fncceo
Diamond Member
- Nov 29, 2016
- 43,415
- 36,272
- 3,615
Saw it last night and have to say, I have notes:
Things I liked:
Something never before even mentioned in a historical space movie, the late '60s was the most turbulent time in American History. If you think the country is divided today, you can't imagine how much more divided it was back in the late '60s Civil rights, Vietnam, and the Space Race all competed for the public's attention and eventually the Space Race lost. 'First Man' gave at least a head nod to the fact that while America was reaching for The Moon, much of America was just trying to get the right to a vote and a job.
They accurately portrayed Armstrong's public persona ... a quiet, effacing man, at least compared to the rest of the astronaut corps who were much more colorful and then some.
Things I didn't like ...
Overall ...
The cinematography ... we get that it happened in the '60s... we're smart people, we don't need a grainy gritty look to the film to remind us. It was the the height of The Space Race, one of the most optimistic times in American History and the last time we celebrated technology for its own sake. Celebrate that.
The soundtrack ... practically non-existent. That there was was plodding and not suited to what was going on the screen. Really, was John Williams not available? I would have rather heard a Danny Elfman soundtrack than music that can only be described as rejects from a bargain bin World Music CD. Movie music is supposed to heighten the action or emotions on the screen, not drag it down.
Dialogue... the one thing that can save the worst movie. You can have crappy photography, terrible music, even C-list actors, but if your dialogue is pithy and evocative, you can still have a good to great movie. Silent Bergman films have more exciting dialogue than 'First Man'
Ryan's portrayal of Armstrong's personality... Look, I get that it's based on Armstrong's book of the same name, but I have my doubts that Armstrong was as introverted and nihilistic in the '60s when he was at the top of the heap of the US Space Program as he was when he wrote the book in 2005. The way we remember our youth is influenced by how we spent our adult life.
Ryan plays Armstrong as a borderline sociopath. The scene where he is forced by his angry wife, virtually dragged by her, to discuss the upcoming moon landing with his sons only minutes before he was set to leave for The Cape. It may be the way Armstrong remembers it, and his children may be too young to accurately recall it, but I have serious doubts it happened that way. NASA was, during the Space Race, the most competitive organization in the world. The top dogs in the Astronaut Corps were monitored closely by NASA doctors not just for how they interacted with each other and NASA engineers, but how they interacted with their families. Time Magazine and CBS News had intimate, invasive access to the astronaut's homes and personal lives. NASA would have never allowed anyone with such a borderline personality disorder into a golf cart, forget about in command of the Moon Landing.
Armstrong, not a man who enjoyed the public spotlight, reached the literal peak of his career in that July of 1969. Not one to seek publicity, he stayed out of the limelight despite NASA's efforts to force him into it. Buzz Aldrin ended up taking most of that slack. The 35-years or so between his public triumph and the publishing of his novel have no doubt taken their toll on Armstrong. But, I cannot believe he was as brooding and distant to his family and colleagues as he is portrayed in the movie (or in his novel).
Specifics...
Particularly annoying ... the spacecraft are filthy! These are not the Millennium Falcon (they couldn't made the Kessel Run in even 1200 parsecs). Windows streaked with ice from atmospheric condensation? The windows of the CM were covered by the escape tower until it was jettisoned, well clear of the atmosphere. These are single-use, state of the art, space ships that were the pride of NASA. NASA was positively anal about cleanliness. A loose thread, a speck of dust, could cause a short that could kill not only another three astronauts but the entire program. No one went near an operational spacecraft without a clean suit, gloves, and disposable booties. I wouldn't have been shocked if during the Gemini Eight spin scene, Armstrong didn't bang on the control panel to get it working while David Scott growled like a Wookie. Don't believe me? Look at the photos from the era. Those ships would have made Martha Stewart's house look like a coal barge.
The Moon sets looked like stage props from a '50s B-movie sci-fi. There are no rugged cliff faces or craters with sheer drops. The moon has been worn smooth after billions of years of micrometeorite bombardment and no tectonic movement. There are barely any places on the moon where the terrain angles more than 40 degrees ... particularly not in the Sea of Tranquility. Apollo 11 did land past its intended target (partly because Moon gravity isn't as consistently even as it is on Earth) and they did have to fly over an area of boulders and craters. But, the landing spot beyond was smooth -- look at the photos.
The 'flag scene' which got the most pre-premeire hype isn't a problem. In fact, the American Flag is clearly seen in a long shot of the LEM. It's the entire moon landing scene which is like watching space dry.
Literally NOTHING happens the entire time, they barely talk. Two men from Earth walked on the surface of another planet for the first time and only Aldrin even breaks a smile. In the film, they just walk around, stare at the terrain as if to say, 'What a colossal waste of time!'. I agree, the movie version of the landing was a colossal waste of time and $30s for ticket and treats.
