View Full Version : Ad Astra (2019)
Comes out this weekend actually.
https://youtu.be/kbZZqns47VU
I haven’t read much into the plot as I prefer to go into a movie oblivious.
But as far as genres go this is right in my wheel house so I’m hoping it doesn’t suck.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here's to hoping for the next Interstellar.
Here's to hoping for the next Interstellar.
Big [emoji533] [emoji184] facts
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Review by our local Austin indie rag: https://www.austinchronicle.com/events/film/2019-09-20/ad-astra/
I plan on seeing it anyway because I frequently don't agree with their reviews.
sundance435
09-20-19, 09:00
Here's to hoping for the next Interstellar.
That's my hope, too. I've been looking forward to seeing it (Ad Astra).
Ad Astra wants desperately to be deep, philosophical, profound, and existential, and it misses the market totally. This movie is a big mess with disjointed action scenes that are unrelated to the plot (shown if the trailers to get people to see it) which drags on and on through one implausible event after another. We get long internal monologues from Pitt on the meaning of existence his inability to form close relationships with people, and so forth.
The visuals/CGI range from breathtakingly beautiful to cheesy and cheep looking. The build up to the grand finale at the outer reaches of the solar system so anti climatic I looked at my watch to see when this movie would end, and that's never a good sign.
The all star cast does their best to make it work, and Pitt is always compelling when on screen, but none of them could save this movie from itself. Finally, and there's zero excuse for this in 2019, there was a lot of bad science in this movie all of which could have been avoided by consulting someone from NASA etc who are always happy to see good science being had in such movies.
I had high hopes for this movie (and made the rare trip to a movie theater to see it...) but it as not to be. It's clear director James Gray was attempting to make this generations 2001. He failed and failed badly. Oh, and critics will love this movie cuz it makes them seem edgy and woke. C+
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYLQdxec5lM
Ad Astra wants desperately to be deep, philosophical, profound, and existential, and it misses the market totally. This movie is a big mess with disjointed action scenes that are unrelated to the plot (shown if the trailers to get people to see it) which drags on and on through one implausible event after another. We get long internal monologues from Pitt on the meaning of existence his inability to form close relationships with people, and so forth.
The visuals/CGI range from breathtakingly beautiful to cheesy and cheep looking. The build up to the grand finale at the outer reaches of the solar system so anti climatic I looked at my watch to see when this movie would end, and that's never a good sign.
The all star cast does their best to make it work, and Pitt is always compelling when on screen, but none of them could save this movie from itself. Finally, and there's zero excuse for this in 2019, there was a lot of bad science in this movie all of which could have been avoided by consulting someone from NASA etc who are always happy to see good science being had in such movies.
I had high hopes for this movie (and made the rare trip to a movie theater to see it...) but it as not to be. It's clear director James Gray was attempting to make this generations 2001. He failed and failed badly. Oh, and critics will love this movie cuz it makes them seem edgy and woke. C+
Your review overall pretty much mirrors the review from our local inde rag I posted in the other thread that only gave it 2 out of 5 stars.
Your review overall pretty much mirrors the review from our local inde rag in the other thread that only gave it 2 out of 5 stars.
Good deal. I have seen rave reviews from the main stream rags.
Seems odd having two threads
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Tldr... version
Dad had aspergers...
Couldn't end mission
..
That's it.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Seems odd having two threads
Yep, probably should be merged.
Ad Astra wants desperately to be deep, philosophical, profound, and existential, and it misses the market totally. This movie is a big mess with disjointed action scenes that are unrelated to the plot (shown if the trailers to get people to see it) which drags on and on through one implausible event after another. We get long internal monologues from Pitt on the meaning of existence his inability to form close relationships with people, and so forth.
The visuals/CGI range from breathtakingly beautiful to cheesy and cheep looking. The build up to the grand finale at the outer reaches of the solar system so anti climatic I looked at my watch to see when this movie would end, and that's never a good sign.
The all star cast does their best to make it work, and Pitt is always compelling when on screen, but none of them could save this movie from itself. Finally, and there's zero excuse for this in 2019, there was a lot of bad science in this movie all of which could have been avoided by consulting someone from NASA etc who are always happy to see good science being had in such movies.
