Sphere Preaches Humanity (*Spoilers*)

Watching the 1998 Crichton adaptation Sphere, I finally understood what the adjective "preachy" meant. I have always struggled to see how a movie could be "preachy," after all, if truth is certain then why shouldn't movies be openly didactic? But, as I have come to believe, if truth is more a way than a thing, then stories are the best testimonies to truth.

And I felt that Sphere compromised its story in order to preach a theme. The story is centered on a mysterious globe found in a spacecraft that has "arrived" at the bottom of the ocean. This sphere has no qualities of its own, but is rather a reflection of whatever goes into it, in this case, people. This struck me as a poor method of characterization, rather than learning about human nature via story, I was assaulted by a story that was mostly a means to a theme. Sphere's story lacks backbone; it is hardly applicable because its primary object, the sphere, is the theme.

That said, the theme of Sphere is a relevant and apocalyptic one. As soon as the stars (Dustin Hoffman, Samuel L. Jackson, Sharon Stone) come into contact with the sphere, they begin to manifest their fears into reality. Attacks by supernaturally-sized jellyfish, squids, and sea snakes account for much of the movie's plot. Right at the end, the characters realize that, just as the sphere brought their fears to life, in more ambitious hands it could bring anything to life, a power they amazingly decide is too great for humankind. This realization of human limitations, coupled with a refusal to submit to the empire's stresses of progress, science without bounds, and optimism create a formidible message. Yet, I couldn't help but wish for a more Godfather-esque exploration of total depravity rather than seeing it actually visualized.

Questions:

1. Is there ever a point where mankind should say "No" to the usage of a scientific discovery? What would happen is someone did?

2. Is Sphere correct in assuming that, at their most basic level, humans are enslaved to primal instincts such as fear, desire, and curiosity? Haven't we left such superstitions in the past?

3. How could Sphere have created a better story with the same theme but wasn't so "preachy?" Or, if you don't agree that it was "preachy," where did this assessment go wrong?