***FIRST MAN (Ryan Gosling, dir.Damien Chazelle)

58,336 Views | 533 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by BoydCrowder13
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Belton Ag said:

You alluded to the middle-aged dudes, but the primary audience for a NASA related movie about Neil Armstrong or the Apollo 11 mission is going to be mostly 30-75 year old American white men. I don't think Ryan Gosling and Chazelle rate really high for that audience to be honest, and the flag controversy didn't exactly help, even if it's not what sunk the movie.

From my understanding the movie was originally going to be directed by Clint Eastwood, I'm willing to bet he would have had demographic turn out.


Right. And again, I'm admitting that the base concept might have been flawed. I personally thought Chazelle did a fantastic job, and likely gave us something more unique than Eastwood ever would have, but Universal probably should have hired Eastwood regardless and maybe gone with another lead (though I don't know if that really mattered that much), and those opening weekend numbers likely would have seen a bump.

But the story would have been roughly the same.

Chazelle didn't approach Universal with this concept. Universal approached him. And only when Chazelle found out that they *didn't* want to make a typical biopic, and were *already* developing it as roughly the movie we eventually got, did Chazelle commit. They saw eye-to-eye and he executed their shared vision.

Which plays into my overall point - that this basic concept might have been doomed from the get-go. Yes, Eastwood 's iteration might have had a couple more flag-waving moments, and his name gotten a few more butts in the seats, but he would have been under "mandate" to adhere to basically the same story, structure, percentage of family life scenes, etc. In other words, not the movie "middle-aged dudes" or "30-75 year old American white men" or whatever you want to call them apparently wanted.

But again... that movie could never have been made by a studio in the first place. Not in this day and age. Studios no longer commit budgets like this to movies that don't span across more quadrants or demographics. Hence the female lead. Hence the family stuff. And all I'm saying is that if that stuff HAD to be in there for this movie to get made, all things considered, I don't see how THIS version could have been executed much better. The Neil-Armstrong-with-no-family version simply doesn't get made today. So the only other option was a mini-series, where everyone gets what they want, but Universal chose not to go down that road for whatever reasons. Maybe they should have.
Belton Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

But again... that movie could never have been made by a studio in the first place. Not in this day and age. Studios no longer commit budgets like this to movies that don't span across more quadrants or demographics. Hence the female lead. Hence the family stuff. And all I'm saying is that if that stuff HAD to be in there for this movie to get made, all things considered, I don't see how THIS version could have been executed much better. The Neil-Armstrong-with-no-family version simply doesn't get made today. So the only other option was a mini-series, where everyone gets what they want, but Universal chose not to go down that road for whatever reasons. Maybe they should have.
It's ironic for this movie to perform poorly using the studio formula for what it thinks will sell.

But I do agree that this movie was executed extremely well given what they had to work with. I actually liked the movie, there were some boring moments to be sure, but the payoff for sticking through those moments was good enough to make it worth it to me.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Agreed. I'm not saying I support the studios' insistence on every movie having to be everything for everyone, I'm just saying that's the reality.
double aught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I thought the moon landing was great. Alarm after alarm being disregarded. Trying to find a safe place to put down. Low fuel. So intense and exciting. I loved that over the shoulder view.
TCTTS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yeah, that was honestly one of the most thrilling sequences I've seen in years, from the landing to the moon walk, to the way it expanded to IMAX, I thought it was breathtaking, along with an incredible technical achievement (the sound cutting out when the airlock opened, how it all felt utterly real and tangible, the absence of cameras in the visor reflections, etc).
HerschelwoodHardhead
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I saw the movie and enjoyed it. Understand the criticisms but personally I was hooked.

My only complaint was that I saw it in IMAX which turned out to be unnecessary. Most of the film was shot in 16mm, no need to spend extra for the few scenes shot on IMAX film. That and the shaky "faux-documentary" style camera movements can really disorient when watching on an IMAX screen.
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
16mm? Really?
HerschelwoodHardhead
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yea, I heard an interview with Chazelle and he said he shot in that size film because he was trying to mimick the 60s documentary look. It worked, but too well in my opinion. I'm not a fan of the shaky camera and low-res, especially on IMAX.
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It had a vintage look to it I thought, but just assumed it was a digital effect.
Jim01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just saw it and really really enjoyed it.

It is definitely slow, but I found it in character with the style of the movie and Armstrong himself.

The moon sequence was amazing. Truly stunning.

It was very emotional too, I found. The final conversation with his sons was very emotional and well done. And Jesus, the daughter. Even though they tipped it pretty heavily that it was coming, the bracelet killed me. And that shot of him standing at the craters edge, like a mourning father looking down into a grave. Holy hell that was beautiful.

Overall I give it a big thumbs up. Chazelle is just at master level.

That's two big contenders I've seen this week and I would put First Man > A Star Is Born in my book.
double aught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Jim01 said:


It was very emotional too, I found. The final conversation with his sons was very emotional and well done.
I don't know. That scene just left me wanting. He was just so cold and matter of fact with his sons, like he was at a press conference. I wanted a little emotion from him and didn't really get why he was so stoic.
coach_pope
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Got around to watching it yesterday. Enjoyed getting to learn about not only the man but the whole space race at the time not having much knowledge of it before hand. Enjoyed seeing his personality and was expecting him to be portrayed as most historical characters are in films, so it was nice to have a realistic portrayal of the man boring or not.
TexAgs91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Since it was titled "First Man", I assumed it was based on the book. I've been reading the book since watching the movie. There is so much they left out and I thought the movie made him look like he was just going through the motions. He was actually one of, if not the most qualified of the New Nine for what they were getting into.

To put into perspective how much they left out, let me first say the book also included stuff from his childhood, high school years, college, his time served as a Navy fighter pilot in the Korean War which was not in the movie. That being said, I'm at the part in the book where he had just returned from the Gemini/Agena mission. I'm only a quarter of the way through the book.
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I mean, the movie was 2 hours and 20 minutes long as is.
TexAgs91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
schmendeler said:

I mean, the movie was 2 hours and 20 minutes long as is.
Well if you're going to prioritize what you cover... wouldn't you give a little more time to Apollo 11? It seemed like an afterthought. The launch sequence was great. Then after pointing out Neil's strange taste in music they were quickly at the moon. The descent was decent. Then he gets out, tosses his daughter's bracelet into a crater and then bam! He's on earth in quarantine.

This should be the type of movie that the audience wouldn't mind 3 hrs (like The Right Stuff), providing you used the 3 hrs wisely.
agracer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
HerschelwoodHardhead said:

I saw the movie and enjoyed it. Understand the criticisms but personally I was hooked.

My only complaint was that I saw it in IMAX which turned out to be unnecessary. Most of the film was shot in 16mm, no need to spend extra for the few scenes shot on IMAX film. That and the shaky "faux-documentary" style camera movements can really disorient when watching on an IMAX screen.
Saw it this weekend and that part drove me nuts. I freaking hate it and have no clue why Hollywood thinks a shaking camera on literally EVERY SCENE in the movie is necessary or even what viewers want.

It's understandable in the launch sequences (although way over done in this case IMO) but not when Armstrong is putting his daughter to bed..or talking to his wife...or his wife is walking across the street to talk with Chaffee's wife when she sees her standing in the driveway staring into her open car trunk...it's was very distracting.

Like the movie for the most part. A little slow at times, but loved most of the space stuff. Liked how the Gemini launch was all shown from the inside instead of the rocket launch shots we've all seen dozens of times.

Didn't realize Armstrong was such an introvert of sorts. Didn't know about the Gemini capsule losing control in space (or forgot about it), knew about the LEM simulator crash (video's on YouTube of that one).

Honestly, don't understand the flag controversy. It was shown pretty clear in several shots on the moon so I'm at a loss to understand what the big deal was.
agracer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTmAg said:

schmendeler said:

I don't get the nagging wife complaint. she was amazingly supportive the entire time. the only time she got on his ass was sorely needed, imo. he was going to potentially go off and die and he was going to do so without saying anything to his two young boys? she deserves admiration for that.
It was more than that, she seemed pissed that he wasn't outwardly emotional about Karen dying, she called the NASA brass a bunch of boys, crap like that.

Perhaps all of that is accurate, but that's not my point. I don't give a rats ass about her half of the story because it is boring. I don't care about "shattering the wife waiting at home" stereotype. I wish they cut all that crap out and spend more time on Neil Armstrong and what made his life so compelling. Not what makes him like the rest of us.
so his wife was not a part of his life..at all....?
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
agracer said:

aTmAg said:

schmendeler said:

I don't get the nagging wife complaint. she was amazingly supportive the entire time. the only time she got on his ass was sorely needed, imo. he was going to potentially go off and die and he was going to do so without saying anything to his two young boys? she deserves admiration for that.
It was more than that, she seemed pissed that he wasn't outwardly emotional about Karen dying, she called the NASA brass a bunch of boys, crap like that.

Perhaps all of that is accurate, but that's not my point. I don't give a rats ass about her half of the story because it is boring. I don't care about "shattering the wife waiting at home" stereotype. I wish they cut all that crap out and spend more time on Neil Armstrong and what made his life so compelling. Not what makes him like the rest of us.
so his wife was not a part of his life..at all....?
His wife was a part of his life, as were his meals, his bowel movements, his haircuts, etc. But all that stuff is boring as hell. So why not concentrate on the part of his life that is interesting? It's not like there is a lack of them.

Hell, Armstrong's house burned down in 1964 and that almost killed them. He first passed ten month old Mark to Ed White through a window and then ran through the house to get six year old Rick. The ridiculous thing is that they actually filmed this for the movie, but cut it to make room for scenes of silence and boredom instead.

It's like they went out of their way to try to make the most exciting life in history as boring as possible. No wonder it bombed at the box office.
TexAgs91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTmAg said:


It's like they went out of their way to try to make the most exciting life in history as boring as possible. No wonder it bombed at the box office.
Agreed. There was plenty to put into the movie unless your goal is to show him as a recluse. When talking to ground control he said even less.

This is from the book that the movie is titled after during the approach to Gemini:
Quote:

Armstrong: Man it flies easy! I'd Love to let you do it but...

Scott: On, no!

Armstrong: I think I better get my practice while I can.

Scott: Man, I'll have my chance!

Armstrong: Get yours later, Okay?

Scott: Yes. I wouldn't even take it if you gave it to me. It's up to you to stick with it. The more you get now, the
better you're going to be when...

Armstrong: Man, this is easy!

Scott: Is it really?

Armstrong: This station keeping, there's nothing to it.

Docking....
Quote:

Armstrong: Flight, we are docked! Yes, it's really a smoothie.

Celebration broke loose in Mission Control for a few mad seconds.

CapCom: Roger. Hey, congratulations! This is real good.

Scott: You couldn't have the thrill down there that we have up here!

CapCom: Ha! Ha! Ha!

Armstrong: Okay. Just for your information, the Agena was very stable and at the present time we are having no noticeable oscillations at all.


What do we get in the theater? Silence.
agracer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTmAg said:

agracer said:

aTmAg said:

schmendeler said:

I don't get the nagging wife complaint. she was amazingly supportive the entire time. the only time she got on his ass was sorely needed, imo. he was going to potentially go off and die and he was going to do so without saying anything to his two young boys? she deserves admiration for that.
It was more than that, she seemed pissed that he wasn't outwardly emotional about Karen dying, she called the NASA brass a bunch of boys, crap like that.

Perhaps all of that is accurate, but that's not my point. I don't give a rats ass about her half of the story because it is boring. I don't care about "shattering the wife waiting at home" stereotype. I wish they cut all that crap out and spend more time on Neil Armstrong and what made his life so compelling. Not what makes him like the rest of us.
so his wife was not a part of his life..at all....?
His wife was a part of his life, as were his meals, his bowel movements, his haircuts, etc. But all that stuff is boring as hell. So why not concentrate on the part of his life that is interesting? It's not like there is a lack of them.

Hell, Armstrong's house burned down in 1964 and that almost killed them. He first passed ten month old Mark to Ed White through a window and then ran through the house to get six year old Rick. The ridiculous thing is that they actually filmed this for the movie, but cut it to make room for scenes of silence and boredom instead.

It's like they went out of their way to try to make the most exciting life in history as boring as possible. No wonder it bombed at the box office.
You truly are insufferable....
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
But not as bad as those wives/bowel movements, though, amirite?
aTmAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
agracer said:

aTmAg said:

agracer said:

aTmAg said:

schmendeler said:

I don't get the nagging wife complaint. she was amazingly supportive the entire time. the only time she got on his ass was sorely needed, imo. he was going to potentially go off and die and he was going to do so without saying anything to his two young boys? she deserves admiration for that.
It was more than that, she seemed pissed that he wasn't outwardly emotional about Karen dying, she called the NASA brass a bunch of boys, crap like that.

Perhaps all of that is accurate, but that's not my point. I don't give a rats ass about her half of the story because it is boring. I don't care about "shattering the wife waiting at home" stereotype. I wish they cut all that crap out and spend more time on Neil Armstrong and what made his life so compelling. Not what makes him like the rest of us.
so his wife was not a part of his life..at all....?
His wife was a part of his life, as were his meals, his bowel movements, his haircuts, etc. But all that stuff is boring as hell. So why not concentrate on the part of his life that is interesting? It's not like there is a lack of them.

Hell, Armstrong's house burned down in 1964 and that almost killed them. He first passed ten month old Mark to Ed White through a window and then ran through the house to get six year old Rick. The ridiculous thing is that they actually filmed this for the movie, but cut it to make room for scenes of silence and boredom instead.

It's like they went out of their way to try to make the most exciting life in history as boring as possible. No wonder it bombed at the box office.
You truly are insufferable....
How is that insufferable? Merely because I disagree with you? The unavoidable fact that everybody's life consist of boring parts and exciting parts. In Armstrong's case, his exciting parts were DAMN exciting. Why spend so much of the movie covering his boring parts and leave out exciting parts? It makes no sense.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I would imagine there is a lot of overlap between people who don't like this movie and people that didn't like Dunkirk.
chiken
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm currently watching the movie. The music before they land on the moon is beautiful!

