Author Topic: "Ad Astra": theatrical film with Brad Pitt and Tommy Lee Jones (Read 29581 times)

Michel Van · « **on:** 06/05/2019 09:33 am »

That's the Trailer

After watching this
i got impression this will be another "Geostorm", this time with A-list actors...

theebag · « **Reply #1 on:** 06/05/2019 12:11 pm »

At least they got some unique designs, seems to be rooted in a more Apollo/Titan-esque continuation with modern technologies thrown in. Of course dad is saving, not threatening

.

Lars-J · « **Reply #2 on:** 06/06/2019 06:59 pm »

I'll watch it... eventually.

I'm an easy sell for most space-related films.

But the whole Apollo remixed look is so bizarre for something that is supposed to be set... 50-60 years in the future (or more), everything will still look like Apollo era hardware from 40 years ago. (With tweaks)

Are Hollywood creative artists and advisers that out of touch with recent space developments?

Lar · « **Reply #3 on:** 06/06/2019 09:07 pm »

Filmed in 2017, released in January 2019, no May, no September... not a good sign

if we're still staging boosters 50 years from now, Starship was a failure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Astra_(film)

spacenut · « **Reply #4 on:** 06/06/2019 09:19 pm »

Most Hollywood films of recent are out of date or out of touch with almost anything they do. To many re-dos of old movies. To many dark movies about the future. Don't know about this one though. That is why I liked Star Trek TV and movies. Nicer view of the future.

ncb1397 · « **Reply #5 on:** 06/06/2019 09:31 pm »

Quote from: Lar on 06/06/2019 09:07 pm

Filmed in 2017, released in January 2019, no May, no September... not a good sign

if we're still staging boosters 50 years from now, Starship was a failure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Astra_(film)

Looks like the space elevator killed the Starship, but the aliens killed the space elevator. Hence the big dumb booster.

Torlek · « **Reply #6 on:** 06/07/2019 01:04 am »

Everything in the trailer has a weird retro-neo-futurism thing going on. The ships, spacesuits, logos and even military uniforms feel like a "futuristic" take from 40 years ago.

tea monster · « **Reply #7 on:** 06/13/2019 12:20 pm »

I find it amusing that the comments here are expressing doubt about the 'retro' space designs, when we are currently experiencing NASA relying on, quote, "Apollo on steroids" to get us back to the Moon. Art imitates life!

In all seriousness though, I quite like the old fashioned art design. I see it more as an artistic choice then any kind of real commentary on what the future will be like.

Maybe what ncb1397 proposed - we had space elevators but the aliens zapped them, so we've had to dig up old boosters out of museums to get back into space. Nice idea.

catdlr · « **Reply #8 on:** 09/06/2019 08:45 am »

Ad Astra | "Moon Rover" Clip | Experience it in IMAX®

IMAX
Published on Sep 5, 2019

Cheapchips · « **Reply #9 on:** 09/06/2019 09:35 am »

It's weird seeing souped-up Apollo rovers driving away from the massive moon base. It's like having Blade Runner's LA with model-T's driving around. My brain couldn't cope with the weirdness.

(The vfx are nice though)

su27k · « **Reply #10 on:** 09/06/2019 04:43 pm »

This chase scene is pretty fun though, and space pirate!

Slarty1080 · « **Reply #11 on:** 09/07/2019 07:24 pm »

Quote from: Lars-J on 06/06/2019 06:59 pm

I'll watch it... eventually. I'm an easy sell for most space-related films.

But the whole Apollo remixed look is so bizarre for something that is supposed to be set... 50-60 years in the future (or more), everything will still look like Apollo era hardware from 40 years ago. (With tweaks)

Are Hollywood creative artists and advisers that out of touch with recent space developments?

Yes sadly they're all still looking to NASA and NASA is banking on SLS which is built around ancient technology. What it needs is a tour de force by SpaceX. And it is coming, it might take a few years but when Dear Moon flies it will utterly destroy the old Apollo era paradigm as far as film is concerned (and probably a lot else besides).

When we see a huge rocket with a lot of people on board with lots of decks, a massive window, stunning views of a (relatively) close flyby of the far side of the Moon, it will make the Apollo era film and technology look very dated. Add a shiny brilliant silver re-entry with a fiery rocket powered final descent and passengers available for interview within a relatively short period in Florida and it’s got to be a show stopper.

It should have an effect similar to the film 2001 cinematically. When 2001 came out in the late sixties all older black and white man on the Moon/space epics suddenly looked very old.

Lars-J · « **Reply #12 on:** 09/08/2019 04:58 am »

As much as I have complained on this film, that last "moon rover" clip looks fun!