Overall, this is one space 'program' that should have been scrapped in the planning phase.
Things I liked:
Something never before even mentioned in a historical space movie, the late '60s was the most turbulent time in American History. If you think the country is divided today, you can't imagine how much more divided it was back in the late '60s Civil rights, Vietnam, and the Space Race all competed for the public's attention and eventually the Space Race lost. 'First Man' gave at least a head nod to the fact that while America was reaching for The Moon, much of America was just trying to get the right to a vote and a job.
They accurately portrayed Armstrong's public persona ... a quiet, effacing man, at least compared to the rest of the astronaut corps who were much more colorful and then some.
Things I didn't like ...
Overall ...
The cinematography ... we get that it happened in the '60s... we're smart people, we don't need a grainy gritty look to the film to remind us. It was the the height of The Space Race, one of the most optimistic times in American History and the last time we celebrated technology for its own sake. Celebrate that.
The soundtrack ... practically non-existent. That there was was plodding and not suited to what was going on the screen. Really, was John Williams not available? I would have rather heard a Danny Elfman soundtrack than music that can only be described as rejects from a bargain bin World Music CD. Movie music is supposed to heighten the action or emotions on the screen, not drag it down.
Dialogue... the one thing that can save the worst movie. You can have crappy photography, terrible music, even C-list actors, but if your dialogue is pithy and evocative, you can still have a good to great movie. Silent Bergman films have more exciting dialogue than 'First Man'
Ryan's portrayal of Armstrong's personality... Look, I get that it's based on Armstrong's book of the same name, but I have my doubts that Armstrong was as introverted and nihilistic in the '60s when he was at the top of the heap of the US Space Program as he was when he wrote the book in 2005. The way we remember our youth is influenced by how we spent our adult life.
Ryan plays Armstrong as a borderline sociopath. The scene where he is forced by his angry wife, virtually dragged by her, to discuss the upcoming moon landing with his sons only minutes before he was set to leave for The Cape. It may be the way Armstrong remembers it, and his children may be too young to accurately recall it, but I have serious doubts it happened that way. NASA was, during the Space Race, the most competitive organization in the world. The top dogs in the Astronaut Corps were monitored closely by NASA doctors not just for how they interacted with each other and NASA engineers, but how they interacted with their families. Time Magazine and CBS News had intimate, invasive access to the astronaut's homes and personal lives. NASA would have never allowed anyone with such a borderline personality disorder into a golf cart, forget about in command of the Moon Landing.
Armstrong, not a man who enjoyed the public spotlight, reached the literal peak of his career in that July of 1969. Not one to seek publicity, he stayed out of the limelight despite NASA's efforts to force him into it. Buzz Aldrin ended up taking most of that slack. The 35-years or so between his public triumph and the publishing of his novel have no doubt taken their toll on Armstrong. But, I cannot believe he was as brooding and distant to his family and colleagues as he is portrayed in the movie (or in his novel).
Specifics...
Particularly annoying ... the spacecraft are filthy! These are not the Millennium Falcon (they couldn't made the Kessel Run in even 1200 parsecs). Windows streaked with ice from atmospheric condensation? The windows of the CM were covered by the escape tower until it was jettisoned, well clear of the atmosphere. These are single-use, state of the art, space ships that were the pride of NASA. NASA was positively anal about cleanliness. A loose thread, a speck of dust, could cause a short that could kill not only another three astronauts but the entire program. No one went near an operational spacecraft without a clean suit, gloves, and disposable booties. I wouldn't have been shocked if during the Gemini Eight spin scene, Armstrong didn't bang on the control panel to get it working while David Scott growled like a Wookie. Don't believe me? Look at the photos from the era. Those ships would have made Martha Stewart's house look like a coal barge.
The Moon sets looked like stage props from a '50s B-movie sci-fi. There are no rugged cliff faces or craters with sheer drops. The moon has been worn smooth after billions of years of micrometeorite bombardment and no tectonic movement. There are barely any places on the moon where the terrain angles more than 40 degrees ... particularly not in the Sea of Tranquility. Apollo 11 did land past its intended target (partly because Moon gravity isn't as consistently even as it is on Earth) and they did have to fly over an area of boulders and craters. But, the landing spot beyond was smooth -- look at the photos.
The 'flag scene' which got the most pre-premeire hype isn't a problem. In fact, the American Flag is clearly seen in a long shot of the LEM. It's the entire moon landing scene which is like watching space dry.
Literally NOTHING happens the entire time, they barely talk. Two men from Earth walked on the surface of another planet for the first time and only Aldrin even breaks a smile. In the film, they just walk around, stare at the terrain as if to say, 'What a colossal waste of time!'. I agree, the movie version of the landing was a colossal waste of time and $30s for ticket and treats.
Overall, this is one space 'program' that should have been scrapped in the planning phase.
Last edited: