"Ad Astra": theatrical film with Brad Pitt and Tommy Lee Jones

[Michel Van]

That's the Trailer


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

[theebag]

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]

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]

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]

Most Hollywood films of recent are out of date or out of touch with almost anything they do.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]

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]

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]

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]

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


IMAX
Published on Sep 5, 2019

[Cheapchips]

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]

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

[Slarty1080]

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]

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

[Eric Hedman]

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]

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

[ncb1397]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[QuantumG]

I'll watch this next week and give y'all a review.

Warning: my review will be about human beings, so you might find it a bit 🥱

[Markstark]

Really good wanted this movie to be good. It was not. Not just from a technical perspective either. The story was just not that great.

[Eric Hedman]

I'll watch this next week and give y'all a review.

Warning: my review will be about human beings, so you might find it a bit 🥱

If you find any human beings acting like you would expect human beings to act in the situations they are in, let me know.  There were some pointless side events that didn't add to the story.  I suspect they were put in because the story itself was weak and allowed for some cool looking special effects.

[QuantumG]

If you find any human beings acting like you would expect human beings to act in the situations they are in, let me know.  There were some pointless side events that didn't add to the story.  I suspect they were put in because the story itself was weak and allowed for some cool looking special effects.

Unfortunately, people watch these movies and form opinions about spaceflight.

Just like they have opinions about AI that they got from watching killer robot movies.

[catdlr]

Watch Brad Pitt in a Chase on the Moon in ‘Ad Astra’ | Anatomy of a Scene

Previous trailer scene discussed

[KelvinZero]

Watch Brad Pitt in a Chase on the Moon in ‘Ad Astra’ | Anatomy of a Scene
Previous trailer scene discussed

That didn't really look like lunar gravity to me. It didn't look that different to earth and I remember the actual apollo rovers looking a lot more bouncy with slow waves of dust thrown up.

One thing that shot suggests to me: You could easily do a pure hardSF mad-max style resource war type storyline on the moon. Im just mentioning it because hollywood seems almost totally incapable of doing a pure hardSF in space.. it _needs_ to throw in aliens or similar.. yet at the same time it can do storylines like Dredd, Mad Max, Ghost in the Shell on earth, and even James Bond with various space nonsense all without aliens.. but if it is a hardSF space movie.. must have aliens.   

(sure, Dredd had psionics but that was canon, not something they had any reason to avoid)

[su27k]

Brad Pitt’s ‘Ad Astra’ Is One Big, Shiny Ad for Lockheed Martin

LM did the design for the ships in the movie, I guess this would explain the peculiar aesthetic choice made.

[Jeff Lerner]

I saw the movie tonight....I didn’t like it at all...I usually treat any sci-fi movie or space TV show as pure entertainment...warp drives, transporters, light sabres, droids, etc ...sure, bring it on...I suspend belief and just enjoy....but with this movie, it was difficult for me as it’s deemed to take place in the very near future...the rocket and space technology is decidedly current state ( eg. space suits, rocket staging, etc...) or even retro looking ( lunar rovers )...I won’t spoil the plot but I had a hard time getting past the technology and how the characters got from story point to the next point in the plot...lots of plot holes and things in the story line that seemed to just conveniently happen or be overlooked...

[Lars-J]

Just saw it... not great. Not terrible either. But disappointing overall, compared to what it could have been.

The whole movie can be read as a metaphor for Pitt’s  character dealing with depression and letting go of a dying father who never loved him. An interesting story perhaps, so I’m not sure why decided to fluff it up with space scenes... most of them make little or no sense. And don’t feel that tightly integrated to the story.

But hey, the moon rover chase was cool at least. I wish the whole movie would have been about piracy and international tension on the moon. That would have been interesting at least.

[HVM]

So 3.6? _Roentgen

[Michel Van]

So 3.6? _Roentgen

more total zero

That Movie is total waste of money and 123 minute of your life !
spend it otherwise...

[Tywin]

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.

Totally agree...

I watched yesterday, the movie, with a lot illusion, but is impossible defense this...

The mistakes in the spaceflight rules are huge...better turn off the brain...

The history, is losting interest every minute, and don't have too much coherence, and the final, is one of the most anticlimactics that I remember...don't have sense..

