Ad Astra: Into the Heart of Darkness
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 лют 2020
- Jame's Gray's 2019 sci-fi left audiences divided. It wasn't a bombastic sci-fi, but a mundane one (on purpose). It's a simple story about a man finding and coming to terms with his father, using the structure of Heart of Darkness and mythic overtones.
I hope to foster discussion on this film. I think it's a movie that will be more appreciated in years to come.
All content in this video is Fair Use.
Social
Twitter: / imahaffeyfilm
Letterboxd: letterboxd.com/TheKinoCorner/
Instagram: / isaac_mahaffey
Sources:
• How the Lunar Scene fr...
• Video
• Ad Astra Filmmakers Br...
• Sneak Peek: Ad Astra D...
• Ad Astra | Making of M...
• Ad Astra: A Conversati...
• Academy Conversations:...
• James Gray | In Conver...
Very simply one of the worst movies ever made. Anyone who pretends to have enjoyed watching this movie, and believe me we both know you're pretending, has what is referred to as bad taste. There is a big difference between having no taste and having bad taste, the latter being a far worse crime. Someone with no taste might really love a band like Nickelback; this person doesn't know their ass from a hole in the ground, but they couldn't care less, they're a moron, they know it, they don't know why or how, they know nothing about music, Nickelback is their band and they go with it... Now someone with bad taste is for arguments sake equally clueless, however they've garnered from some type of social cues what it is someone with actual taste, a genuinely perceptive individual who has been exposed to and recognized beauty throughout their lifespan, first naturally and then artistically, appreciates. A person with truly bad taste then tries to play the role of someone with actual taste. They mimic a person with taste. And they end up listening to bands like The Arcade Fire and The Black Keys, and post youtube comments about how Ad Astra was "my favorite movie of 2019."
TomTsu very simply one of the dumbest comments ever written. No actual reasons for why you don’t like the movie, but you hop straight to ad hominem attacks of people who enjoy a movie you dislike. It’s okay to not agree on movies, but to completely discredit a person’s entire taste based on one movie is absurd and ignorant. You’re only making yourself look bad here, buddy.
I’m sorry, is this a copypasta? It reads like one.
@@TheKinoCorner "It’s okay to not agree on movies, but to completely discredit a person’s entire taste based on one movie is absurd and ignorant." I'd generally agree with this statement but there are exceptions. Your response belies your confident tone. To do an exhaustive cinematic analysis of this film would be on par with critiquing a Dogs Playing Poker painting... ohhh but the lighting, the grain of the film... it's comical. You're still pretending. Failed art and hacks exist. I was just using this comment section and your video to make a tongue in cheek articulation of that fact. As you're probably aware my initial comment wasn't even directed at you; I like what you're doing here man keep up the good work.
@@tomtsu5923 I'm not convinced that wasn't a copypasta
@@TheKinoCorner I don't know what that is but I'm going to have to check it out.
I love how this film portrays space. In a lot of sci-fi films, space is usually portrayed as something of wonder and full of strange life. In Ad Astra, space is shown as lonely, vast, indifferent and full of existential terror. Since I was a child, I always viewed space this way and found it interesting that people found wonders in space. It's very heart warming that the film tells us that even if there are no other intelligent life forms, we are not alone. We still have ourselves to connect and that's more valuable to only looking outwards.
While I agree that space is not only wonder and awe, i don't think it's absolute loneliness, tragedy and misery either, which i think is the only thing this movie is portraying. When I watched it, they way space affected the people in the movie felt unrealistic and way over the counter. I want to watch it again tho, and see for myself wether that was correct.
@@MrPabgonConsidering the fact people feel lonely these days even when not in space, you can imagine how the loneliness in space feels like.
"In his quest to prove that he wasn't alone, he made himself the loneliest man in the solar system"
Beautifully said
40% audience score? Bruh moment. Brilliant video
Because the audience don't have mind
Well, how many of us went to the site to upvote it? I mean I didn't.
It didn't deserve 40%. It should have gotten 14%.
Apparently, not enough explosions for some people.
@@gregcyr You’re crazy. 14% is too high
This movie was honestly beautiful and one of my favorite movies of 2019. I understand the gripes people have with this movie but I still enjoyed it nonetheless. Its a shame that it was marketed as an action film and not a character study.
Agreed. Screw the critics.
i just like how it looks
It's a great portrait of a world where God is real.
I absolutely adored this film; in fact, it was my favourite film from 2019. I think it would be interesting if you read the script and compared it to the finished product. The ending is so drastically different (there are many minor changes throughout), and I think it would be cool if you did a video about director intentions changing to be more emotionally fulfilling.
how was the ending different?
Do you like nickelback?
Same here. It was also my favorite 2019 film and I was emotionally touched by the story.
@@mattm3400 🤣🤣
This film resonated deeply with me on an existential level. Thanks for highlighting the philosophical and mythological perspectives behind the film.
Loved this movie. I felt like it is underrated
5:36 isn’t entirely true. The crew was shocked when their captain ended up dying whereas McBride didn’t display much emotion over the fact. It’s Roy who acts like an automaton through most of the movie, that’s showcased by his first scene when he takes his psych test and the way he narrates. I did think the crew was meant to be the antithesis of Roy, how he should be rather than how he pretends to be, he even wonders briefly how much of the faces they present is a facade like his.
Beautiful movie, I liked the it when I saw it last year, although I much preferred the calmer moments than the action bits. Brad Pitt did an amazing job, acting cold and collect, while slowly dialing up the emotions through out the film. Also great video!
I have grown to love this film. I find its a lot more clever than most give it credit for.
Without question Ad Astra is a masterpiece!
with a question.
It's sad that we feel alone in this universe...LOOK AROUND AT ALL THE LIFE IN FRONT OF YOU...
Yea but wen I try to ask life's questions to the tree in my front yard people start murmuring about my mental health or if I got sum really good drugs
right, but we feel alone because of the SIZE of the universe.
if the universe is almost infinitely vast, and we're just one planet in hundreds and hundreds of billions . . . that sounds pretty lonely to me.
Everything around us (including the Universe) was created FOR US! That makes all of us very special.
I feel like the director really wanted to add some more to the movie, especially when Brad Pitt's character (who's name I've forgotten) was traveling with the crew. In that sense, it would have more or less mirrored the Odyssey and allowed to flesh out the main character a bit more (accomplished with more journal entries/voice overs).
It probably would have invested more people into the film by adding manifest and latent content.
That's just my opinion though.
Emotional dread after watching Ad Astra was unbeatable, I haven't had this strong existential crisis since a year ago and now this movie singlehandedly made me thinking a lot about life.
Am absolutely amazing analysis of this movie. The way you went into it searching for the humanity instead of searching for the science fiction was an astounding outlook. The best line you had was about both wanting and not wanting to be our fathers and hoping to help the next generation a little bit more. Hit me like a truck when you said that, great video man I'm glad emplemon sent me your way
Wow, you've nailed it, I had this movie all wrong, but I think it's because of some of the other channels interpretation of it. I'll see it now, and better.
I think your analysis is extremely cogent. I particularly like the hideous banality, the slightly sordid, at least boring aspect of the Lunar and Martian colonies, anti-utopian without being outright dystopian, that you emphasize. I have an additional reason to love this movie, which is its use of spatial constraint: the way it molds its storyline and emotional arc onto a precise geography, with which the viewer becomes familiar, and ends up inhabiting. Very few films, and very different films have this precious quality of taking their location seriously, of communicating what could be called a “geographical sentiment”, and they do it in different ways. In Ad Astra, it is the trajectory: Earth, Moon, Mars, Neptune and back. In Stromboli by Rossellini, it is the island of Stromboli with its two villages separated by a volcano. In Picnic at Hanging Rock by Wier, it is a rocky formation looming over the bush. In Fitzcarraldo by Herzog, it is a two-river system across a hill (however fictional); (in Rear Window by Hitchcock it is pushed to a minimalist and maybe excessively cerebral extreme: a room overlooking a courtyard.)
I think it was a great film, certainly a breath of fresh air, in the sense that i, sincerely, give absolutely no shits about comic movies, joker, remakes of remakes, of remakes. I'd rather see a movie like this that borrows heavily on existing material, than some director trying to cement their shoddy ground coughstarwarsstartrekdeathcough.
Back to the movie, one of the things i absolutely loved, is the fact that despite the story being there, solidly in place, it's also, very much a carriage for the world around them. It made me want to know more, soaking in the movie, to see every detail of this broken world in which Roy lives.