And agreed, this is not at all what I expected from the movie.
Philip J Fry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PatAg said:

I would imagine there is a lot of overlap between people who don't like this movie and people that didn't like Dunkirk.


Thought Dunkirk was great. Thought this was forgettable.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Philip J Fry said:

PatAg said:

I would imagine there is a lot of overlap between people who don't like this movie and people that didn't like Dunkirk.


Thought Dunkirk was great. Thought this was forgettable.
Wasn't meant as an insult, just felt like they had a lot of things in common
ATM9000
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PatAg said:

Philip J Fry said:

PatAg said:

I would imagine there is a lot of overlap between people who don't like this movie and people that didn't like Dunkirk.


Thought Dunkirk was great. Thought this was forgettable.
Wasn't meant as an insult, just felt like they had a lot of things in common

Such as?
ATM9000
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I liked First Man. It wasn't the best movie ever and was slow at times... but it wasn't meant to be an Armstrong biopic. I knew about the moon landing (obviously)... but had no idea of the political strife, Armstrong grief, how high the odds were of the mission not succeeding, or how many people died during the space race.
rynning
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I finally rented it and was just underwhelmed. "The Right Stuff" is still the best movie on the subject. They should have added plot and removed...non-plot.
Joe Exotic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Finally watched this. What a snooze fest. I think Apollo 18 was a more exciting movie than this steaming pile of garbage.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ATM9000 said:

PatAg said:

Philip J Fry said:

PatAg said:

I would imagine there is a lot of overlap between people who don't like this movie and people that didn't like Dunkirk.


Thought Dunkirk was great. Thought this was forgettable.
Wasn't meant as an insult, just felt like they had a lot of things in common

Such as?
They are both pretty intense films, that are more about getting into the mindset of the protagonists and understanding what they went through in major moments of history.

The two responses prior to mine, and about half of this thread, are perfect examples of what people were expecting. Maybe the advertising should have made it more clear going in that it wasn't going to be the same old Space Race story.
HoustonAg2106
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PatAg said:

ATM9000 said:

PatAg said:

Philip J Fry said:

PatAg said:

I would imagine there is a lot of overlap between people who don't like this movie and people that didn't like Dunkirk.


Thought Dunkirk was great. Thought this was forgettable.
Wasn't meant as an insult, just felt like they had a lot of things in common

Such as?
They are both pretty intense films, that are more about getting into the mindset of the protagonists and understanding what they went through in major moments of history.

The two responses prior to mine, and about half of this thread, are perfect examples of what people were expecting. Maybe the advertising should have made it more clear going in that it wasn't going to be the same old Space Race story.


I think the pace, dialogue, style, and music in both movies have a lot of similarities...I really enjoyed both movies, but I know a lot of people that disliked both movies also.
bobinator
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I really liked this movie. I think the boringness-to-action stuff is part of the whole thing. Like, most of being an astronaut is boring as hell, and then you have these insanely intense few minutes where you're making history.
Max Power
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I finally got around to watching this weekend and enjoyed it, but definitely had it's flaws. If the earlier post indicating this was originally intended for Clint Eastwood, I would agree that it would have been a very different film, maybe more what I was expecting.

That being said there was some truly incredible action sequences, and the sounds were what really sold the drama to me.

I think the scene with his sons was tough, but important. As a parent if I lost my daughter, I would be broken, permanently. Every single day would be concentrated on making it through the day, nothing more. I thought Gosling did a good job at portraying what a parent would be like given that situation, regardless of whether he was trying to land on the moon. There would be a piece of him that disassociated, even with his remaining kids. There would be an aspect of that person that is permanently broken, and could never be fixed. The scenes with him holding his daughter and stroking her hair were just gut wrenching to me. I just can't really deal with that as a parent in a movie. It's the reason I've only seen Arrival once, and won't ever watch it again. I stayed away from the reviews and this board, and had i known that stuff was in there, even for such a brief part of the film, I probably wouldn't have watched it. It's just too hard.
Malachi Constant
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Caught this again in a format much better than on the seatback screen on a plane.

I loved it. Using the setting of the Apollo program to tell the story of the Armstrong family. They 'showed' a lot more than they 'told', which is what you want in a good film.

One part I found particularly awesome was the score. The guy from LaLaLand did it, and it's remarkable - a testament to how music can be a HUGE factory in the feeling of a movie.

There are only 2-3 motifs in the whole soundtrack, but Hurwitz arranges them in different ways throughout the film and ultimately brings them all to a crescendo in the landing scene. You take a motif that perfectly captures a backyard gaze through a sextant, mix it with one that is sounds perfect as a wedding waltz, then dial it up and it's perfect suspense music for a moon landing.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.