I had high hopes for this movie (and made the rare trip to a movie theater to see it...) but it as not to be. It's clear director James Gray was attempting to make this generations 2001. He failed and failed badly. Oh, and critics will love this movie cuz it makes them seem edgy and woke. C+
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYLQdxec5lM
Sad.
Hollywood needs to learn you can't make "epic." You either achieve epic or you don't, it really can't be manufactured deliberately.
I also hate "crap science" in science fiction, it's ruined more potentially great movies than bad special effects. That's one more lesson Hollywood can't seem to grasp.
Saw it tonight and enjoyed it. Not as good as I hoped but enjoyable nonetheless.
Haters can hate
Also kryptek mars camo is dope.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Saw it tonight and enjoyed it. Not as good as I hoped but enjoyable nonetheless.
Haters can hate
Also kryptek mars camo is dope.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sounds more like a DVD experience than a theater experience.
LMT Shooter
09-22-19, 07:45
......there was a lot of bad science in this movie all of which could have been avoided by consulting someone from NASA etc who are always happy to see good science being had in such movies.
Brad Pitt's space epic 'Ad Astra' sets 'new standard' for science fiction films, ex-NASA engineer says
https://www.foxnews.com/science/brad-pitts-ad-astra-new-standard-science-fiction-nasa-engineer
This has me curious.
Brad Pitt's space epic 'Ad Astra' sets 'new standard' for science fiction films, ex-NASA engineer says
https://www.foxnews.com/science/brad-pitts-ad-astra-new-standard-science-fiction-nasa-engineer
This has me curious.
Note the wording:
"In my view, it sets a new standard for science fiction films, updating for all to see on the big screen some of the most fantastic imagery we have obtained of our solar system since films like '2001: A Space Odyssey' were released over 50 years ago," said Robert Yowell, who served as an engineer at NASA for 11 years and as a senior mission manager for SpaceX."
Per above, some of the imagery is beautiful. Not really a spoiler, as one physicist wrote about the "To get to Neptune from Mars in 79 days, the average speed of the spaceship would have to be over 1,400,463 MPH. Maybe an ion thruster could achieve that, but it would take a huge amount of time to speed up and slow down because while ion engines have a huge top speed, they have extremely small amounts of thrust."
It's clear they were using chemical rockets. There was no apparent crew quarters in that rocket, he they didn't apparently have enough fuel to return making it a one way suicide mission but there's no mention of that, so he uses a nuke to give him a nice little push off for home, using a freaking Neptune's rings shielded only with a space station panel, etc, etc The list is long. The science nerds I know are having a field day with all the bad science and I'm no physicist, but I was rolling my eyes all through this movie. Oh, and after a space monkey eats guys face, he used duct tape (yes duct tape) to cover the helmet opening and go into the vacuum of space with duct tape set up.
Much of iy was not bad science per se, just totally implausible and double eye rolling.
Brad Pitt's space epic 'Ad Astra' sets 'new standard' for science fiction films, ex-NASA engineer says
https://www.foxnews.com/science/brad-pitts-ad-astra-new-standard-science-fiction-nasa-engineer
Thanks for posting that. It is certainly more credible than a review in my local indie rag.
Thanks for posting that. It is certainly more credible than a review in my local indie rag.
It's accurate from the POV of the visuals being beautiful in some scenes. Note, no mention of the science from the NASA engineer. As they're all about promoting space travel, support for it, etc, they're not going to chit on the science issues generally. That usually happens with outside science nerds and is already being discussed. Tons of plot holes, stuff never explained, etc made it very difficult to just get immersed in the impressive visuals for me. Your mileage may differ.
Yep, probably should be merged.
I combined the threads last night.
Ad Astra wants desperately to be deep, philosophical, profound, and existential, and it misses the market totally. This movie is a big mess with disjointed action scenes that are unrelated to the plot (shown if the trailers to get people to see it) which drags on and on through one implausible event after another. We get long internal monologues from Pitt on the meaning of existence his inability to form close relationships with people, and so forth.
The visuals/CGI range from breathtakingly beautiful to cheesy and cheep looking. The build up to the grand finale at the outer reaches of the solar system so anti climatic I looked at my watch to see when this movie would end, and that's never a good sign.