Kinda...made me think about cowboy movies, but when cowboy movies were such as they were, not now to us, the cliche. Great piece. If only more movies had such line of sight.
Didnt like the movie because of expectations but after hearing your analysis, brilliant by the way, I’m going to give it a watch again. Very insightful assessment.
I'm late to the party but glad to be here, and glad to have watched this film. Incidentally, I saw the much overpraised 'The Creator' at Imax last week and consider Ad Astra to be its antithesis in all the right ways. Intelligent, beautifully presented and subtle in its messaging, this film has what is lacking from so many recent releases.
Thanks for this commentary on Ad Astra. It makes me want to revisit the film. I did like it when I watched it at the cinema. But I am now sure that I did miss a lot the first time around.
I loved this movie when it came out, but i couldn't quite figure out why
Now i do and love it even more
Good review (LIKED) and thanks for the work you put in.
One of the absolute best movies (topp ten atleast) I have seen. We might be functionaly alone, love to actually see that explored
I'd love to see more movies etc. that expands on the lore, its really interesting
i quite liked Ad Astra; i have tried to put my finger on the elements that shifted it from "decent near future movie" like "2010" to the realm of "thoughtful yet emotionally satisfying sci-fi masterwork". basically they didn't mess with the science too much, (Nolan - Interstellar, i'm looking at you- surviving a near event horizon accelerator event) and yet they were examining inner space that was important in context of the science. mood stabilizers to assist in the emotional distress of travel, isolation, boredom etc, and yet dehumanizing elements of it... then the risk of a stunning ego-collapse from realizing there may be no point to anything; we're alone in the universe, and Roy being able to survive it because he'd already lost faith in father/god figures. finally; the one man who IS an island, realizing he didn't have to be, and his life becoming better for it (plus ending up with Liv Tyler... for the win!). i suspect that the movie wasn't narrated as heavily, and probably was "rescued" by it, made more approachable. (unlike the first release of Blade Runner, which didn't need 'saving'...)
(and NIckleback is okay. Not Tool or Rush, but not Backstreet either... BTO was the Nickleback of my childhood, and they're revered now. let go of the hate, you may need to learn to hear them again and again on oldies stations without test-monkey rage episodes...)
I've watched this so many times. It's a brilliant movie
Stumbled on to this video about a very underrated science fiction film. I personally love this film. I also really like the soundtrack.
I sensed deep Christian symbology in this movie the first time I saw it. So I saw it a second time more carefully, and there is clearly something deeply metaphysical going on in this movie, as you very correctly stated 'in the backdrop of space'. Yours was so far the most nuanced analysis of this movie. Enjoyed it.
I sincerely like this movie. It was not at all what I was expecting when I saw it in the theatre and I loved it for that.
Reminds me of a space odyssey of Kubrick but I hope we get more films like this
Excellent analysis. Some new insights here. Now I love the film even more.
Gunna have to rewatch this. Forgot about it. Gray is a great director.
Me encanta esta película. Qué bueno encontrar más gente en internet que también la aprecie.. Al parecer, también tuvo muchos reshoots. Me gustaría conocer, si es que lo hay, la versión que James Gray tenía en mente. Igualmente, me sigue pareciendo una obra maestra.
Fine review that does the director justice.
The thing about 'Ad astra' is that is was released and perceived during our current *culture war* .
Whoever suffered through Latin grammar school knows the complete phrase, referenced in the title as *_'per aspera ad astra'_* ( *_'through hardships to stars'_* - that is the _'apotheosis'_ of mortal man).
This *culture war* of ours - a sort of 21st century *'Western Cultural Revolution'* with it's over the top shrill, dogmatic agitation, 'struggling sessions' and political persecution ('cancel culture') - framed the movie not along *Joseph Conrad's **_reactionary cultural pessimism_* , but *gender* - as if it were a _'deconstruction of masculinity'_ , because of the mere absence of a female main cast.
_'True Grit' Americans who oppose the globalist propaganda_ disregarded the movie, then in a mere political _reflex_ without trying to _reclaim_ the story from pseudo-feminist _misappropriation of culture_ .
The interpretation of Gray's work, given here does it's script more justice and may put it back into the rhetorical 'arsenal' of _neo-reactionary discourse_ .
Best comment I've gotten on any video in a long time!