Eric Hedman · « **Reply #13 on:** 09/08/2019 05:41 am »

I might as well continue with the technical nit picking. At 1/6th gravity I suspect any rovers moving that fast would be bounced pretty high with the bumps they are hitting. I don't think rovers are going to be moving that fast on the lunar surface. And yeah I don't think the rockets fit in with the size of the lunar installation. I would expect to see something more advanced.

Eric Hedman · « **Reply #14 on:** 09/08/2019 05:53 am »

Here is a clip of Apollo's rover. It maxed out at 11.2 mph and bounced fairly intensely at that speed:

ncb1397 · « **Reply #15 on:** 09/08/2019 05:58 am »

Quote from: Eric Hedman on 09/08/2019 05:53 am

Here is a clip of Apollo's rover. It maxed out at 11.2 mph and bounced fairly intensely at that speed:

The terrain looks flatter in the movie. And you can do amazing things with suspension systems...stuff that wasn't incorporated in the Apollo LRV.

Anyways, how fast do think they are moving in the clip?

edit: The movie appears to have a much larger suspension system than what was included in the LRV:

Dalhousie · « **Reply #16 on:** 09/08/2019 06:12 am »

Quote from: Lar on 06/06/2019 09:07 pm

Filmed in 2017, released in January 2019, no May, no September... not a good sign

if we're still staging boosters 50 years from now, Starship was a failure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Astra_(film)

Did you miss the memo about about Starship being a second stage?

Of course, given track record, 50 years from now we might still be waiting for Starship.....

Eric Hedman · « **Reply #17 on:** 09/08/2019 06:34 am »

Quote from: ncb1397 on 09/08/2019 05:58 am

Anyways, how fast do think they are moving in the clip?

The length of the Apollo lunar rover was 122 inches. This one has two rows of seats and a longer front end so I'm guessing that it is at least 14 feet long. In the scenes showing them moving from above they seem to cover about 4 to 5 rover lengths per second. If it is 4 lengths per second that is a minimum of 56 feet per second which is 38 miles per hour. In that low gravity I think they would be bouncing pretty high regardless of how good the suspension is. So no I don't believe they could move that fast in that low gravity without bouncing more. I also think the surface will probably be as rough as the Apollo rover experienced. The Apollo rover also kicked up significantly more dust at 11 mph.

I used this method of estimating speed when I saw the first clip of the first littoral combat ship produced by Marinette Marine in sea trials on Lake Michigan filmed from a helicopter and it turned out to be a pretty good estimate of a little over 40 knots. When the Navy later published specs on the ship they listed top speed at 40+ knots.

ncb1397 · « **Reply #18 on:** 09/08/2019 07:17 am »

I went about it slightly differently. Measuring the number of frames it takes a rock to travel from the shadow of one wheel to the shadow of another (with the sun coming in from the side), I get 7 frames. This is 24 frame per second video. I then measured the height from a seated person to the top of his head in pixels of a man in one shot (I got 70) and the length in pixels from one wheel to the other (I got 276). Measuring myself (who is average height at 5'10") from my seat to the top of my head yields .8 meters. This suggests the distance from the center of the front wheels to the center of the back wheels is (276/70) * .8 = 3.15 meters. So this suggests that they travel 3.15 meters in 7/24ths of a second or a speed of 10.8 meters per second(24 miles per hour). This is only about double the current record land speed on the moon of 11.2 mph.

Eric Hedman · « **Reply #19 on:** 09/20/2019 09:53 pm »

I went to see the movie today. Disappointed. No story spoilers.

I'll start with the positive. Okay done.

The negative. If you have an understanding of physics including orbital mechanics, you have to empty your brain of all knowledge first. There are also several things that happen in the story line for no apparent logical reason. The five star reviews have to be by people who don't understand a thing about spaceflight. The whole premise of the story is a fail. Why what they are doing at Neptune has to be done out by Neptune is beyond me.

What appears to be a rotating radar antenna at the station orbiting Neptune looks like a large version of rotating antennas you could see on older large yachts. I guess they forgot how to build phased array radar. What Brad Pitt rips off of that antenna and uses it for made me think of getting up and walking out before the movie was over.

The acting is two hours of Brad Pitt brooding. That's all I'll say on that topic.

Final conclusions: Can I get those two wasted hours back? Many years ago I went to a theater to see Jurassic Park which I didn't think was too bad. The next movie that finally lured me back into a theater was Apollo 11 which I think is one of the finest movies I've ever seen. Ad Astra will make me reluctant to go back. It might be another 30 years before I head out to see another movie.