a world that didn't believe in it. It is times like these that I miss the fairy plot device. Those special people are another issue with Tomorrowland’s theme. Instead of being a land of idealism and broad appeal, or even the happiest place on Earth, this Tomorrowland is an exclusive club, a secret dimension that only the best and brightest are invited to. This is maintained throughout the movie, and never challenged. Of course the special people get privileges. It’s only fair, right? I imagine the hands on this script were those that had been told from a young age they were destined for greatness, naturally intelligent, creative, talented. They work at Disney, after all. There isn't a hope of integrating the world with Tomorrowland, of making the future a reality - only of making sure that all the special people get access, instead of the more select few that were already there. This couples with determinism. The first evidence of determinism is the idea that recruits are children - the most frequent age appears to be late high school / early college, though a few older and few much younger people are invited. This, along with the utter lack of redemption for the films hastily introduced and disposed of villains, make for a very rigid view of people’s personalities. The characters are flat, with our perception of Walker changing, but his internal feelings are never truly challenged. (There might be an argument that Athena’s last acts are signs of development, but I believe they are consistent with her prior actions.) This is coupled with the dealings of the future - although variance is permitted, the future, especially short term, has almost no degree of change. This is broken in three key moments, one of which allows for a very cliche sacrifice to occur. The determinism debases the fundamental message of “be hopeful, and work hard, and the future is open to you” to something akin to “the smart will prevail, and save the masses out of the kindness of their hearts.” The underlying theme of the movie, then, is to have faith in the future - someone smarter than you has already seen it, and they can make it real. This implies that one must try their hardest, fulfill their part, and avoid fatalism and apathy. The line specifically that “the future of destruction asks nothing of us today” reveals that we should be helping, although the film never explains exactly how. The opening image of the disassembly of the NASA platform gives us some indication that we will need to pursue science more focusedly in order to save ourselves, while conserving our resources and maintaining peace are also shown as desirable traits from the masses. Society’s “race” toward the apocalypse, the modern fascination with desolation, is scorned, revealing a failure to appreciate that the apocalypse is a highly convenient setting to deal with extremely heightened personal drama. The Walking Dead, Borderlands, Y: The Last Man all use intense and insane post-apocalyptic settings to amplify already relevant themes of trust, humor, and sexism. Ultimately, I believe Tomorrowland fails to deliver its theme of optimism in favor of one of elitism, though being heavy handed enough to display both openly.
The spectacle of Tomorrowland is something to behold. Fast cuts between dimensions, spectacular modes of transportation, rocket ships, and cosmic energy are depicted in stunning quality. Explosions and robots alike feel real, and the vision of the future offered, though depressing, is realized gorgeously. I wish the movie had spent more time against the backdrop of an altered skyline, because these shots were gorgeous, and easily the best reason to go and see Tomorrowland. Especially notable was anything falling from the sky - the film understands inertia very well, and while not especially realistic, jet-pack sequences are full of tense fun. The more disturbing imagery here is centered around delivering the villain’s just desserts that I do not believe he deserved, and that the film does very little to justify, but it never becomes gorey. There is even a rocket launched from the Eiffel Tower, and it’s spectacular (if generally irrelevant to the plot, since apparently it’s fairly simple for the man in charge, whomever that is, to open portals between dimensions). Things glow blue, red, and white, are shaped wholly impractically, and most rooms are at least 90% dead space. The future is captivating, while the present is also gorgeously shot. Dirt is kicked up “behind” us, Casey’s assumptions are not nearly as mystifying as most of Sherlock’s (though still utterly remarkable), and the flow from scene to scene, if a little slow, feels highly natural.
So, did I like Tomorrowland? I thoroughly enjoyed watching it, and it’s message, while muddled, was satisfying to unravel and understand. I’d recommend it as a bad movie worth watching if you want to see a mediocre exploration of Interstellar’s optimist themes, or if you want to see thoroughly inferior Tron style images of the future. (The opening Disney logo is quite spectacular, though).
So, did I like Tomorrowland? I thoroughly enjoyed watching it, and it’s message, while muddled, was satisfying to unravel and understand. I’d recommend it as a bad movie worth watching if you want to see a mediocre exploration of Interstellar’s optimist themes, or if you want to see thoroughly inferior Tron style images of the future. (The opening Disney logo is quite spectacular, though).
Thanks for reading! Did you / do you plan on seeing Tomorrowland? What did you think? Do you agree that it’s elitist, but optimistic? Or is it actually a parody of itself, the ultimate apocalypse movie (think 2012)? Maybe it’s something else entirely, a childish jaunt? Share below!