@@TheKinoCorner
"Best comment I've gotten on any video in a long time!"
Thanks for the friendly feedback - not many 'go that extra mile'.
I haven't watched Your other essays to be able to tell Your political leanings when You are welcoming someone who openly advocates a _reactionary_ , _traditionalist_ stance.
But regardless, Your interpretation of this movie is concisely developed _along the material_ and involved individuals without _normative moralization_ .
To me, learning of *Joseph Conrad* was arguably the only meaningful content when passing high-school external exams, years ago.
And I don't mean the conventional post-war 'beware fascism' in 'Apocalypse Now', but Conrad's _original_ deconstruction of Western 'enlightenment', not along premises of a _deductive_ 'Marxist or emancipatory orthodoxy', but the *personal experience* of a sailor in the 'Age of Imperialism'.
I do entertain the idea of building up a collection of 'reactionary cinema' works for quite some time, now - that is movies that run against the 'visual language' and the materialism of Hollywood (Adorno's 'culture industry').
Telling stories of individuals, struggling with gods and fate toward their role in the cosmos - and ultimately divine love - don't fit the modern _narrative and 'framing'_ of the arts and media.
Movies are rarely concieved consistently in such a spirit - and they usually fail if they are _constructed_ like e.g. 'Republican investigative movies' - but traces of this ancient _tradition_ of storytelling can be found, every now then.
('Man of La Mancha' 1972)
ua-cam.com/video/iH9nDlBr3b4/v-deo.html
('Solaris' 1972)
ua-cam.com/video/BxfMfQvUlfs/v-deo.html
('Sarah Connor Chronicles' 2008)
ua-cam.com/video/gkIyHSitUMc/v-deo.html
('William' 2019)
ua-cam.com/video/9B2WLgzu-Ec/v-deo.html
('Sputnik' 2020)
ua-cam.com/video/Qh-oOnZ2Di0/v-deo.html
('The Dig' 2020)
ua-cam.com/video/JZQz0rkNajo/v-deo.html
This is one of the most realistic portrayals of Space and its effect on the human psychology in history
Most beautiful movie with little story behind.
I noticed within the first 15 minutes that this seems to be based on the Heart of Darkness.
Thing I love about this movie is it’s about space, but not really sci fi. There’s no aliens, it’s all contained within our solar system and only has technology that either all exists or could exist within the next few decades or so.
Sometimes aliens and big adventures to newly discovered planets can get kinda stale, sometimes it’s nice to see a movie that takes an approach of “as far as we know we’re alone and we’re still generations out from being able to search farther”
Best film I saw in this decade
My opinion
Beautiful movie visually and Brad Pitt was great... but there was something off with the pacing. It felt very long and choppy. I do think the best scene was the board room meeting with random people taking notes and recording with no explanation. There were times in the movie with multiple voices from past and present talking over one another, I had to go back with subtitles and it still didn't make sense of who was talking. And I have so many questions about space pirates. They feel more like a plot device and not part of the movie's universe...Do they have their own base? Do they live in tents? How do they have rovers, functional suits, and weapons without any support systems from earth? Moon isn't that big - can they not be found? How many are there?
Very simply, one of the best films ever made.
I hope a Directors Cut one day sees the light of day. I read that there was A LOT cut.
People have to run a campaign online..
Great movie and good review
Excellent work
I fell in love with this movie so fast when I first saw it. Wished I had seen it while it was still in theaters. Brad Pitt is an all time fav and seeing another sci-fi adventure so grounded and gut-wrenching was needed at the time. I just rewatched it so I could come and watch your essay here on it. I love how you break down the Joseph Campbell and Heart of Darkness influences. I had a crazy thought while watching, and I am sure I am not the first to note this, but what if McBride's father was never really there on the ship? and what we see is him grappling with letting go all on his own? Or maybe he was pulling a Weekend at Burney's with his corpse as he was going insane? Hahaha, a crazy theory but it really seemed to make me wonder. I connected with this film deeply and will recommend this video to all friends of mine I get to watch. I love your channel and can't wait for what is next.
Hey man, just discovered your channel (came from The Lighthouse vid) Anyways I absolutely adore your content, my only note is you may want to put a spoiler warning on the beginning. I'll be telling my friends about you though
I love this movie. Definitely got me emotional, but maybe it just hit something close to home.
