"First Man" Neil Armstrong Biopic

[zubenelgenubi]

Bringing the picture of his dead daughter and dropping it onto the Moon surface and seemingly getting some sort of closure out of it. It didn't happen and there are no sources at all saying that her death influenced his wish to go to the Moon.

If it wasn't said before...
I THINK this is a BIG extrapolation, from the James Hansen's authorized biography, by the screenwriter(s).

Jan Armstrong, upon query for the biography, expressed a deep hope that Neil had carried a memento of Karen to the Moon.  She also explained that Neil had never talked about that possibility with her, either before or after Apollo 11.

Also, IIRC, Charlie Duke left a color portrait photograph of his family on the Moon--Apollo 16.

[Cheapchips]

I enjoyed this a lot as an exploration grief and how it could feel to be at the sharp end of the Apollo program.  Not sure how I feel about it as a biography, given the bits it invents.  Can't say I mind though.  It wasn't as if it was a character assassination and Armstrong's kids seem happy enough.

The action sequences created the right visceral sense, even if things like the launch vibration were unrealistic.  It felt authentic to me, but I hold the right to change my mind after I was the Apollo 11 doc.   

Straight documentary style footage doesn't convey everything the astronauts describe as experiencing through launch.  Going the way they did put you more in the scene and the heads of the astronauts, unless you were thinking, "nah, it wasn't like that".

The landing sequence in particular gave me chills. The music though that sequence is utterly phenomenal.

The Bad cinematography ?
The Bad Sound ?
The Cheap Special effects ?
The awful Soundtrack ?

I couldn't disagree with you more with all these points.  Each to their own! 

(I do love Apollo 13 and The Right Stuff though.  And From Earth to the Moon)

[JohnF]

Straight to the point-this movie was bad, it's clear the director had no clue or isn't interested in spaceflight-one or the other, probably both,  Armstrong was portrayed to be too aloof, from the folks I know that actually worked with him, he was very friendly, had a sense of humor, really invested in the space program and each mission he was assigned, just a go do it kind of guy, this movie didn't capture that at all, and dirty interior of spacecraft ?, no talking  to Bruce or Buzz on the lunar surface ?, the above poster was correct Howard or Hanks should have directed this movie for sure.

[Hog]

Straight to the point-this movie was bad, it's clear the director had no clue or isn't interested in spaceflight-one or the other, probably both,  Armstrong was portrayed to be too aloof, from the folks I know that actually worked with him, he was very friendly, had a sense of humor, really invested in the space program and each mission he was assigned, just a go do it kind of guy, this movie didn't capture that at all, and dirty interior of spacecraft ?, no talking  to Bruce or Buzz on the lunar surface ?, the above poster was correct Howard or Hanks should have directed this movie for sure.

About the "just a go do it kind of guy."

There was a movie where Armstrong had just ejected from the Lunar Lander Research Vehicle and was sitting back at his desk.  Others were surprised to see his so composed after having just "riding the Weber ejection seat" of the LLRV. Armstrong acted as if it was no big thing and was ready to get on to the next task.

I just can't see any NASA Astronaut riding, or being allowed to ride a LLRV or LLTV as part of the Artemis program.  A symptom of todays space culture of being averse to adverse conditions.  To launch without risk, is to never launch at all.

[ccdengr]

it's clear the director had no clue or isn't interested in spaceflight

From interviews I've seen, it seems to me that Chazelle cared a lot about the subject but had some significant misconceptions.  For example, he kept saying that he was amazed about how "rickety" the Apollo spacecraft were.  Having built a lot of spaceflight hardware, I don't think it's fair to call anything that went through that much random vibe testing "rickety".

I think he meant well but told a story that emphasized a dramatized (to the point of fictional) portrait of Armstrong, over the greater context of Apollo.

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/10/656193137/first-man-director-damien-chazelle

[JAFO]

I just can't see any NASA Astronaut riding, or being allowed to ride a LLRV or LLTV as part of the Artemis program.  A symptom of todays space culture of being averse to adverse conditions.  To launch without risk, is to never launch at all.

OTOH, with 21st century sims there is no need for that kind of risk any more. Yes, Shuttle astronauts still used the STA, but compared to the LLRV/LLTV, the risk is negligible.

[QuantumG]

God forbid a director try to make you feel something for your hero's suffering.

Whenever I retell a "funny story" the first thing I do is think about my audience. There is no point repeating an in-joke that only my friends and I find funny, so I translate those parts of the story into something the audience will understand. If something has to be embellished or invented to make the audience feel the same way as we did when whatever really happened was happening... well, that's just good story telling.

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

[Rocket Science]

It felt good to watch First Man on this special anniversary...