Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

So: what is so philosophically interesting about this movie? This: the brilliant but brittle scientist is turned mad by the realization that the human race is alone in the cosmos. Or at least in this galaxy. One key premise is that the base was established on Neptune in the first place because only there could data about the rest of the galaxy be gathered free of solar interference or something. Usual sci-fi gobbledegok but... the point is that the base was established on the fringe of our solar system with the confidence that if there is other intelligent life to be detected, it could be detected from there. Lots of data was gathered, no sign of alien life appeared. The negative result drove Tommy Lee Jones' character over the deep end and sets up the situation with which, as I said in Part I of this discussion, the plot of the movie begins. Science fiction is full of aliens. It nearly never gives serious consideration to the possibility that there aren't any. That we ...

Ad Astra is a recent science fiction movie starring Brad Pitt. I will describe the plot today and, in a later post, I will say what it is about the movie that strikes me as philosophically intriguing. In "high concept" form, the movie is: Heart of Darkness as a space opera. In "the near future," space travel within at least the inner half of the solar system is routine.  A madman (played when he does eventually appear, late in the movie, by Tommy Lee Jones) working from a base on Neptune, is apparently causing mysterious electromagnetic power surges directed toward the inner planets. The madman was once a hero but somehow went rogue in deepest space.  Somebody must be sent to confront him, find out the truth, and stop him. That burden falls on Brad Pitt. Pitt undertakes the arduous journey from earth to Neptune, talks to the rogue genius, and tries to bring him home and by implication, to his senses But Jones denies that the earth is his home. I won...