Posted on 10/13/2018 6:49:16 PM PDT by Future Snake Eater
So I took the family to see "First Man" today. The movie took a lot of heat from virtue-signaling types, but I suspected the criticisms were unfounded. I was nearly totally correct. Like, 98%.
First of all, I'm not super well-read on the space program as compared to some uber-nerds who I'm sure populate this forum who could run rings around me in general knowledge regarding this era of our history. I have, however, been interested in the space program for a long time and even got to meet Alan Shepard at a book signing at the Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, AL, once. I've seen all the key films and documentaries, and I (read?) the audio book "Rocket Men" which was quite exhaustive in its content and research. Now that my bona fides (or lack thereof) are established...
Ryan Gosling is great. When I saw he was cast as Neil Armstrong in the first trailer for this film, I thought that was some fantastic casting. He's nearly always quiet, stoic, and thoughtful in his roles which fits everything I've read about Armstrong. I don't know anything about the real Janet Armstrong, but Claire Foy did a fine job playing his supportive-but-perpetually-worried wife. While he's not in many scenes, Corey Stoll (Marvel fans will recognize him as the bad guy in the first "Ant-Man") plays Buzz Aldrin as a bit of a loudmouth who rubs people around him the wrong way, which, again, based on what I've read, seems to fit well. The other most recurring role outside the Armstrong clan is their friend, neighbor, and fellow astronaut Ed White played by Jason Clarke who is very good in that role, too, if a bit generic in his "overall good guy" portrayal, but I'm sure the real Ed White was a good dude.
The film is heavily reliant on sound. That's not to say it doesn't look fantastic, because it does. There's an added film grain look that almost makes it look like a new-ish 1960s film. But the sound punishes you. That doesn't mean it's overly loud, it just uses sound a lot to put us right there. As Armstrong streaks through the stratosphere in his X-15 in the opening scene of the film, the shaking and rattling of the aircraft combined with Armstrong's rapid breathing elevates the heart rate. When the Gemini 8 rocket lifts off and we're strapped into the tight capsule with Armstrong and Scott, the harsh creaking and slamming and whining of their spacecraft as it roars off the launchpad puts us in a spot we've never really been in any other film. These guys are just there for the ride until they hit orbit and it feels like a very, very dangerous trip. The close-ups of the rivets holding the panels together were especially effective shots communicating to us just how rickety these things are given the stresses they're supposed to endure.
The tone of the film, in juxtaposition to the intense sound and beautiful shots, is quiet, sad, almost funereal. Armstrong's daughter Karen died of cancer at a very young age. Numerous friends of his die though the course of the space program. Each loss impacts the stoic Armstrong by further driving him to stoicism. My wife commented that he would be a very difficult man to live with, and, indeed, Neil and Janet Armstrong divorced in 1994 after 38 years of marriage. You can see the seeds of that sad end in this film.
Now on to the political side of it all.
There is something of a montage scene after the Apollo 1 fire. Some hippies outside the Cape Canaveral facility doing a bongo circle poetry slam with this black guy lamenting in prose how he don't got nuffin but "whitey is on the moon." There are contemporary interviews of young Baby Boomers whining that space program money could be spent to solve all of our society's ills instead of being wasted on exploration. My favorite is the bongo circle types brandishing signs with pictures/names of the dead astronauts, asking if the sacrifice is worth it--like people like that give a damn about dead people and definitely aren't using their bodies to try to advance their political ideals. Perish the thought. Post-Apollo 11, there is montage footage of the celebrations around the country (I'm a little spotty on this scene since that's when I had to take my son to the bathroom). As I walked out of the theater, I heard a French woman proclaiming how she knew the Americans would do it because they don't fail. Overall, I though the movie showed both sides fairly dispassionately, but the latter set of scenes was clearly more exciting b/c real people really cared about the achievement. During the poetry slam scene, all I could think was "Who here knows who this guy is? Who here knows who Neil Armstrong is?" Case closed as far as I'm concerned.
Finally, the moon landing itself. Great scene, meticulously accurate. When they finally open up the LEM, the camera looks down through the hatch and the effect of that shot makes the moon feel like a completely alien place these guys are about to set foot on. It's a feeling I've never felt before in any other film/show/documentary. There is something of a montage scene as Armstrong and Aldrin do their thing, but the overall scene is played from a very personal perspective with respect to Armstrong. Could the filmmakers have worked them putting up the flag in a quick cut as part of the montage? Yes, I think so. Would it have detracted from the film? No, I don't think so. Do I think the film is an insult to patriotic Americans and ruined as a result? Hell no.
Overall, I really enjoyed it. It went the opposite direction of the NASA press release side a la "The Right Stuff." This was far more personal and felt realistic. These weren't invincible Supermen doing the impossible with a smile and a wink. These were human beings fully committed to doing an extremely dangerous job, and they paid a personal price for it.
Bottom Line: ignore the virtue-signalers. This is a great film and well worth your time.
this production is not worthy of my time nor money.