A really big lost opportunity with this movie, for the good actors, the budget, the fotografy, even the initial idea, etc...but all was throw away...

[dwheeler]

I saw it this past weekend. I was disappointed. I thought the plot didn't really hold together well. Several tangent scenes/plot lines that didn't seem to matter. Space scenes and tech weren't believable, at least for me. And definitely not enough Liv. 

[jcopella]

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.

Totally agree...

I watched yesterday, the movie, with a lot illusion, but is impossible defense this...

The mistakes in the spaceflight rules are huge...better turn off the brain...

The history, is losting interest every minute, and don't have too much coherence, and the final, is one of the most anticlimactics that I remember...don't have sense..

A really big lost opportunity with this movie, for the good actors, the budget, the fotografy, even the initial idea, etc...but all was throw away...

Every word of both of these.

This movie was gawd-awful. Painfully bad. It's a message movie, the message is "toxic masculinity is bad" (as if we needed to be told), and all of the sci-fi and spaceflight trappings are just excess baggage. There is nothing remotely thoughtful about any of the science fictional elements of this film -- it's all garbage.

The one thing I will give the movie credit for is it has smart production design and the spacecraft interiors are plausibly depicted. In fact, that's one of the maddening things about it -- you're seeing plausibility with your eyes (at least when you're seeing the inside of the spacecraft) while at the same time your ears and brain are hearing blatant stupidity from the script.

I'm no fan of Interstellar, by a long shot, but it was leagues better than this.

Gotta run -- need to throw on my 2001 DVD to wash this horrible film out of my memory.

[Eric Hedman]

I'm not surprised that as more reviews are coming in that people are disappointed.  What is sad is that some of the special effects were so good and they were wasted on such a bad movie.  Neptune and its rings were well done.  The lunar surface was very well done.  I did like how well they did the pointless buggy chase on the Moon.

If you do go see this movie be prepared to be disappointed.

[Lars-J]

This movie was gawd-awful. Painfully bad. It's a message movie, the message is "toxic masculinity is bad" (as if we needed to be told), and all of the sci-fi and spaceflight trappings are just excess baggage.

If you really think this movie was about "toxic masculinity", you cannot have paid attention. I'm not defending the movie, but that is so far off-track.

[QuantumG]

If you really think this movie was about "toxic masculinity", you cannot have paid attention. I'm not defending the movie, but that is so far off-track.

Hey, an actual discussion about the movie! What would you say it's about?

[Eric Hedman]

If you really think this movie was about "toxic masculinity", you cannot have paid attention. I'm not defending the movie, but that is so far off-track.

Hey, an actual discussion about the movie! What would you say it's about?

My two cents.  We can't have a real discussion about the movie without spoilers.  Do you want that here before you see the movie?

[sanman]

Just from the comments of the director made in video above - he mentions Space Pirates. How do you have space pirates in the next 50-100 years? I'm not making a rhetorical remark ignoring suspension of disbelief to knock what's obviously a sci-fi movie. But what would be the basis for space pirates in this movie universe? Would they be smuggling something of value? How would they operate unseen by sovereign states?

[QuantumG]

My two cents.  We can't have a real discussion about the movie without spoilers.  Do you want that here before you see the movie?

I'm fine with it.

Spoiler: Here's how to post spoilers.

Or something.

[QuantumG]

Just from the comments of the director made in video above - he mentions Space Pirates. How do you have space pirates in the next 50-100 years?

Wooo... I writing prompt!

It was an early Thursday morning when the 103rd launch of SpaceX's Starship Mk41 entered terminal countdown. To say that the Boca Chica base security was unprepared for a water assault from across the border would be an understatement. Although no attempt was made to abort the launch, the radio frequency jamming would have prevented it in any case. In under a minute these - and there really is no other appropriate word - pirates transformed what was expected to be another routine Starlink satellite replenishment launch into a bloodbath. Their crude spacesuits alone seemed sufficient to reach orbit, but reports indicate the hijackers utilized an on-site crane to load life support and other equipment that had mysteriously gone missing from a Mars training site six months earlier. Investigators would later discover that three of the members of that training group were complicit in the heist. Where the merry band of marauders went after they passed beyond Lunar orbit is still unknown - as most all of us have heard several hundred times, space monitoring systems are not designed for tracking vehicles that don't want to be tracked. However it seems likely that a rendezvous was made with the near-Earth asteroid (2019 QY3) that passed within 3 lunar distances around the time of the launch. Will we ever hear from this black sheep offshoot of humanity again? Only time will tell.

