After a screening of Richard Kelly’s The Box at the Theatre of Dionysus, Socrates encounters his old friend, Johnny, amongst the people of Athens discussing the movie.

Socrates: Well, my good friend, what thought you of this film?

Johnny: I was intrigued by it, certainly.

Socrates: But did you find it to be beautiful?

Johnny: But Socrates, what do you mean by this?

Socrates: Well, if a film is to be worthwhile, it must partake in the form of beauty. Did you find that this film partook in the form of beauty?

Johnny: Well, I enjoyed myself, so I suppose it did.

Socrates: What about half-missing face of Arlington Steward? Did you find that to be beautiful?

Johnny: No, but you certainly can’t judge the beauty of a film upon beauty of the players within it.

Socrates: Certainly, or any play featuring Medusa would necessarily be ugly. But how do you determine whether or not The Box was beautiful?

Johnny: Well, it would have to be by deciphering the themes and seeing what truths are contained in them.

Socrates: So what truths do you see contained in The Box?

Johnny: Well the moral dilemma posed brings up the question of whether it is better to be just and poor or unjust and rich. If Arthur and Norma press the button, they get $1 million and a person they don’t know dies. If they don’t press the button, they must keep living a lifestyle they can’t afford. The movie inevitably suggests that Arthur and Norma will be punished for pressing the button. And if it is better to be just, then the movie is revealing the truth.

Socrates: But does the film not undermine the form of justice, by suggesting the moral decider is not a form at all, but a sentient being?

Johnny: I suppose it does, but the main theme is still the same, that unjust deeds will be punished eventually.

Socrates: But isn’t even that message compromised by the premise? The possibility that the button is a hoax is highly plausible, even to Arthur and Norma. Does that make the pushing of the button more excusable?

Johnny: But if one of them still pushed the button, it would still be for unjust reasons.

Socrates: True, but would it not be more unjust if they had no doubt that the consequences of their actions would be real?

Johnny: I suppose.

Socrates: And what about Arlington Steward? Is he not to be held responsible for facilitating these unjust acts? How does he escape moral judgement when he offers the opportunity and eventually organizes the death of other people?

Johnny: I don’t know.

Socrates: Doesn’t it seem reasonable to think, then, that the film suggests that what is just and what is unjust is not defined by a transcendent form, but rather by a flawed being with enough power to confuse the rest?

Johnny: Why yes, I suppose it does. That would explain why they referenced the Arthur C. Clarke quote “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”

Socrates: Thus, the film undermines the truth of the forms, and thus cannot be considered beautiful.

Johnny: But Socrates, philosophical quandaries aside, did you enjoy watching the film?

Socrates: Yes, I suppose I did.

Johnny: So if the forms didn’t exist, would you not consider the film worthwhile for the sake of your enjoyment.

Socrates: Yes, I suppose I would.

Johnny: Well then, Socrates, have you ever thought about the possibility that the forms actually don’t exist?

Socrates: Shhhhhhhhh!

- Thrasymachus Jones