Curious what people thought about this blockbuster release?
Pete
Curious what people thought about this blockbuster release?
Pete
I saw it. I enjoyed it. I don’t know if it’ll become a classic, but it was well done. Somewhat reminiscent of Interstellar.
A buddy of mine saw it. He's generally pretty critical so I tend to trust his opinion, even though it differs from mine sometimes. He really enjoyed it.
We watched it for free yesterday (had a gift card). It was OK. Not sure I would actually have paid to watch it but it was ok.
OK, I gotta go see it again, cause both me and the missus would have left right after the scene where he was hauled into the big boardroom after the big fall. I mean this was like reading James Joyce; there might be a message, but nobody could stay awake long enough to find it.....If there was a plot I never figured it out. Other than serving as an excuse for a night out together, the only redeeming value is that it now resides at the pinnacle of our "Worst Movies Watched" toppling the reigning champion "World War Z".
And someone explain to me...I can fly to the edges of the galaxy, and yet the technology to deliver a suitcase nuke a few miles to the final destination requires the fuller brush salesman approach? Anyone else see the old school IBM accordion computer printout paper on the nightstand?
Pete
The sound design is really well done. Seriously. And it's pretty cool to look at.
It's slow. I enjoyed it. It's got some serious errors in the science, but every space travel movie will have that or it will be REALLY BORING because spaceflight is really boring unless things are going wrong, in which case the goal is to drag out the problem as long as possible.
It reminded me more of the second two parts of 2001 more than Interstellar (space voyage then stuff gets weird), but I never forgave Interstellar for being science-based at first and then turning to mysticism.
I saw a good question on the Ars Technica review comment thread that makes for a good judge of sci-fi. Is there anything about this movie that couldn't take place in a different era, such as a 19th century sea voyage? In this case, no. In fact, it might even make more sense.
Keith Tanner said:The sound design is really well done. Seriously. And it's pretty cool to look at.
It's slow. I enjoyed it. It's got some serious errors in the science, but every space travel movie will have that or it will be REALLY BORING because spaceflight is really boring unless things are going wrong, in which case the goal is to drag out the problem as long as possible.
In reply to mtn :
Was Star Trek left off the list, because it would have checks all the way across the board? 
It would be interesting to put First Man on that list, I suspect it would do pretty well.
Ad Astra would have checkmarks in columns 2 (gravity, although that varies), 6 (weird vacuum) and 10 (slow motion in zero g, although I'm not sure that's all that weird). Probably 1 as well (sound in space), but I'm willing to accept that.
Missing from the list is "shows accurate depiction of physics of spaceflight", which would ding every movie I know on the list except for 2001, Apollo 13 and probably the Right Stuff. Ad Astra also fails here although it's far better than average.
Somebody tried to type "Ed Asner" and got it wrong?
Also missing Galaxy Quest and Spaceballs, but I assume those were left off because no one wanted to malign the perfect works of art that they are.
I had a nice long post typed out, and then lost it due to phone berkeleyery. Point was, I liked it. But not enough to retype what I just said.
mtn said:Also missing Galaxy Quest and Spaceballs, but I assume those were left off because no one wanted to malign the perfect works of art that they are.
They even highlighted one of the issues:
Title sounds like some drug advertised on tv. “Do you suffer from moderate to severe movieitis? Ask your doctor if Ad Astra is right for you.”
You'll need to log in to post.