 

[Eric Hedman]

My two cents.  We can't have a real discussion about the movie without spoilers.  Do you want that here before you see the movie?

I'm fine with it.

Spoiler: Here's how to post spoilers.

Or something.

Does anyone else object to spoilers?

[KelvinZero]

Now I almost want to watch this movie so I can discuss how bad it is with you guys

[Ben the Space Brit]

To me, the movie is about humanity using the backdrop of a pop culture version of realistic space exploration as a backdrop and staging. It's about what we define as 'success' and 'worth' and also more than a little about how we confront difficulties and setbacks.

It isn't anti-space, but the writers clearly wanted to address (but didn't really manage to) the logical outgrowth of the commercialisation of space. If you have resources, crime of one sort or another will follow. Where you have people, all their problems will follow because being on the Moon or Mars does not serve as a magic wand for the human condition.

There is little more I can add without verging into spoilers but I have to add this point: This film isn't anti-space. If it has a political message it is that, if we put too narrow a definition of 'worth' and 'success' on our endeavours, it will poison everything that we do. Rather, if space is to be a part of humanity's future, we must identify and take with us the best parts of humanity rather than try to wall ourselves off from it.

[mme]

I vote spoilers are fine with a warning up front and/or text that requires highlighting. Otherwise this might as well be a poll with no discussion.

[ncb1397]

My two cents.  We can't have a real discussion about the movie without spoilers.  Do you want that here before you see the movie?

I'm fine with it.

Spoiler: Here's how to post spoilers.

Or something.

You want to use the color markup but you want to use "color=#E6E6E6" instead of "color=white". Here is an example....

Brad Pitt blah blah blah Tommy Lee Jones blah blah blah This move sucks blah blah blah

[Eric Hedman]

Spoiler: I have several problems with the story line, the technical details, character development, and acting in the movie.  They are in part as follow:

Brad Pitt travels to the Moon to board a ship going to Mars.  His purpose is to send a message to his father who is in Neptune orbit to get him to respond because it is suspected he is alive.  At Mars they broadcast via laser to Neptune orbit.  Why does he have to go to Mars to do this?  If for some strange reason they couldn't send a message from Earth to Neptune, couldn't they just send the message from Earth to Mars to rebroadcast?

The buggy trip to the far side of the Moon during which they get attacked by pirates is to go to where they launch from the surface direct to Mars.  When they launch to Mars they expend a first stage and are on a 17 day trajectory to Mars.  They must have one hell of a high thrust delta V capability which makes you wonder why they had to expend the first stage as they climbed from the Moon.

On the way to Mars they stop at a Norwegian space station to find out what has gone wrong there.  They find killer primates loose in the station that have killed the crew.  okay!!!!

The surges from Neptune that are disrupting systems on the Earth, the Moon and on Mars make no sense.  There is the vague reference to anti-matter at Neptune causing these surges that are messing up systems around the solar system except for the underground Mars base.  Neptune is 30 AU from the Sun.  The amount of energy released at Neptune to saturate the inner solar system would be massive and yet the small old ship in Neptune orbit right at the source of this energy release is untouched.

For some reason in this story people in space have weird mental problems.  Brad Pitt is frequently having his mental state checked by a computer.  His father, played by Tommy Lee Jones, has flipped out and killed his crew out by Neptune.  When Brad Pitt sneaks aboard the ship to Neptune, the crew is ordered to stop him, they completely incompetently manage to kill themselves so Brad Pitt goes alone to Neptune to confront his father who is alone because his crew is also dead.  Who comes up with drivel like this?
 
When Brad Pitt goes out in a space suit chasing his father in Neptune orbit he has some magical propulsive force to return to the old ship.  Then he grabs on to the spinning radar antenna and rips a panel of to protect himself for being flung through Neptune's ring.  The spinning radar antenna manages to fling him straight to his ship at a significant distance.  He's holding a the panel he ripped free from the radar antenna in front of him as a shield to protect himself from the chunks in the ring.  I bet more people consider walking out during this scene.  The physics is stretching reality significantly.