The all star cast does their best to make it work, and Pitt is always compelling when on screen, but none of them could save this movie from itself. Finally, and there's zero excuse for this in 2019, there was a lot of bad science in this movie all of which could have been avoided by consulting someone from NASA etc who are always happy to see good science being had in such movies.
I had high hopes for this movie (and made the rare trip to a movie theater to see it...) but it as not to be. It's clear director James Gray was attempting to make this generations 2001. He failed and failed badly. Oh, and critics will love this movie cuz it makes them seem edgy and woke. C+
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYLQdxec5lM
Ugh--sounds like another pseudo-intellectual sci-fi that epitomizes over-promise and under-deliver. No thanks. Good detailed summary, was gonna see this in theater, but will wait until I can rent it on Vudu for $3.99--or they run it 'free with ads.'
MountainRaven
09-22-19, 14:02
Sounds like y'all got another Interstellar.
Sounds like y'all got another Interstellar.
It was not as good as interstellar. The ending was anticlimactic I will admit.
And despite what the amateur fan fic LARP writer says it was/is not a dud.
To that end I feel it pulled together a number of different avenues in science fiction that we should absolutely be pursuing in real life, but I digress.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sounds like y'all got another Interstellar.
Interstellar was a better movie by a long shot.
Sounds like y'all got another Interstellar.
I really liked Interstellar and the fact that it worked mostly in the "theoretical" meant a lot could be forgiven.
Ad Astra wants desperately to be deep, philosophical, profound, and existential, and it misses the market totally. This movie is a big mess with disjointed action scenes that are unrelated to the plot (shown if the trailers to get people to see it) which drags on and on through one implausible event after another. We get long internal monologues from Pitt on the meaning of existence his inability to form close relationships with people, and so forth.
The visuals/CGI range from breathtakingly beautiful to cheesy and cheep looking. The build up to the grand finale at the outer reaches of the solar system so anti climatic I looked at my watch to see when this movie would end, and that's never a good sign.
The all star cast does their best to make it work, and Pitt is always compelling when on screen, but none of them could save this movie from itself. Finally, and there's zero excuse for this in 2019, there was a lot of bad science in this movie all of which could have been avoided by consulting someone from NASA etc who are always happy to see good science being had in such movies.
I had high hopes for this movie (and made the rare trip to a movie theater to see it...) but it as not to be. It's clear director James Gray was attempting to make this generations 2001. He failed and failed badly. Oh, and critics will love this movie cuz it makes them seem edgy and woke. C+
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYLQdxec5lM
Went in hoping for Interstellar. Walked away with a weird love child of 2001 and Apocalypse Now. Too much narration, not enough anything else. Some of the visuals were trippy but I was disappointed overall.
The wife says I’m not allowed to pick movies for a while.
Per above, some of the imagery is beautiful. Not really a spoiler, as one physicist wrote about the "To get to Neptune from Mars in 79 days, the average speed of the spaceship would have to be over 1,400,463 MPH. Maybe an ion thruster could achieve that, but it would take a huge amount of time to speed up and slow down because while ion engines have a huge top speed, they have extremely small amounts of thrust."
It's clear they were using chemical rockets. There was no apparent crew quarters in that rocket, he they didn't apparently have enough fuel to return making it a one way suicide mission but there's no mention of that, so he uses a nuke to give him a nice little push off for home, using a freaking Neptune's rings shielded only with a space station panel, etc, etc The list is long. The science nerds I know are having a field day with all the bad science and I'm no physicist, but I was rolling my eyes all through this movie. Oh, and after a space monkey eats guys face, he used duct tape (yes duct tape) to cover the helmet opening and go into the vacuum of space with duct tape set up.
Much of iy was not bad science per se, just totally implausible and double eye rolling.
I think they used chemical rockets to get off the surface of Earth/Moon/Mars. With the first stage dropping away the engine they used for long distance travel wasn’t the same. It was glowing blue not red/yellow/orange flame of the first stage.
Even so, 79 days from Mars to Neptune is some crazy ass shit. It would require a crazy amount of thrust and a long duration of a lot of Gs. Meanwhile, the whole time he was weightless which would mean no acceleration but the engine appears to be lit which would mean he is accelerating. WTF?
Watney used duct tape on his cracked visor in The Marian and people said it was plausible. Plus, the captain didn’t survive so...
