First Man

Tony EH

The "iconic" moment is stepping out onto the moon's surface for the first time. Nobody outside small mind America gives a crap about their flag.

McDermotX

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcev7yEPeF8

Deceptively simple piece from Justin Hurwitz, but fit the scene so well.

Pero_Bueno

Tony EH wrote: »

The "iconic" moment is stepping out onto the moon's surface for the first time. Nobody outside small mind America gives a crap about their flag.

Thats the biggest moment for sure, I think even patriotic Americans would agree but the flag planting is still huge!!
Still a good film though, I would not let it spoil it for me.

pleas advice

Do you think if the Russians got there first, and 50 years later they were making a film about it, they'd leave out the planting of the flag...?

edit: Do you think if the Russians got there first, they wouldn't have planted their own flag?

pixelburp

Pero_Bueno wrote: »

eh ... no I don't think that's all they are taking from it!

It was an iconic moment, and Hollywood hates Trump and patriotism so much that they leave that ICONIC moment out of the film, they should have just left the launch itself out too.

Really sad how divided that country has become, I can't ever see it recover.

Leaving aside the confirmation that the flag IS on the film and Fox News & its ilk is doing its usual rounds of patriotism outrage ...

Considering "Hollywood" has to aim at an international audience for its monetary success these days, downplaying American jingoism has been a policy that predates the Trump presidency. Heck many big blockbusters are propped with Chinese money now, China being the country to coddle, but why let that get in the way of a "damn liberal Hollywood" kicking?

kerplun k

Damien Chazelle Is a seriously talented filmmaker. Brilliant movie. The whole space thing has been done to death. I went in expecting the usual NASA shtick, with Hidden Figures and The Martian so fresh in my mind, I went into this with a hint of trepidation, and was pleasantly surprised to find one of the best movies of the year. It’s not your usual space movie, it’s a movie that takes a look at human nature, it really emphasizes the point that these were just normal guys, doing their job and attempting to do something very complex, something that was never done before, there was no blueprint, just best effort from a bunch of people who believed they could send a man to the moon. The story is so famous, the human element gets lost on people, the astronauts knew there was a strong possibility they may not return, and this movie does an amazing job of showing this. Chazelle should take huge pride in this, and shows that the story doesn’t really matter, it’s all about the execution and how you tell it, and he tells it brilliantly.

Tony EH

pleas advice wrote: »

Do you think if the Russians got there first, and 50 years later they were making a film about it, they'd leave out the planting of the flag...?

edit: Do you think if the Russians got there first, they wouldn't have planted their own flag?

Who'd give a shit? The same apathy would apply to Russia.

The thing of import is the fact that a man stepped onto the moon, a celestial body that we've viewed from afar for the entirety of our existence. That's what matters. Not who did it.

Yuri Gargarin is celebrated as the first human in space. Nobody, outside of jingoistic politicos that want to make nationality a big deal, gives a damn where he came from.

In any case, the flag is in the film. So, there's even less of a non-story here and even less reason to give a crap. It's a nothing story from the American right to try and generate some petty point scoring.

Talk about "fake news". :rolleyes:

kerplun k

Tony EH wrote: »

Who'd give a shit? The same apathy would apply to Russia.

The thing of import is the fact that a man stepped onto the moon, a celestial body that we've viewed from afar for the entirety of our existence. That's what matters. Not who did it.

Yuri Gargarin is celebrated as the first human in space. Nobody, outside of jingoistic politicos that want to make nationality a big deal, gives a damn where he came from.

In any case, the flag is in the film. So, there's even less of a non-story here and even less reason to give a crap. It's a nothing story from the American right to try and generate some petty point scoring.

Talk about "fake news". :rolleyes:

I think once again, it’s the people who haven’t watched these films that are ones making these ridiculous complaints.

silverharp

it was a good film, I found myself yawning through parts of it so for me the pacing was off or possibly lacked a but of humour or something. Also they could have shortened other parts of the movie and had longer scenes on the moon. Was there even one scene in the movie where the camera wasn't hand held?, pretentious crap if you ask me.

p to the e

pleas advice

I was going to say that Yuri Gagarin as the first man in space is probably a more important milestone, but it was the space race, at the height of the cold war, to leave out the planting of the flag is leaving out a very iconic, symbolic part of history... for what reason?

Tony EH

kerplun k wrote: »

I think once again, it’s the people who haven’t watched these films that are ones making these ridiculous complaints.

As is the usual.

This is more a deliberately manufactured attempt to rile the more simple minded on the right though.

"Those gawd damn hullyword liberuls...they don't want to make murica great..."

johnny_ultimate

pleas advice wrote: »

for what reason?