Tommy Lee Jones was on a mission to determine if there was life anywhere else in the universe why he and his crew who were out of contact with Earth for a decade and a half had to go to Neptune for this mission is never really explained.  Why with ships that could make the journey in 79 days they waited so long to go find out what was going on also makes no sense.

Brooding for 2 hours is not acting.  There is no real character development.  This movie basically sucked.  The whole movie is incoherent.  The story would have been better if the pirates had eye patches, swords and parrots.  They should have had the pirates kidnap Liv Tyler and make the story about rescuing her.  It would at least have been fun.

[sanman]

I never liked  Interstellar much either. So this sounds to be of roughly the same quality.

[Eric Hedman]

I never liked  Interstellar much either. So this sounds to be of roughly the same quality.

I would agree with the comparison.

[john smith 19]

Saw the movie.

Brad Pitt plays a hero astronaut whose heart rate has never gone above 80 BPM no matter what.

Sadly my heart rate didn't either. 

Afterward I was thinking
a) Should have seen the other Pitt movie, the Tarantino one.
b) The Martian felt more scientifically accurate.
c) Gravity was more exciting.

[jcopella]

This movie was gawd-awful. Painfully bad. It's a message movie, the message is "toxic masculinity is bad" (as if we needed to be told), and all of the sci-fi and spaceflight trappings are just excess baggage.

If you really think this movie was about "toxic masculinity", you cannot have paid attention. I'm not defending the movie, but that is so far off-track.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I paid attention. Me and around 716,000 other people, apparently.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ad+astra+toxic+masculinity

Maybe you need to be open to less literal interpretations of the film?

[QuantumG]

Maybe you need to be open to less literal interpretations of the film?

Yes, I just quietly waiting for another "what this film is about" and got another "why don't they do space right?"

Anyone else have opinions about what the message of this film is? What does it say? Does it tell people to think a certain way? Does it challenge any preconceptions?

[jcopella]

Maybe you need to be open to less literal interpretations of the film?

Yes, I just quietly waiting for another "what this film is about" and got another "why don't they do space right?"

Anyone else have opinions about what the message of this film is? What does it say? Does it tell people to think a certain way? Does it challenge any preconceptions?

It says that the complex of behaviors we've come to associate with "toxic masculinity" -- repressed anger and rage, thoughtless striving in pursuit of an abstract goal, cutting oneself off from one's own emotional life and denying oneself meaningful connections and relationships with other people -- leads to destruction, catastrophe, and death. Redemption comes thru letting these behaviors go, reaching out for help, and establishing and nurturing relationships with people.

It's a fairly pedestrian and obvious message. In fact, it's so obvious and pedestrian I'm surprised anyone could watch it and think it was about anything else. The movie fairly well telegraphs the message in its first 60 seconds, and then beats you over the head with it for the remaining (seemingly interminable) two hours and four minutes.

It's certainly not about space. Space just provides the setting for flashy VFX they could put in previews to draw in an unsuspecting audience, and a convenient, if outdated, archetype (the typical NASA astronaut, ca. 1967) to use as a negative example.

I don't think the movie is challenging and I don't think it's going to change anyone's preconceived notions -- unless maybe they had a preconceived notion that this would be a good movie.

[john smith 19]

Yes, I just quietly waiting for another "what this film is about"

It's about half an hour too long. 

Sorry. Couldn't pass that one up. Y'know. Worse angels of my nature and all that.

Anyone else have opinions about what the message of this film is? What does it say? Does it tell people to think a certain way? Does it challenge any preconceptions?

Well things like
1) people may build their whole lives round role models who are fundamentally unworthy. They may do extraordinary things motivated by the deeds of someone who basically turns out to be a bit of Ahole.
2) If all the evidence  tells you you're wrong you're not "dedicated" or "committed,"(except in the mental hosptal sense of the word)  you're a fanboi.
3)  Tactical nuclear weapons do sometimes solve problems.

Other than that the back ground to how humans expand across the solar system is so sketchy as to be meaningless. 

Somewhat like Sunshine.
 Visually impressive.
 Wants to make a make some sort of profound statement about human relationships.
Fails to do so. 

[JohnF]

One word....Boring

[CameronD]

All I'll add about this is that apparently the Director was quoted as saying he wanted to feature "the most realistic depiction of space travel that's been put in a movie".  ..and then we see our hero climbing into a rocket seconds from launch via a hatch in the bottom, setting off a "hull breach" alarm.