Went in hoping for Interstellar. Walked away with a weird love child of 2001 and Apocalypse Now. Too much narration, not enough anything else. Some of the visuals were trippy but I was disappointed overall.
The wife says I’m not allowed to pick movies for a while.
I warned ya... it's just not a good movie.
I think they used chemical rockets to get off the surface of Earth/Moon/Mars. With the first stage dropping away the engine they used for long distance travel wasn’t the same. It was glowing blue not red/yellow/orange flame of the first stage.
Even so, 79 days from Mars to Neptune is some crazy ass shit. It would require a crazy amount of thrust and a long duration of a lot of Gs. Meanwhile, the whole time he was weightless which would mean no acceleration but the engine appears to be lit which would mean he is accelerating. WTF?
Watney used duct tape on his cracked visor in The Marian and people said it was plausible. Plus, the captain didn’t survive so...
The movie was full of fail like that. I don't think duct tape would work in the vacuum of space, but more importantly, they don't have anything better in their emergency kit to cover a busted face place (and lets not even mention how goofy that whole killer space monkey scene was....) than duct tape?!
Bad science and or just sloppy movie making, just too much of that stuff for me to give it a good rating.
It’s like folks are incapable of simply going to the movies nowadays simply for the sake of being entertained.
Everyone’s an amateur critic
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I warned ya... it's just not a good movie.
I didn’t read your warning in time. lol
The movie was full of fail like that. I don't think duct tape would work in the vacuum of space, but more importantly, they don't have anything better in their emergency kit to cover a busted face place (and lets not even mention how goofy that whole killer space monkey scene was....) than duct tape?!
Bad science and or just sloppy movie making, just too much of that stuff for me to give it a good rating.
The whole space monkey scene was totally superfluous. Just like the moon pirate scene. What the hell was the point of that. Neither added anything to the story except runtime.
Also, the metal shield trip through the rings was annoying AF. He didn’t have enough momentum to overcome the impacts of all those rocks/ice. They would have imparted enough force on him to rob all of his velocity. He would have just become part of Neptune’s rings.
Plus, they said the goal of the project was to go beyond the Sun’s Heliosphere. The Heliopause is 120+AU from the sun. Neptune is something like 30AU. They were a quarter of the way there. WTF?
At least in Interstellar the science was right up to the 5th dimensional tesseract and even that has a basis in physics. The Martian was really close to real science too, the boom more than the movie. Gravity had the physics right but some of the action was far fetched. This movie was just silly.
Dude... the more I think about it the more upset I get lol
It’s like folks are incapable of simply going to the movies nowadays simply for the sake of being entertained.
Everyone’s an amateur critic
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If I'm going to see King Kong vs. Godzilla, I have certain expectations and standards.
If I'm going to see a film about Omaha Beach, I have certain expectations and standards.
If I'm going to see a film about time / space / black holes / space travel, I have certain expectations and standards.
My expectations and standards vary from genre to genre. Interstellar and The Arrival show what Hollywood is capable of, the rarity of films of that quality shows that Hollywood mostly doesn't care about quality films.
Look at what got nominated (or won) for an Academy Aware in the last 10 years and it's mostly shit.
Bohemian Rhapsody is the only film I recall liking from 2018 and honestly it was "just ok." In 2017 "Darkest Hour" was ok and honestly Dunkirk was crap. 2016 "Arrival" was great (but didn't win) and "Hacksaw Ridge" was ok. 2015 pretty much everything sucked including "The Martian." 2014 I liked "American Sniper" but hated that it was mostly fiction. 2013 was really the last year of amazing films with "American Hustle" and "Wolf of Wall Street" but most people hyped "Gravity" (which sucked) and "Capt. Phillips" which mostly sucked. 2012 also had two great films, "Argo" and "Zero Dark Thirty" but everyone talked about "Django Unchained" (which sucked) and "Lincoln" which had a few too many historical inaccuracies (umm hello he was a Republican) to be enjoyed. It's hard when a Speilberg film is unwatchable.
2011, nothing. Everything sucked. 2010, nothing. Everything sucked. 2009, nothing. Everything sucked. In fact you have to go all the way back to 2005 to find an excellent film and there was only one, "Munich."
So that's not even one great film a year and how many films get cranked out?
I stand by my statement.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I liked it..
