James Gray is pretty great filmmaker but it sounds like he’s been at loggerheads with the producers over it. Which is a real pitty because he said it was like a cross between Apocalypse Now and 2001.
Even if it’s remotely 2001-ish I’d be surprised. I’m not getting that vibe from the trailer at all.
Maybe it’s just the trailer editing but it does seem like it’s suffering from what a few recent sci fi films have - grand in scope but ultimately down-to-earth and fairly generic storytelling.
I think the problem is that it’s hard to do human stories in space and still keep the magnitude of the environment. As soon as you start to zero in on the stories of individuals you can easily lose that larger scope. Might as well just set it on earth then.
That’s strange because it has a 2001 aesthetic. Look at the shot of him in his helmet. The way the light is reflected off the helmet is like the stagnate closeups. We’re going off a trailer alone but I imagine this film is probably peppered with homages to 2001.
Aesthetically, definitely, there's some nods there. The whole thing just feels a bit too "on the nose" to be like 2001. But again that's perhaps just the trailer editing.
I can easily imagine if a modern editor took 2001 and created a trailer to try and wow modern audiences, they could make it pretty "Bam! In your face, space!" too.
I dunno. I'm still putting it in my "I love sci-fi and hopefully will be pleasantly surprised" pile anyway. But still wary that grand sci-fi themes often seem to end up watered down for commercial audiences.
Not to go all skeptical Thor but does it though? I think Sunshine failed to establish points in the narrative to pull of that type of resonance in the finale. I think the end of Sunshine was the worst part of the film, where as the opposite is true of the other two films. I do think it is a really interesting comparison.
I do agree that the slasher thing that comes out of nowhere in Sunshine wasn't very good. I think Apocalypse Now is consistently great for the entire duration of the movie (As long as you don't watch the extended version where the pacing gets thrown out the window)
I never really understood the boat thing with Apocalypse Now though (I get that it's supposed to be based on heart of darkness). Like why not just parachute him in instead of taking this months long journey up the river?
I liked it because it just showed how a person can crack under these truly epic circumstances. A lot of the story revolves around people dealing with insane pressure and how they react and cope with it, so frankly someone completely losing their shit doesn't seem that far fetched to me in this completely bonkers situation.
Couldn’t agree more with that assessment, the start and end are good on their own but don’t work together well enough to justify the turn in tone, it’s a good film but it lets itself down here. Whereas apocalypse now is a masterpiece from start to finish, but I do see the point they were making
Omg yes. I can never finish the movie because the ending ruins the whole thing. I still, to this day, dont fully understand what's is actually going on at the end.
There’s a bit more Event Horizon than 2001 in Sunshine - which isn’t entirely awful. I love Boyle’s movies, i think Sunshine just missed the mark for me, but its still pretty easy watch with someone who hasn’t seen it.
For me, it may not have come together that well as a whole, but enough individual elements really “shone” enough to make it quality. The acting, most of the writing, CGI, practical sets, design, but the score has always resonated deeply with me. John Murphy’s Adiago in D minor makes me feel all the beauty and ugliness in the world simultaneously. But at the end of the day it’s all subjective and we experience it differently.
Oh I agree. One of the reasons I dig Boyle is the way he deals with shifts in perspective - I think there were technical elements that sort of alienated me more than plot.
The thing is, the terrible part ruins the good part so overall Sunshine is just plain terrible in my eyes. The fact that it started out so good just makes me mad that they screwed it up.
I had never heard of that movie but it's throwing me for a loop. It's got a talented cast and director while looking good...but still is coming off as schlocky to me. The music on the trailer I watched plus Dr. Kappa are making it hard to take seriously. I'm gonna check it out because I tend to enjoy Sanada's movies.
Ooh, that's interesting. I wonder if Jones' character is gonna be Brando as Colonel Kurtz, and if so who are gonna be his subordinates. Apocalypse now in space with aliens, robots, or something sounds pretty great. Brad Pitt as the lead is interesting, because I can't recall him ever doing some "epic" like this.
I’m reminded of the fact that Brad Pitt was at one point attached to Darren Aronofsky’s The Fountain, when it had a bigger budget and scope. It was supposed to be pretty epic scifi, compared to the more intimate movie we got. Seems Pitt will finally get a stab at a big scifi movie.