And Lockheed-Martin put their name to this drivel?  Right.  Next!!!

[Hog]

All I'll add about this is that apparently the Director was quoted as saying he wanted to feature "the most realistic depiction of space travel that's been put in a movie".  ..and then we see our hero climbing into a rocket seconds from launch via a hatch in the bottom, setting off a "hull breach" alarm.

And Lockheed-Martin put their name to this drivel?  Right.  Next!!!

Emphasis mine:

{These types of things happened all the time during the history of human spaceflight.
You do realize that the T-31 hold for STS-135 really had nothing to do with an "error with the reported position of the crew access arm", right?  NASA simply showed a frozen pic of the Crew Access Arm in its fully retracted position and made up the audio that they broadcasted over NASA-TV.  Meanwhile Pilot Doug Hurley scrambled across the access arm, pulled the side hatch closed behind him, passed through the empty Mid deck up to the Flight Deck and jumped into his front right seat. Chris Ferguson(Commander) sitting in the front right seat just shook his head in disbelief when Hurley looked over and said
"Don't even start with me Fergie, now here, hold my coffee while I strap in and close/lock my visor. 
Commander Ferguson looks over and says "Hey "Chunky" don't forget to initiate O2 flow, we don't want our prime "Jarhead" Pilot going hypoxic before he gets his morning coffee. I told Karen that I'd bring you back in one piece. (astronaut Karen Nyberg and astronaut Doug Hurley are married)
I don't think that Shuttle had a "hull breach" alarm though. Perhaps it had a "Side Hatch Ajar" alarm?}
{j/k}

[Kansan52]

Went to "Downton Abbey" last week. Never seen any of the series before the movie but was engaged with the story and cared about the characters.

Saw "Ad Astra" in Imax Saturday. Never cared for the characters (felt some sympathy for the dead ones). Didn't hear an explanation why they needed to launch on the far side of the moon. Going through the sewer on Mars to get to the rocket, huh? Launch with a hatch open???

And I set my expectations low. The director said they were going for realism by talking to active astronauts but did not include speaking to Anyone Else as the background info sent my expectations plummeting.

[CameronD]

All I'll add about this is that apparently the Director was quoted as saying he wanted to feature "the most realistic depiction of space travel that's been put in a movie".  ..and then we see our hero climbing into a rocket seconds from launch via a hatch in the bottom, setting off a "hull breach" alarm.

And Lockheed-Martin put their name to this drivel?  Right.  Next!!!

Emphasis mine:

{These types of things happened all the time during the history of human spaceflight.
You do realize that the T-31 hold for STS-135 really had nothing to do with an "error with the reported position of the crew access arm", right?  NASA simply showed a frozen pic of the Crew Access Arm in its fully retracted position and made up the audio that they broadcasted over NASA-TV.  Meanwhile Pilot Doug Hurley scrambled across the access arm, pulled the side hatch closed behind him, passed through the empty Mid deck up to the Flight Deck and jumped into his front right seat. Chris Ferguson(Commander) sitting in the front right seat just shook his head in disbelief when Hurley looked over and said
"Don't even start with me Fergie, now here, hold my coffee while I strap in and close/lock my visor. 
Commander Ferguson looks over and says "Hey "Chunky" don't forget to initiate O2 flow, we don't want our prime "Jarhead" Pilot going hypoxic before he gets his morning coffee. I told Karen that I'd bring you back in one piece. (astronaut Karen Nyberg and astronaut Doug Hurley are married)
I don't think that Shuttle had a "hull breach" alarm though. Perhaps it had a "Side Hatch Ajar" alarm?}
{j/k}

Yeah..  It's just that I never realised before that propellant tanks were optional, thus freeing up a large internal volume for fight scenes.  Maybe rocket engines of the "near future" run on imagination.. 

 

[CameronD]

Went to "Downton Abbey" last week. Never seen any of the series before the movie but was engaged with the story and cared about the characters.

Saw "Ad Astra" in Imax Saturday. Never cared for the characters (felt some sympathy for the dead ones). Didn't hear an explanation why they needed to launch on the far side of the moon. Going through the sewer on Mars to get to the rocket, huh? Launch with a hatch open???