Here’s some, beyond the obvious that a director can put in or leave out whatever they damn please

Basic pacing reasons, maybe even technical ones. The film leaves out multiple significant aspects of the moon voyage - including much of the trip itself, and pretty much the entirety of the return journey / re-entry.

The film is defiantly focused on the human aspects of the story. In that sense, the ‘one small step...’ moment is intimate and universal in the way the flag planting wouldn’t be.

Throughout the film, in one key sequence in particular but also through many of the dramatic decisions, Chazelle reflects on whether the moon landing was worth it in terms of the huge human and financial cost. He retains IMO a healthy and sensible scepticism in that regard, while expressing great respect for the people involved in the feat while still questioning the underlying motivations of the project. In that sense, a flag planting scene could feel like an odd and clunky departure from some of the underlying themes explored in the film.

And I repeat once again: the flag is in the film anyway.

quad_red

pleas advice wrote: »

I was going to say that Yuri Gagarin as the first man in space is probably a more important milestone, but it was the space race, at the height of the cold war, to leave out the planting of the flag is leaving out a very iconic, symbolic part of history... for what reason?

Because the film isn’t about the Cold War. It’s about Neil Armstrong. His experiences and his point of view. And planting the flag wasn’t what drove him.

Indeed reading a books that talked to all the moon walkers they themselves were surprised by how emotional and philosophical their perspectives were whatever their political motivations. Human politics seemed small as they looked back on earth.

silverharp

p to the e wrote: »

while that's memetastic and all, they bring this up in the movie with a nice visual of the guy drawing dots around the earth on a board representing the Russian's achievements and drawing a line onto a second board to represent going to the moon, the idea being the US needed to do something to leave the Russians clearly in the shade.

Goodshape

Good film. Really enjoyed it.

Audio and visuals were stunning. Made up for any other shortcomings to be honest.

Story itself was unexpectedly emotional. Left the cinema feeling pretty sad and reflective, which wasn't what I'd hoped for but not really a fault I suppose.

Gosling was his typical unemotive self. While that may have been true to the character of Neil Armstrong it's a bit of a pity that it's also, well, just typical Ryan Gosling. There was very little there to separate it from most of his other performances.

Conchir

Just saw this last night, I really enjoyed it.

The landing sequence was amazing. The score, the visuals, I just sat there enthralled for the whole scene.

Telecaster58

pleas advice wrote: »

I was going to say that Yuri Gagarin as the first man in space is probably a more important milestone, but it was the space race, at the height of the cold war, to leave out the planting of the flag is leaving out a very iconic, symbolic part of history... for what reason?

Probably for the same reason that Armstrong says "one step for man..." and not "one step for an American....."

Goodshape

"One small step for man. One giant f**k you to Russia!"

* Neil slams the flag in the ground, touchdown style *

"WOOOO!! U.S.A!!"

Avatar MIA

Enjoyed the film, but didn't have the usual post cinema adrenalin feeling.

But, by far, FAR the most annoying thing about this movie was the Gemini pronunciation.

Shred

I saw this last Friday and thought it was phenomenal, I'll very likely be seeing it again before it leaves the cinema.

emo72

Surprised the Aldrin Armstrong first man on the moon argument wasn't mentioned. Protocol up to that point was Aldrin should have went first, and the commander stayed on board. They changed for that mission. That would have been fascinating to see how that developed. I know Aldrin was upset over that.

silverharp

Telecaster58 wrote: »

Probably for the same reason that Armstrong says "one step for man..." and not "one step for an American....."

he didn't, he said one step for a man , the "a" was staticed out

pleas advice

One small step for a big man

Avatar MIA

emo72 wrote: »

Surprised the Aldrin Armstrong first man on the moon argument wasn't mentioned. Protocol up to that point was Aldrin should have went first, and the commander stayed on board. They changed for that mission. That would have been fascinating to see how that developed. I know Aldrin was upset over that.

Didn't know that, which kind of makes your point. And it's really the difference of being remembered for as long as there are human records or being forgotten about in a few hundred years. Who followed Columbus onshore?

But, Aldrin doesn't come out the best in the movie. He did say it was a shame Armstrong wouldn't be around for the 50th anniversary.

silverharp wrote: »

he didn't, he said one step for a man , the "a" was staticed out

So research seems to suggest. Nasa still have the [a] in the quote in parenthesis

AMKC

So seen this yesterday in the IMAX. The sound and the visuals were amazing although I was not so keen on the parts with the crazy shaking where you got it hard to make anything out and thought some outside views of what was happening would have been good too but the 2 hours 20 mins flew buy. I did feel like I was actually there. They were brave men doing things under crazy stress and taking huge risks to do it. It would have been nice ff there had of been a summery about Neil Armstrong at the end of the film do. It the film could have been dedicated to him or just said a bit about him and when he died.