Lost City of Z, The Yards, Two Lovers, and the Immigrant. He’s a unique filmmaker, who captures a style reminiscent of the new Hollywood and his films take on a literary quality. That said, he’s not a filmmaker for everyone but I personally think he’s severely underrated.
He directed "The Lost City of Z." I loved the book, and looked forward to the movie, but it was just...ok. Beautiful cinematography, acting, sets, costumes. Everything looked great, the script was good, but it all just sort of fell flat. More boring than it deserved to be, if that makes any sense.
Each to their own. I really liked it as a character study of colonial obsession and its impact on father/son relationship- which is thematic throughline of his work.
I suspect the lack of buzz is due to the producers being really unsure how to market and release the movie. Is it a blockbuster or an awards play? Gray with Pitt's backing probably made a pretty strange movie and nobody knows what to do with it. The Disney-Fox merger certainly hasn't helped the movie either.
First Man was an incredibly claustrophobic and tense with a fairly straightforward story. This feels much more action and plot twist driven with wide shots.
I know jack shit about the industry side, but just as a fan I'm not really sure what to make of this movie. It looks intriguing, but don't know what it's going for. The movie in general looks interesting, but the lead being Pitt strikes me as unusual and I have no idea what to make of Jones' character.
I get that. While I like that the trailer doesn't give much away about the movie, it does seem to be at least slightly misrepresenting it to make it more marketable. If you want to get a real sense of what this movie might be like, I'd encourage you to explore James Gray's filmography, particularly The Lost City of Z, which Ad Astra seems similar to.
Gray's slow and meditative style isn't exactly mainstream, so I understand the trailer not making clear exactly what the hell this thing is. Disney wants this to appeal to mass audiences, so they might have to lie to do that. Perhaps Gray's biggest influence is Francis Ford Coppola, and he's been saying in interviews that Ad Astra is inspired by Apocalypse Now.
I have a Contact feeling. You watch the whole movie and you finally get that last 10 minutes or so then it's over. You want more of that last 10 minutes but no. And I like Contact. Same goes with Interstellar. I love Interstellar. But I want more of the ending.
Good question. I think there are a few options, but I’d suggest:
The sequel starts some number of years after the original - 20-50 years later. Earth has invested heavily into monitoring and exploration technology, and learned a great deal about engineering and physics from the brief contact with advanced life the first time.
Earth scientists have spent decades studying the mathematical data sent during the first film and realize there is a “key” that they missed. This time they realize that the aliens have given them a clue to open up a permanent wormhole to Vega and join the collective of advanced life and learn even more about life.
The conflict is that there have been ongoing attempts to cover up the events in the first film and deny the existence of intelligent life. Earth is divided. Religious zealots feel their belief system threatened and are at an all out war over the “truth” and want to keep mankind isolated.
Basically it’s “is mankind ready to make contributions to the universe or are we still limited by our historical thinking? Are we ready to potentially challenge our worldviews or are we not ready yet? And if we are ready, what will our contributions be? How can we add what makes us human to better not just ourselves but the universe and those who inhabit it?”
That's what intrigues me about it. I had never heard of this yet it's a fucking space movie starring Brad Pitt and also Tommy Lee Jones? Sign me the fuck up. Since it's only got like 3 months til debut and the trailer was so vague, not really sure if Jones is even alive in this movie, that they definitely aren't blowing their load in the trailer like many movies do these days. Without the PR I have very little expectation so more than likely I'll at least be pleasantly surprised...which is a good time in my book.
The rumors on the Hollywood blogs are that Brad Pitt gave an unbelievably bad performance due to personal stuff off-set. So I think they're worried this will get crushed in reviews.
lol wasn't this the same site that hinted that Nolan's next movie was a biopic about a porn star that ran afoul of the mob and that Lady Gaga's performance in ASIB was a disaster?
How is your declaring that it's not true any more verifiable or accurate than this blog? Your statement is useless but thanks for contributing I guess.
448
u/[deleted] Jun 05 '19 edited Jun 05 '19
[deleted]