IIRC, they needed to launch on the far side of the moon 'cause it's dark, so no-one could see them.

I hear from my niece and nephew that "Dora The Explorer" is quite good.

[daver]

The movie was abhorrent.  I've never left a movie theater feeling so dissatisfied.

[KelvinZero]

I went to see it anyway. Just to be ornery, I quite liked it.

Spoiler/
I would describe the plot as Gattaca meets Moby Dick

I think it helped to know that there was not a big SF pay-off. It was interesting trying to figure out what drove the guy. People here complained about the overdone drama in Apollo 13. This went the other way.
 The way it was acted was complimented nicely by the way it was filmed. I definitely had the impression of some sort of mild dissociative disorder that maybe appeared as a positive on all those automated tests. The robots thought he was almost as good as a robot. No danger sign there! 
/Spoiler

It would be nice to get past these spoilers and discuss how all the plot holes could have been fixed.. with science!

[Eric Hedman]

I went to see it anyway. Just to be ornery, I quite liked it.

Well that makes one of you.

[KelvinZero]

HUGE SPOILERS (obviously)
This youtube clip is a guy giving opinions on some of the technical errors, showing bits of scenes from the movie.



I like the point he makes at the end that so many of these plot holes could have been fixed they often didn't matter to the story at all.

One of the most blatant and straightforward was
Spoiler/
At the end he uses the nuclear blast to push his ship back home. Just don't do that. There was no requirement that he had any shortage of fuel, no big plot reason. Nothing. If you want tension then he still had to get to his ship and get to a minimum safe distance.

Also I think it would have been interesting to see an accurate simulation of what a nuclear blast would do to that local portion of a ring.
/Spoiler

[QuantumG]

I still haven't seen this stinker and there's a movie theater next to my hotel room. I guess you've all convinced me it isn't worth walking over.

If the average person is walking out the cinema with this "obvious" message then yeah, we're going to see the Space = Toxic Masculinity meme more often. Can't say I'm upset about that.

For me, too many people see spaceflight as a stage on which to make heroes.

[KelvinZero]

I still haven't seen this stinker and there's a movie theater next to my hotel room. I guess you've all convinced me it isn't worth walking over.

If the average person is walking out the cinema with this "obvious" message then yeah, we're going to see the Space = Toxic Masculinity meme more often. Can't say I'm upset about that.

For me, too many people see spaceflight as a stage on which to make heroes.

For what it is worth, I don't think it was about toxic masculinity ( and yeah I hate that term too ).
My argument is that the film only shows the "Self-reliance and emotional repression" aspect, none of the others. This guy was no misogynist, domestic abuser, bully or even braggard. The story would have worked exactly the same if the man and scientist father had been replaced with a woman and scientist mother.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity

Traditional stereotypes of men as socially dominant, along with related traits such as misogyny and homophobia, can be considered "toxic" due in part to their promotion of violence, including sexual assault and domestic violence.

Self-reliance and emotional repression are correlated with increased psychological problems in men such as depression, increased stress, and substance abuse. Toxic masculine traits are characteristic of the unspoken code of behavior among men in American prisons, where they exist in part as a response to the harsh conditions of prison life.

Other traditionally masculine traits such as devotion to work, pride in excelling at sports, and providing for one's family, are not considered to be "toxic".

The (story relevant to) character arc was basically this.
Spoiler/
The main character is a very competent astronaut. We are told that his heart beat never goes above 80bpm. He seems sort of disconnected emotionally. He always passes the automated psychology tests that are applied repeatedly throughout the movie.

He learns his father may still be alive He is sent on a sort of odyssey to the farthest edges of the solar system where his father is apparently engaged in some dangerous experiment that is threatening the solar system itself (some mcGuffin about antimatter and the search for life) . All sorts of chaos happens around him but it sort of feels like it is played on a movie screen at a distance. (realistic lack of sound in space helps with this)

His travels show a moon that is full of people. Mostly they show an airport lounge, commercialised mall feel. There are also people on mars.

The mission starts as official but gradually it becomes personal for him (though pretty much throughout he never admits this to himself. We learn how driven his father was on his mission to find life. We learn his father was somewhat of a monster, sacrificing everything including his crew to complete the mission.