Original line ups
Apollo 7 Prime Shirra, Eisle, Cunningham
Backup Stafford, Young, Cernan
Apollo 8 Prime McDivitt, Scott, Schweikart
Backup Conrad, Gordon, Bean
Apollo 9 Prime Borman, Collins, Anders
Backup Armstrong, Lovell, Aldrin
Apollo 10 Prime Stafford, Young, Cernan
Backup Cooper, Eisle, Mitchell
When the LM was not available till 1969, McDivitt opted to stay with the shakedown mission. Slayton offered the moon orbit mission to Borman who jumped on it like a tiger. this caused a swap out of both the Prime & Backup crews. Collins needed neck surgery, so he was replaced by Lovell. He came back healthy in time to be placed on the 11 mission. Irregardless, Conrad had a shot at the 11 mission if the hardware had been available on time, but Stafford and Cernan would have been the 1st guys on the moon if that happened. Fate has a way of intervening, and I haven’t met an astronaut yet from the 1st 3 groups that didn’t think that history picked the right man for the job.
Actual content of the film doesn’t matter at this point. Gosling said what he said. Case closed.
They didn’t delete it. It’s there. They just don’t have an explicit “planting the flag” scene.
Hmmm
FR, interesting as always.
As if LBJ's TRILLIONS down the toilet wasn't enough
Very cool. And I hope NASA can regain its glory.
BTW, where is that 2001 Space Odyssey space wheel you all promised us?
It sure killed all the adventure we were hoping for.
When you make a movie so you don’t want to offend the Chinese market because they can’t stand our flag, covering it up for the American audience ain’t doing the picture any good in the state, don’t you think? But hell, take a knee for a flag, dont show it on the moon, hell call Clint Eastwood for a directors cut of the marines not raising it on Mt Suribachi. It’s either part of history, or revisionist history, and that what this is. Done with American hating Hollywood trying to be PC in retelling history as they think it should have happened. That crap started with Oliver Stone and JFK.
Enjoyed this review. Thank you!
In 6th Grade our class had a “formal” debate over whether to continue the space program. This was in 1969 or so. Most of the class chose the side of “Yes, let’s continue.” Two people plus myself took the other side, saying, “No. We should hang it up.”
My intellectual and emotional investment in space exploration is comparatively dull, but I would not go out of my way to argue against it. At the time I just figured there is too much we do not yet know about the planet we live on. There is still a lot we do not know about it.
In later years I have had flashes of appreciation for space exploration, as various probes have reached significant benchmarks. Like opera, there is a learning curve that comes with appreciation of some things. I still do not appreciate man’s landing on the moon as I should. Maybe this movie will have a part in changing that.
Excellent review, makes me want to go see it on the big screen.
"...“I wanted the primary focus in that scene to be on Neil’s solitary moments on the moon. …This film is about one of the most extraordinary accomplishments not only in American history, but in human history,” Chazelle said..."
If anyone is arguing that they didn't deliberately omit it, they are wrong, because they did. They absolutely did, and they are proud of it.
There are a lot of people who may be fully into the concept that The Soviet Union, Red China, Nazi Germany, Uganda, India, Japan, Bangladesh, and the Ottoman Empire had as much to do with landing a man on the moon for the first time (Which is exactly what the POS director wants to convey) but I, and many others like you believe this was an effort that was American.
Americans paid billions of our hard earned dollars to make it happen. We had men die in the process because it was dangerous, and some (including Armstrong) who nearly died. It happened on American soil. Every single one of those men were American.
I do not take personal umbrage at those who accept the globalist viewpoint and philosophy of the director, but I do take issue with calling those of us who don't buy into that globalist-one-world viewpoint sold by the director of the movie and the main actor in it, virtue-signalers.
I do take issue with that attitude towards fellow conservatives who take issue with that deliberate omission.
From the advertising, it seems like they made it in to an annoying melodrama. Wife whining about husband’s job etc...
Saw it tonight, I thought it was good. I didn’t want to go because of the flag, but my curiosity got the best of me since I’m a space nerd to begin with. The X- 15 opening was awesome. All that shaking and the moans and groans of the spacecraft. The moon landing was cool. They also didn’t have Nixon talking to them from the Oval Office. I guess that would have been a bridge to far for the lefty’s.
I made the following analogy on another thread: Imagine for a moment they made a movie about the Battle of Iwo Jima without showing the raising of the Flag on Mount Suribachi and the members of the movie company say something about they left it out as they don’t see it as an American victory, but a victory for all freedom loving people? Would you feel the same? Would my objection to such a deliberate omission be considered virtue-signaling?
Sad move. Mr. Armstrong was a Naval pilot, brilliant engineer and American hero. The film insults him, the American space program and the American people who funded the mission to the moon.
Goes to show that the 200,000 people involved in the American space program in Downey from 1950 to 2005 were more brilliant than anyone in Hollywood.
I saw it yesterday and agree - thought it was very well made and worth seeing.
Flag was there in one shot of the LEM while Armstrong was walking about thinking of the contrast with his family. Absence of the flag ceremony wasn’t a detraction.
I enjoyed it and would recommend seeing it.
Agreed. The reviewer seems to forget two things:
1. The moon is an ALIEN place re the camera “makes the moon seem like a completely alien place”.
And more importantly, THE AMERICAN FLAG WENT TO THE MOON ALONG WITH THE ASTRONAUTS. There was a purpose for them placing on the surface for all to see.
That is what was left out of the film and shouldn’t have.
This was an American space production so why not do a little gentle “show the flag” scene? After all, the last major “show the flag” film/photos of note, besides at the site of the Twin Towers, was something my wounded father-in-law saw in person, the raising of the American flag at Mt. Surabachi, Iwo Jima, in 1945. It cost a lot of blood to do that but Americans paid that the price for its viewing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.