When in doubt, a filmmaker should cast Tom Cruise and Morgan Freeman to appear for the exclusive purpose of masking deficiencies in story, plot and character. Joseph Kosinski's Oblivion spends two hours sampling every known quantity in the science-fiction genre. There's cloning, memory recall, love as sub-plot, artificial intelligence and the inevitable epiphany experienced by the protagonist, as he begins to comprehend a greater destiny. All this could fool you into thinking that the film has a decent backbone for storytelling. However, the pioneering work of Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov and Philip K. Dick becomes fresh bait for mimicry and insult.  

Earth has been abandoned, except for two people who keep close tabs on all alien activity. Creatures known as Scavs (short for scavengers) are roaming this wasteland in unknown numbers. Jack Harper (Cruise) finds himself increasingly alone, remembering a past in which skyscrapers dominated the landscape. Adding to which, he recalls the presence of a woman who played a major part in his life. Could she be a real person or merely a dream phantom?
 
Think of any science-fiction entry, film or literary, made in the last sixty years and I guarantee the technicians behind Oblivion include an on-the-nose reference. The difference between having inspiration and being derivative lies with the central conceit: how much homage can the storytellers get away with before redundancy sets in? Practically every summer blockbuster we see, year in and year out, adds to the malaise. Have we reached a point where even the average film-goer craves something seminal rather than clichéd? These are questions open to debate. Given the recent success of action movies such as Iron Man 3 and Man of Steel, it may be too early to say.
 
Overall, Oblivion steals from the very heart of science-fiction, becoming a betrayal of everything the genre stands for, including suspension of disbelief and the relevant mythologies.

(Released by Universal Pictures and rated "PG-13" by MPAA.)