Theory: What if we, humanity, are actually the first intelligent species in the universe? That in millions or billions of years we are the ones reaching out to future intelligent species? We would be like the mysterious higher beings in 2001 Space Odyssey and Contact.
Could be true,if not the universe
Maybe the milkyway galaxy
many people just hate movies that aren't lot of explosions and stuff like that. Or anything where they might have to think about it
Some people complain when they're asked to use more than one brain cell.
@@frankvee sadly.
I was hoping for something more...sci fi, but the visuals are extremely good
Who did you say directed 'Apocalypse Now'? @1.27 I was so sure it was Francis Coppola?
It was directed by Coppola, but both Lucas and Coppola were in talks to direct it and so both were attached to the project.
Holy shit I had no idea George Lucas was ever attached to Apocalypse Now. Thank you
“Sometimes I think we're alone in the universe, and sometimes I think we're not. In either case the idea is quite staggering.”
I enjoyed the movie but it also made me a bit sad, there was so much untapped promise and obvious studio meddling. I definitely want to give this a rewatch though.
Several beautiful shots in the film, a fantastic concept. I just thought its execution was sorely lacking. Also non re-usable rockets reeeeeeally?
i thought the message and like point of the movie was to illustrate the fact the mankind's place is here on Earth. That there is nothing better out among the stars waiting for us and that our human experience and endeavors are a pointless shout into the void outside of our home, that me are inexorably tied to our home planet and belong within it. There is no cosmic catharsis awaiting us. All purpose of existence to discover is here.
The first time i saw this movie, I was high as balls... and I was blown away lol
Why would being alone for years and years in something the size of a cabin in the woods. Drive someone crazy. That sounds like absolute heaven. I can't stand the sight of other people somedays.
You should become a UA-camr then!
Was incredible in theaters
I thought the film was excellent. There were were one or two scenes and sequences that I felt might have been put in the film to give it more “action” or make it more “exciting”, that it could have done just fine without. ie: the moon buggy chase scene or the bio experiment run amok scene. 2001 and 2010 weren’t action films but they were both excellent.
Director stumbles into Campbell and ends up repeating a tired story structure. Imagine my shock.
Watched in a theatre in November before the pandemic. It’s NOT the worst space movie ever, but a close 2nd behind Armageddon. I was quite excited when I saw the cast. But...
Watch it again. I didn't care for it first time I watched it. The second time it nearly brought me to tears. It's a beautiful film.
Dude ARMAGEDDON IS YOUR #1 SPACE MOVIE? lololol
But...?
Great movie.
Interesting review. I think I took something philosophically very different away from it than you did, or perhaps we came to the same conclusion and you simply didn't mention it. I felt like the theme of the movie was really about coming to grips with the idea that there is no God. The father is obsessed with the idea of extraterrestrial life, intelligent life. He devotes his entire life to finding it, proving it, confirming his faith. But he is ultimately working on faith, and when he fails to find evidence supporting his belief, he just keeps on looking, assuming the absence of proof must be his own error, and not evidence that the thing he is looking for simply isn't there. The movie makes it very clear that there is no intelligent extra terrestrial life. How exactly they did this is fuzzy, but I think we're supposed to except that we are alone in the universe as per the film.
Mankind needs a sense of meaning, purpose. While you do not absolutely 100% need a God to have that sense of meaning, it does make it vastly vastly easier if you believe in God. Anyone who disagrees should perhaps read Victor Frankel's book, mankind search for meaning. I actually just read that book anyway it's really good.
So anyway to continue the metaphor of the movie as I see it, the aliens represent God in the absence of aliens represents the absence of God. So the dad only found the meeting by searching outward, and in the absence of any discovery, all of his actions and his life have been meaningless. I think the movie is basically trying to ask the question, "how do we go on if it all means nothing? " that seem to fit the structure as well. Heart of darkness uses the ivory trade as a metaphor for that tiny little kernel of beastly savagery with an all of us that we hide with her and veneer of civilization. Lord of the flies does the same thing. Those kinds of stories lend themselves to existential ponderings about the nature and significance of men. This seemed to be doing the same thing, at least to me.
On the off chance that you actually see this comment, I would really be very interested to know what your take on my take is. But thank you very much for doing this, well I do not think that this is a great movie by any stretch, I do think it had a lot of potential and I think the idea is very interesting even if the execution was a bit lacking by my standards. Certainly the more views worthy of more attention than it gets, so I appreciated this review
Nice one
Thank you!