He fails the psychology test but pushes on anyway, against orders. Like his father this also results in the death of the rest of the crew. (it is not really the same but the comparison is definitely there)

He alone makes it to the edge of the solarsystem to complete the mission. The location is the rings of Neptune. He finds his father, the monster, is a broken man. The mcGuffin experiment has somehow let his father see the entire universe and it is vast, beautiful and entirely empty but he has refused to accept this and just keeps repeating the same work over and over.

He convinces his father to take his hand but during a spacesuited trip back to the son's vessel, the father jets away and after a struggle, convinces the son to let him go.

Floating there alone, he sees the sun rise over Neptune's ring and has a sort of "pale blue dot epiphany" and an inferred great desire to rejoin humanity. With his new drive he overcomes various odds and returns home.

The story wasn't anti-space. For example I think he remains an astronaut but reconnects with his wife, people are still going about their lives on the moon and mars. It was the whole human world he was returning to, physically the small fraction of the inner solar system that actually had humanity in it, the only life anywhere in the universe, but metaphorically returning to humanity itself.

/Spoiler

I think there are two factors that stop people enjoying this movie.
* Like 2001 it was grindingly slow. This was sort of integral to the movie. I liked it but like 2001 some people never will.
* Despite a decent attempt, a string of unnecessary technical errors and also bad explanations that could have simply been omitted.

I think there is a really good movie within this movie. Cut away some stuff that doesn't make sense and was possibly added to introduce drama. Re-do some CGI with CGI that makes scientific sense. You could pretty much have inserted scenes from "Wanderers" because none of that stuff really mattered.

The "moon pirates" scene was a perfect example. I definitely would have kept it because it showed his mental state very well. The ONLY thing you needed to omit was any mention of "moon pirates." If the attack had been left mysterious then people's internal speculation would have come up with a far more obvious reason why they were attacked, and focused attention on the secret information that was revealed directly after.

[CameronD]

For me, too many people see spaceflight as a stage on which to make heroes.

..which is no different to the way people saw aviation 100 years ago.  Humanity has always needed heroes.

[john smith 19]

If the average person is walking out the cinema with this "obvious" message then yeah, we're going to see the Space = Toxic Masculinity meme more often. Can't say I'm upset about that.

For me, too many people see spaceflight as a stage on which to make heroes.

Indeed.

For space settlement to become a serious thing it's got to stop being a thing where every initial launch has a 50/50 chance of failure.

It's got to stop being this "alien" zone where humans venture briefly and scurry back home and space travel has to be something someone does as a way of going to work

It's the idea (expressed by both Elon Musk and Alan Bond in different ways) that for it to become an integral part of human society it must become "boring."  Something almost anyone could do in the way someone moves to a new city to take a job.

[Martin.cz]

Spoiler:

So I went for this movie only seeing the initial trailer, hearing something about it striving for realism & not doing any prior research. Still, I did not have very high hopes as realistic depictions of space are generally far between in mainstream fiction media (basically Expanse, maybe Gravity and not much else).

Already seeing staging taking happening in the trailer, not to mention the first stage being much smaller that the rest of the rocket, was kinda out of place to me for supposedly realistic depiction of pretty well settled near future Solar System.

On the other hand the scene in the trailer where a party with rovers gets hit by a meteor shower looked pretty realistic! :-) (Yeah, I have not noticed any pirates and it simply looked to me like their area was hit be a meteor shower or possibly some ship/station fragmenting due to the overall ongoing catastrophe and the debris hitting them down on the surface. Kinda like with the debris after Canterbury exploding in The Expanse.)

From the start things looked quite realistic, though I wonder what a "space anthenna" is good for (very low frequency signal detection ?) & how it holds in place to such height (dynamic structure alla space fountain ?).

