Terrible


I couldn't believe how bad this was. I was ready to see this 50th anniversary film, expecting at least something like Apollo 13, maybe even something approaching 2001. Instead I got this low budget improv acted piece of junk. All I could think of is they must've made this up as they went with the most mundane and boring scenes possible. Even the space scenes were so low budget they weren't worth seeing. A total disservice to the real Neal and all those behind Apollo, the greatest project in history. Much better to just see the documentaries. Maybe someday they'll make a film that does justice to the real thing. This is so far from that it's sad.

reply

You troll bad are.

reply

N Armstrong was not Mr. Excitement. This was not Apollo 13, a riveting movie about, well Apollo 13. If you read about him, he was a low-key guy, an engineer and test pilot. He was boring. The movie was boring. Buzz Aldrin would have been a better choice for 1st man on the moon, 'cause even though he's eccentric, he's fun to watch. He punches people for saying the moon landing was faked. Now, there's your hero. Bad choice by crew leader Deke Slayton on that one. IMHO

reply

Almost replied in disagreement, took me a moment to see the forest for the trees is all. I like the cut of your jib Jim.

reply

No, Armstrong was not Mr. Excitement, that was the last thing NASA wanted in its astronauts!

But Hollywood really could have made a better film about him, the movie isn't very good - it's a dull movie about a really interesting subject. I think a big part of the problem is a miscast lead, Ryan Gosling can be very good in the right role, but well. Ask him to play a character who hides his feelings, and it turns out he isn't one of those actors who can speak with their eyes while their character says nothing. And that's what the lead in this film needed to do, show the audience what was going on in Armstrong's mind, while saying nothing, or nothing meaningful.

reply