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I didn’t read your warning in time. lol
The whole space monkey scene was totally superfluous. Just like the moon pirate scene. What the hell was the point of that. Neither added anything to the story except runtime.
Also, the metal shield trip through the rings was annoying AF. He didn’t have enough momentum to overcome the impacts of all those rocks/ice. They would have imparted enough force on him to rob all of his velocity. He would have just become part of Neptune’s rings.
Plus, they said the goal of the project was to go beyond the Sun’s Heliosphere. The Heliopause is 120+AU from the sun. Neptune is something like 30AU. They were a quarter of the way there. WTF?
At least in Interstellar the science was right up to the 5th dimensional tesseract and even that has a basis in physics. The Martian was really close to real science too, the boom more than the movie. Gravity had the physics right but some of the action was far fetched. This movie was just silly.
Dude... the more I think about it the more upset I get lol
It almost lulls you into thinking it's a good movie due to the visuals and perhaps the cast, but yes, more I think about it the worse it gets.
It almost lulls you into thinking it's a good movie due to the visuals and perhaps the cast, but yes, more I think about it the worse it gets.
They tried to be 2001 with the visuals but failed. The $125 pillow and blanket on the flight to the Moon was kinda funny, but it was a rip off 2001.
Tried to be Apocalypse Now and failed. The narration of the main character who was tasked with the assassination of an idol. Countless side quests that are fun but add nothing to the story. In Apocalypse Now it worked, here it didn't.
Tried to be Interstellar and failed. Long distance space travel but completely unrealistic. In Interstellar it too the crew of the Endurance 2 years to get to Saturn. Saturn is 8.5AU from the Earth. So the trip is roughly 4.25AU/Yr. With the distance to Neptune being +/-30AU, it should take 7 years not 79 days.
They tried to be 2001 with the visuals but failed. The $125 pillow and blanket on the flight to the Moon was kinda funny, but it was a rip off 2001.
Or a rip off for BL 2049. Some scenes were damn close to identical.
Tried to be Apocalypse Now and failed. The narration of the main character who was tasked with the assassination of an idol. Countless side quests that are fun but add nothing to the story. In Apocalypse Now it worked, here it didn't.
On a few occasions the narrative was well done, but there was too much if it and most of it sounded like someone recently took a college philosophy course or something.
Tried to be Interstellar and failed. Long distance space travel but completely unrealistic. In Interstellar it too the crew of the Endurance 2 years to get to Saturn. Saturn is 8.5AU from the Earth. So the trip is roughly 4.25AU/Yr. With the distance to Neptune being +/-30AU, it should take 7 years not 79 days.
Not unless they had some tech that does not exist, nor will exist in the near future where the story takes place. They were chemical rockets. There was a few shots on the mars 2 Neptune mission showed what may have been ion drive or something, but they're very slow to accelerate. Regardless of tech, to make that trip in 79 days, what would the Gs be? You'd be under Gs the entire time and yet (because apparently there's no crew quarters at all in a ship expect to carry 4 people round trip from freakin' mars to Neptune) he's floating in the middle of the damn (only?) segment of the ship while sleeping.
How about climbing onto a lifting rocket to find a very convenient hatch right into the crew capsule? That was yet another WTF? moment among many in that movie that prevented me from enjoying.
Any episode of The Expanse was better then that movie and does a great job of paying attention to the science to boot.
If I'm going to see King Kong vs. Godzilla, I have certain expectations and standards.
If I'm going to see a film about Omaha Beach, I have certain expectations and standards.
If I'm going to see a film about time / space / black holes / space travel, I have certain expectations and standards.
My expectations and standards vary from genre to genre. Interstellar and The Arrival show what Hollywood is capable of, the rarity of films of that quality shows that Hollywood mostly doesn't care about quality films.
Precisely so. I gave high marks to the recent Godzilla for example. If I go to see a movie about Omaha Beach where the US lands in Japan and the Germans have M4s, I don't care how good it looks, I'm still gonna review it as a crappy movie.
Precisely so. I gave high marks to the recent Godzilla for example. If I go to see a movie about Omaha Beach where the US lands in Japan and the Germans have M4s, I don't care how good it looks, I'm still gonna review it as a crappy movie.
I predict in out lifetime, there will be a film where the Germans actually bombed Pearl Harbor and Bluto will be vindicated.
Saw it today. Total waste of time.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.