The Kino Corner omg
Bombad Bombadness
0 seconds ago
Ad Astra was not a great movie but it was pretty damn good and very relevant to our time. A few days from now, the JWST is going to launch and hopefully go into operation next year when it arrives at L2. One of the state goals is to find evidence of life outside our solar system. I'm expecting the space telescope to discover absolutely no evidence of extra-terrestrial life. Just as in this movie, we will find that there is nothing out there saying "hello" to us.
made me look for the film...
"did you know that you can't see stars on the bright side of the moon?"
You can see stars just fine on the bright side of the moon. However, most cameras cannot because of the massive difference in light levels which is why you don't see (hardly any) stars in the pictures and videos of astronauts landing on the moon.
1:08 Homer's theodicy? You mean the Frank Grimes episode?
I am being honest here, I got just about everything said here upon first viewing at the cinema. The film could have done relayed all this in more interesting and dynamic ways and had some subplot to make it a bit less slow.
Enjoyed your vid none the less mind.
I really want to see this one again; all I remember is being disappointed and bored by the whole thing and being quite underwhelmed by the moon chase sequence. I must say that I find the Apocalypse Now comparison unconvincing -- almost every conceivable story can be shoe-horned into the Hero's Journey template -- that's why it's a useful concept but an over-used one.
The film really feels like it's been tampered with, the script is a mess and the action bits that follow after the moon chase (which I thought did actually work) are far too cartoony and logically inconsistent to survive along side the Tarkovsky inspired introspection that fills the majority of the air time. Donald Sutherlands's character is pointless and the tropey use of Liv Tyler really robbed it of my investment. It's the kind of film I want to be good and I want to see more of, but this really felt like an artist who wanted to swing for the fences but didn't have the power, influence, or spine (we can't really know which from the outside) to make it happen.
I wasn't a big fan of Liv Tyler but I disagree about Donald Sutherland's character. He's there to show a different side to TLJ before we see him. He's sort of the antithesis to TLJ. Maybe he could have been used more, I think he fits in on a structural level. I thought the Tarkovsky-inspired scenes far outweighed the more cartoony scenes (like going back to his ship). That's not to say that the film is flawed, because it is, but I'm glad to have an introspective sci-fi in a time when what passes for sci fi is Marvel or Star Wars.
@@TheKinoCorner I think on paper you're right about the intention behind Sutherland's character but functionally he leaves far too soon to actually play any meaningful role. Especially given how subdued Pitt's character is, any development is forced to take time, and the film does not provide it before Sutherland is gone. Everyone I've talked to whose seen the film ends up being like "Oh yeah, Donald Sutherland was in it. What was the point of him again?".
They do outweigh the cartoony scenes in runtime but the nature of them makes them far less memorable than the times that they are broken by something absurd.
It's a great film to talk about but in depth discussion tends to paint the film as far better than it actually is.
There's actually been a lot of great and interesting sci-fi lately, they're just not getting the same marketing pushes as the franchises. But that issue is the same for all genres not specifically sci-fi.
Loved it. Space is epic. Don't like Pitt so much but oh well. Didn't get the meaning behind the scenes so much - too highbrow for me.
Never judge a book by its movie - especially Joseph Conrad - I'm currently re-reading Nostromo recognize the name?
I have no desire or ambitions to go exploring or to know what is "OUT THERE!" in the cosmos. I already know the answer!
The Mandelbrot and macrocosm studies have shown me so much that I now begin to understand the bigger grand view -
knowing too that we change reality by viewing and participating - that our minds are interconnected, and connected to the present, past and future prove we are not alone and that we have unlimited power and potential to see and touch the fingertip of infinite energy and infinite possibilities - which is GOD!
Very simply one of the best movies ever made. Anyone who pretends not to have enjoyed this movie, and believe me we both know you are pretending, has what is referred to as bad taste. In the age of endless Marvel universe movies, dumb action movies, insipid romcoms and fantastical network series, this film stands out, like a hand of a savior, ready to pull you out of the current rotting wasteland that is Hollywood film.
