I don't have to tell you that this is a good film. It has Tom Hanks in it. The acting, of course, was incredible. The story was heartwarming and the character of Jeff was developed with enough subtle robot-learning realism to appease sci-fi buffs like yours truly. Where it fell short was in the ending. The whole film is very 'close'. Hanks is the only human apart from a girl in a short flashback and the unseen driver of a menacing car. This closeness is maintained throughout, all the way to the end. The idea of life finding a way is a theme but it is not developed very far. The end sees Jeff and Goodyear going off into the sunset with nothing having changed. Apart from the loss of Finch. I think Craig Luck and Ivor Powell missed out on an opportunity to 'widen' the scope at the end. I thought that the relationship between Finch (Hanks) and Goodyear (Seamus) was a metaphor for stewardship - stewardship of nature. The apocalypse ...
"There is nothing better than saying nothing." - Ryokan Why do I read and write poems? Poetry, to me, is a nexus of opposites. It is where language (thought) and experience (reality) meet. The worst thing to do is explain a poem. In the same way as a joke is no longer funny if it is explained; it takes the epiphany of a realisation to elicit laughter and the epiphany of reflection to experience a poem. A poem is a mirror. If we don't see ourselves or some of our own experience in a poem, it falls flat. Bad poetry is just words. Good poetry is words woven together to create a reflective surface that resonates . Like a clear pool with hidden depths it is reflective on the surface but you can dive in - become immersed. That is the goal. Otherwise, why say anything at all?