Yet once the whole Lima project & the gamma ray burst (!) from Neptune stuff shows up, any striving for realism pretty much falls down to Earth, like debris from the space antenna. Just to enumerate the worst aspects:

- the Lima project uses antimatter for propulsion & apparently in big enough amount to somehow manipulate the magnetosphere of a gas giant to excite the bursts - the ludicrous amounts of energy needed to create any, let alone such ludicrous amount of antimatter simply does not match the technology & infrastructure of the setting
-> on the other hand, we at least don't hear about any material shortages or ecological issues like we were bombarded with in Interstellar, but still,
-> so much energy would imply giant swarms of space solar generators not to mention big orbital infrastructure which is suspiciously missing overall, with all the launches originating on the surface of a Planet or Moon
- the Lima project apparently aims to detect life by going out of the heliosphere, but that is way waay waaaay past Neptune where they actually end up
- the mission going for 16 years before things go wrong does not match its objective as well as the apparent ease of space travel in the setting
-> why do you actually have to send people to a listening post on the edge of the solar system ? can't you just relay the data to the inner Solar System, like we have been doing for ~40 years with the Voyager ?
-> couldn't they simply conduct a crew rotation or even possibly call hope for help/space taxi ? that way the crazy guy could continue to do his stuff without a bunch of dead bodies floating around ? it seems to take just 79 days (about half of ISS crew rotation!) with latest tech, so even older ships should be able to get there relatively quickly
- you need to go to Mars in person to speak to microphone directly connected to a laser link
-> one would think with multiple outright wars going on in space they would have secure communication channels they could send a recording through...

But hey, maybe it would switch to be so bad it is good - and the sight of a Norwegian space money of doom mauling an unfortunate astronaut in full EVA suit to death on a space station made me sure I was right! Indeed, just the depictions of physics and technology is so bad it is enjoyable with a morbid sense of amazement:

- the above mentioned primates of space doom
- joy ride through a lunar warzone without any kind of of armor protection or armament heavier than pistols, not to mention going all the way to the far side (nothing really prevents armored cars & tanks from operating on the moon...)
- the generally crazy approach speed every time any ship is attempting to land or dock
- climbing a ladder on a lunching rocket & hijacking said rocket!
- the ullage motors killing one of the Cepheus crew members with their burst of acceleration - apparently the booster & main engine generate no acceleration at all, but staging does!
- Cepheus storing cylinders of poisonous gas in the craw quarters that kill everyone once shot though
- Cepheus overall being a heck of a ship, rivaling many ships of the Expanse with is apparent limitless deltaV, trust-to-weight ratio (at least it seems to have radiators...) and re-entry/radiation shielding
- thrust vectors & vessel orientation all over the place most of the time
- nuking a ship full of antimatter - there is no kill like overkill!
- forgetting to tether your transfer pod to the Lima even though you visibly carry a tether on you - you could see the look in his eyes: "Oh, not again!"
- no explanation whatsoever how the bursts, antimatter & search for aliens on the Lima actually go together (this really stands out like it was cut out and replaced by all the introspective babbling instead)
- can totally agree with no intelligent life being present in the movies universe, including all the protagonists - that might indeed drive one insane!
- the whole spinning antenna & metal plate shield run thing - I was expecting the protagonist the use the plate as a surf board & ride the shock wave back to Earth, Dark Star style!
- the Earth landing CG was for one actually pretty nice and likely inspired by the Dragon V2 propulsive landing animation
- the landing location on Earth (arid area with a body of water) really reminded me of Planet of the Apes & another primate assault upon landing would not be unexpected by this point

OK, this got a bit long. I hope I have not bored to death anyone actually reading this far. ;-)

A spoiler free summary: The depiction of space travel and technology in Ad Astra is so abysmal this alone definitely makes it worth seeing as B/C movie to anyone with even little knowledge of realistic space travel. :-)

[ncb1397]

Hmm, using #E6E6E6 seems to be highly readable in half the posts because the forum software alternates the background color every other post. "#EBEFF3" is directly between each of those background colors. Should work better.

[mike robel]

One word....Boring

Much more boring than 2001 when I was in High School, except the killer baboons were much more ferocious than the 2001 hominids, but had not discovered tools.

[KelvinZero]

Hi guys, I started a new thread with SPOILER PALOOSA in the title so that we don't need to keep using spoiler tags.

I know lots of people hated the movie but I really like talking about flaws in HardSF, and problems that stop the film industry producing good hard SF. There is an interesting mix of totally trivial and unnecessary flaws, all the way up to some genuinely difficult problems of hardSF drama.

MASSIVE SPOILERS. No need to use the spoiler tag here.
(subtitled: why don't script writers just come here to get their science sorted out?)

[Cheapchips]

I'm sure part of the problem with this film's science is Pitt as producer.  When he was interview an astronaut on the ISS he asked about the Vikram lander, "Did you see it crash?"