Between the questions of the protagonist's relationship to his non-present dad and the questions of god, commercialization and commodification of all human experience, stands a film that precariously balances between being watchable and being thinking. I think this feat is accomplished in a stellar fashion (see what I did there?). For multiple generations of people with bad parental figures, this is a movie that hits home in the most visceral way. For those who wonder about humanity on a larger scale, this film is an answer to the question of what is out there for us and where our efforts are best directed. We only have each other and this precious blue planet, the likes of which might exist somewhere we would never travel to in our measly human lifespan. For anyone who has the cast blackness of void in their psyche, this film appeals to them with its cinematic grandeur.
Those who trash Nickelback, The Arcade Fire, and The Black Keys, whoever those are - presumably musicians? - in youtube video comments are the embodiment of bad taste they pretend to despise. What a profound irony is on display in that comment, only the commenter could never possibly grasp it. Just as well, as they are on their way to watch Spiderman and listen to Josh Groban or something. Bon voyage, @TomTsu.
"This film is basically Apocalypse Now"
"This film is basically Heart of Darkness"
My friend, this story is the story of Pinocchio.
How so?
Is this good?
6:29 you are mistaken. Roy's voyage from Mars to Neptune lasted 79 days.
I loved the film but I felt it really could have had a shot at being an all time great if the studio had not gotten in the way. The monkey scene and ending wreaked of studio mandated reshoots
Yeah it’s definitely flawed. I didn’t mind the ending so much, but the monkey scene was a bit out of place and felt tacked on.
@@TheKinoCorner The idea behind the ending I really liked. Thematically it works quite well imo. Just the execution of it felt so hollywoodish.
@@brendankraus4744 I'd have also preferred a quieter approach, but it does feel like the studio wanted a more bombastic ending because the rest of the film was fairly quiet.
@@TheKinoCorner i think the monkey seen can serve as a way to show brad pits rebellious side, and also a way to foreshadow what he is gonna be like going forward in the movie, like when he went against the decision of the crew to not engage in the rescue mission. or they might've just added the scene as a mere filler, just so the audience doesn't fall asleep, something interesting to keep the audience engaged
@@daniboiyy
More like filler so that audience doesn't sleep
Thanks for sparking the conversation! Unpopular opinions are valid and essential. Too bad UA-cam, Google, Facebook and several others with their short-lived strangleholds disagree.
Cool shit
George Lucas did not direct Apocalypse Now unless that was a joke. Francis Ford Coppola!
It was offered to him but he turned it down to do Star Wars
I watched it for the second time yesterday and now understand what it was trying to do. It's basically a beat for beat retelling of Apocalypse Now in space. There are some clever ideas and beautiful cinematography, but it's let down by poor casting choices and weak dialog. Brad Pitt is great, but everyone else is just completely disposable. It's not a terrible movie by any means, certainly not compared to most movies being churned out in the last couple of years, but it could have been a lot better.
Or third, we are the last of a vast collection of life.
1:23 Lucas was NOT in Apocalypse Now-producer check your informatio- facts. It was Francis Ford Coppola.
Coppolla directed Apocalypse Now.... not Lucas.
i wouldn't consider being tribalistic a bad thing, i'd say its what drives us to success. The strong want to protect your closest and those who will actively protect you drives us to create better and safer environments for us to live in. Ultimately the pirates are out for their own yes but is that truly a bad thing?
The Movie is a Guided Meditation, As a person into Zen philosophy, I really enjoyed it, especially having the whole cinema to myself without any annoyance.
Didn't enjoy it but I still think it was a good and interesting movie
I liked it.. it's a flawed movie all right. But it was meditative and engaging
Is accurate...
I can't imagine what it would be like to give a damn about my father.
I liked it, wasn't the best but I liked it, I liked Interstellar better. What I like is the attempts better or worse to depict our future and the technology. I like the physics as depicted, not all get it right but its entertainment right, so they have to take liberties to keep it entertaining. The Martian was better but even it fudged the physics a little for the sake of the story.
Brilliant film. But I can tell where the studio tried to make it more appealing to the people who were never going to like it, and in dooing so, made it less appealing to the ones who would.
Everyone who believes in heaven and a God that looks like them, should watch it.
Ad Astra = Ed Asner
the only reason i didnt like this movie was because it made me think about my own relationship with my father ;w;
The rest of the movie is awesome but looking at the orbital mechanics is so disappointing. 😢