It was a pity that the space race died after this as I think if it had of gone on maybe we would have a colony on the moon now and maybe even have gotten to Mars. Maybe the human race would be in a better place than it is now as well because of that.

p to the e

If we're throwing out some space trivia I always liked this one:

Michael Collins (3rd astronaut) is the only human being, alive or dead, that isn't in this photo.

Mr E

I'm going to go against the grain and say that this is 2h20m of my life that I'm never going to get back. A slow, dry movie that would have benefited from leaving 45 minutes on the cutting room floor.

Itssoeasy

emo72 wrote: »

Surprised the Aldrin Armstrong first man on the moon argument wasn't mentioned. Protocol up to that point was Aldrin should have went first, and the commander stayed on board. They changed for that mission. That would have been fascinating to see how that developed. I know Aldrin was upset over that.

Well up to that point there hadn't been an attempt at a landing. Apollo 10 was never going to land on the moon and John young and gene cernan didn't try as the LM wasnt fuelled fully. I don't see an issue as they were hardly going to have the commander of the mission go out second and not be the first man to step on the moon. The protocol was about EVAs aka spacewalks and the commander did stay inside during the Gemini programme but this was a different programme. I'm sure that buzz aldrin would have preferred to have been first but he wasn't. And I don't recall there being any animosity between the two men or I've never read there was.

Itssoeasy

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Enjoyed the film, but didn't have the usual post cinema adrenalin feeling.

But, by far, FAR the most annoying thing about this movie was the Gemini pronunciation.

I've not seen the film but if it's been pronounced the way NASA pronounced it then yes it's different to how you'd normally pronounce it but it's one thing.

Stovepipe

The decision about who would go to the surface were made long before they ever launched, because their training was so intense, that even the slightest change to who was supposed to do what, meant rewriting training sequences and everything they did was rehearsed to death. Aldrin was more media savvy and more extrovert than Armstrong, who was no shrinking violet but preferred to step back a bit. One thing that still stands is the respect that they held for each other as professionals, even when they disagreed at a personal level about many things.

CatFromHue

Mr E wrote: »

I'm going to go against the grain and say that this is 2h20m of my life that I'm never going to get back. A slow, dry movie that would have benefited from leaving 45 minutes on the cutting room floor.

Are you implying it needed to be......jazzed up :cool:

Itssoeasy

Stovepipe wrote: »

The decision about who would go to the surface were made long before they ever launched, because their training was so intense, that even the slightest change to who was supposed to do what, meant rewriting training sequences and everything they did was rehearsed to death. Aldrin was more media savvy and more extrovert than Armstrong, who was no shrinking violet but preferred to step back a bit. One thing that still stands is the respect that they held for each other as professionals, even when they disagreed at a personal level about many things.

When you say go to the surface what way do you mean it ? As in land and walk on the moon ? That was decided when the Apollo 8 prime crew was decided and that was 1967 sometime as there was a back up crew and prime crew rotation so the Apollo 11 crew was back up to Apollo 8 crew so by the rotation in place barring any changes(and the 8 and 9 crews swapped and the missions changed) they were always going to be first on the moon.

questionmark?

Mr E wrote: »

I'm going to go against the grain and say that this is 2h20m of my life that I'm never going to get back. A slow, dry movie that would have benefited from leaving 45 minutes on the cutting room floor.

I''m with you big time. Just didn't do it for me. Too long and too much shaking camera moments. The person sitting beside me in the cinema was actually snoring half way through which says it all.

tricky D

quad_red wrote: »

Indeed reading a books that talked to all the moon walkers they themselves were surprised by how emotional and philosophical their perspectives were whatever their political motivations. Human politics seemed small as they looked back on earth.

A bit OT but caught this last night which is worth 6/7 mins about how being in space changes your bigger picture and realisation that were in this together.
https://bigthink.com/videos/chris-hadfield-how-space-travel-expands-your-mind

Avatar MIA

CatFromHue wrote: »

Are you implying it needed to be......jazzed up :cool:

Could have done with more 'splosions!

Gwynplaine

I thoroughly enjoyed it. The time flew by. Only thing I didn't like was that Jason Clarke fella, can't stand him. Big square head on him. Head is dyed off him too.

El Duda

Just out of this and not impressed. It's a bit far fetched.



Seriously though, it is too long, quite boring and the attempt at an emotional connection didn't land.

Pero_Bueno

OK so finally saw the film.
Fantastic, and so sad actually, I was really

welling up at the start and when he was on the moon and dropped the necklace into the crater ...

Was more about the man himself then the mission, great acting by Ryan Gosling - barely noticed it was him.
As for the flag, yeah seems it's a big hissy fit over nothing.
I mean you see it in the background (fair enough in the distance), you also see one of his sons raising the flag outside the home, plus the many patriotic/flag images throughout the movie.
Then again I'm not American so it won't bother me as much.

Solid film 8/10.

Hector Savage

Gwynplaine wrote: »

I thoroughly enjoyed it. The time flew by. Only thing I didn't like was that Jason Clarke fella, can't stand him. Big square head on him. Head is dyed off him too.

And what were they thinking casting that bald lad for Buzz Aldrin ?
Buzz is almost 90 and has still a full head of hair on him !!

I really enjoyed it I must say, I was slightly disappointed that Neil Armstrong didn't say "..... and good luck Mr. Gorsky" after the famous first words.

Stratvs

Haven't seen the movie yet but last Friday on Nationwide they were at a furnace (iron ore) festival in Woodford Galway. During the program they interviewed briefly an elderly but sprightly gentleman who visits from the USA each summer. Turns out he was the engineer who designed the rocket motor that lifted the Apollo 11 Lunar Module off the moon. He spent a day with Armstrong and Aldrin explaining the working to them. I imagine he'd be great company in a pub of a wet evening with a roaring fire and a few pints.

Avatar MIA

Hector Savage wrote: »

And what were they thinking casting that bald lad for Buzz Aldrin ?
Buzz is almost 90 and has still a full head of hair on him !!

Was thinking the same and took me a while in the movie to figure it out that that was Buzz. I wouldn't mind, but the same actor has been known to wear a hair piece when required.

Hector Savage wrote: »

I really enjoyed it I must say, I was slightly disappointed that Neil Armstrong didn't say "..... and good luck Mr. Gorsky" after the famous first words.

I heard him say it ! Honest. :pac:

Hector Savage

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Was thinking the same and took me a while in the movie to figure it out that that was Buzz. I wouldn't mind, but the same actor has been known to wear a hair piece when required.



I heard him say it ! Honest. :pac:

It's my favourite urban myth

Hector Savage

Stratvs wrote: »

Haven't seen the movie yet but last Friday on Nationwide they were at a furnace (iron ore) festival in Woodford Galway. During the program they interviewed briefly an elderly but sprightly gentleman who visits from the USA each summer. Turns out he was the engineer who designed the rocket motor that lifted the Apollo 11 Lunar Module off the moon. He spent a day with Armstrong and Aldrin explaining the working to them. I imagine he'd be great company in a pub of a wet evening with a roaring fire and a few pints.

Absolutely, I could talk to him for hours !

Pelvis

Hector Savage wrote: »

And what were they thinking casting that bald lad for Buzz Aldrin ?

martingriff

Pelvis wrote: »

My brother I very bald but he lets the hair grow and looks like he is not bald

daywatcher

It's not doing well at the American box office since it's up against Venom and some other blockbuster movie. Plus no flag planting pisses off the flag-waving Americans.

The Right Stuff did lousy box office too when it was released back in 1983. After it was nominated for 8 Oscars it was re-released in cinemas a week before the Oscar Ceremony and did amazingly well.

Maybe the same tactic will be used with First Man.

The Right Stuff went on the be a classic highly-regarded movie. My guess is that First Man will be seen as a classic in 20-30 years.

I don't think it's a movie that will appeal to the teen/20-something audiences that are the main cinema goers. Half of them believe we never went to the Moon anyway and it was all faked by Stanley Kubrick on a Hollywood soundstage. First Man appeals to space enthusiasts and those who were alive at the time of the Moon Landing. If the Lunar Lander wasn't shot down by invading aliens, today's cinema goers ain't interested.

Avatar MIA

martingriff wrote: »

My brother I very bald but he lets the hair grow and looks like he is not bald

He kept what he had very well - recent picture. A guy totally bald on top was a bit strange.

woodchuck

Pretty much the only thing I liked about this movie was Claire Foy. She gave an amazing performance.

Ryan Gosling was just... Ryan Gosling. Very wooden acting. Maybe that's an accurate portrayal of Neil Armstrong, but it doesn't make for good entertainment. There was far too much up close shakey camera action for my liking. And ffs how hard is it to pronouce gemini...

Tony EH

woodchuck wrote: »

Pretty much the only thing I liked about this movie was Claire Foy. She gave an amazing performance.

Ryan Gosling was just... Ryan Gosling. Very wooden acting. Maybe that's an accurate portrayal of Neil Armstrong, but it doesn't make for good entertainment. There was far too much up close shakey camera action for my liking. And ffs how hard is it to pronouce gemini...

New York Times, Apr 1965: