Thank you.
***FIRST MAN (Ryan Gosling, dir.Damien Chazelle)
68,274 Views |
533 Replies |
Last: 4 yr ago by TexAggie5432
Uh... no it didn't.Quote:
the achievement 'transcended countries and borders'
aTmAg said:Uh... no it didn't.Quote:
the achievement 'transcended countries and borders'
It was proof we were better than all the other countries. It was called the space race, not the space UN.
Has this article made it to the politics forum yet? Gosling must be going for the best actor award? Was the 3 minute standing ovation Iike the ones they used to do for Michael Moore?
I won't let it ruin the movie for me
I won't let it ruin the movie for me
I still would like to see this movie, but this is exactly the type of PC bull**** that I f-ing hate from Hollywood.
"Transcends other countries and borders?"
F*** you, no it didn't. Quit re-writing actual history to bend it to your snowflake modern sensibilities. Yes, it was "one small step for man" and "one giant leap for mankind" but DO NOT try and erase the FACT that it was AMERICANS who accomplished this and proudly planted a U.S. flag to prove it.
This is a movie celebrating the AMERICAN space program. How AMERICANS beat the odds and got AMERICANS to the moon first. It celebrates the triumph of the AMERICAN astronauts and the sacrifices they made. Not only are we supposed to feel white-guilt, but now the filmmakers want us to feel American-guilt?
I could go on and on about how angry this makes me, but let me just say to the filmmakers, Gosling and anyone who actually believes this crap: kindly go and f*** yourselves.
"Transcends other countries and borders?"
F*** you, no it didn't. Quit re-writing actual history to bend it to your snowflake modern sensibilities. Yes, it was "one small step for man" and "one giant leap for mankind" but DO NOT try and erase the FACT that it was AMERICANS who accomplished this and proudly planted a U.S. flag to prove it.
This is a movie celebrating the AMERICAN space program. How AMERICANS beat the odds and got AMERICANS to the moon first. It celebrates the triumph of the AMERICAN astronauts and the sacrifices they made. Not only are we supposed to feel white-guilt, but now the filmmakers want us to feel American-guilt?
I could go on and on about how angry this makes me, but let me just say to the filmmakers, Gosling and anyone who actually believes this crap: kindly go and f*** yourselves.
..and if the rest of the world would really like to share in the accomplishment of walking on the moon, then maybe another country (ANY other country) would like to actually try and accomplish it.
Until then, the fact is that only Americans have actually set foot on the surface of the moon. The rest of the world doesn't get a "Participant" ribbon for it.
Until then, the fact is that only Americans have actually set foot on the surface of the moon. The rest of the world doesn't get a "Participant" ribbon for it.
Maybe it's just as simple as the movie ends with Armstrong saying "One small step" and looking up at the Earth.
The landing on the Moon will be crazy tense: they landed with all kind of alarms and about 30 seconds of fuel. The first few steps were also unknown because they didn't know what the surface would be like to walk on. You end the movie with celebration and release of all that tension with a smile, famous words, and a pan up to the Earth.
The landing on the Moon will be crazy tense: they landed with all kind of alarms and about 30 seconds of fuel. The first few steps were also unknown because they didn't know what the surface would be like to walk on. You end the movie with celebration and release of all that tension with a smile, famous words, and a pan up to the Earth.
Izzard did it better
Start at 2:25
Start at 2:25
Well at least they didn't cast Whoopi Goldberg as Buzz Aldrin to make it more inclusive. Count your blessings.
You know, as a Texas Rangers fan, I'm going to take credit for the Astros World Series win because that transcends teams and borders.
List of Apollo subcontactors that I can find: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/app-f.html & https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4206/app-e.htm
I don't see any foreign countries.
And it appears that the movie was filmed in Georgia. So they can't even film a movie about it in a way that "transcends countries and borders"
I don't see any foreign countries.
And it appears that the movie was filmed in Georgia. So they can't even film a movie about it in a way that "transcends countries and borders"
Maybe some of you drama queens ought to actually WATCH THE MOVIE FOR YOURSELF before frothing at the mouth. The American flag - on the moon - is IN THE MOVIE, in multiple shots, just as I suspected/remembered.
But it's called First Man, not First Country. This particular telling of the story of the moon landing is told through the eyes of Neil Armstrong. If it were the eight-part HBO mini-series version, they'd no doubt have the time to dive more into the "space race" / U.S.-vs.-Russia angle more. And I'm sure that aspect is obviously featured, but this is primarily the story of Neil Armstrong and his family, NOT U.S. vs. Russia. Apparently there's a pretty strong personal/human beat in the movie on the moon for Neil, that's the culmination of HIS arc, and to actually show the flag planting itself would take away from THAT moment. But again, they SHOW the flag, ON the moon, quite a bit. No one is scrubbing that from the history books...
But it's called First Man, not First Country. This particular telling of the story of the moon landing is told through the eyes of Neil Armstrong. If it were the eight-part HBO mini-series version, they'd no doubt have the time to dive more into the "space race" / U.S.-vs.-Russia angle more. And I'm sure that aspect is obviously featured, but this is primarily the story of Neil Armstrong and his family, NOT U.S. vs. Russia. Apparently there's a pretty strong personal/human beat in the movie on the moon for Neil, that's the culmination of HIS arc, and to actually show the flag planting itself would take away from THAT moment. But again, they SHOW the flag, ON the moon, quite a bit. No one is scrubbing that from the history books...
Geez the film acts like we needed a bunch of German rocket scientists, or that we left a plaque saying "we came in peace for all mankind" or something
Okay, but if this film tries to say that this historical event never took place, I will freaking lose it:TCTTS said:
But again, they SHOW the flag, ON the moon, quite a bit. No one is scrubbing that from the history books...
This is a part of our country's history, dammit....and I'll be damned if I let these Hollywood liberals scrub this away!
Business Insider is a hack publication, and I'll happily see the movie and the way they portray it wont make or break anything for me unless it's painfully obvious that they go out of their way to bury it as an American achievement AND a human achievement because it was both. My guess is they do it justice good enough. I also agree it's a story about the man, not the overall space race. Likely overreaction.
That being said, I hate every person who puts those ****ing emojies between every word in a tweet.
That being said, I hate every person who puts those ****ing emojies between every word in a tweet.
Hey!!!! our captured German rocket scientists were better than the Russian's captured German rocket scientists!!!!!!!!Ag Since 83 said:
Geez the film acts like we needed a bunch of German rocket scientists, or that we left a plaque saying "we came in peace for all mankind" or something
Glad to hear that article is likely fake news. But I would still see this movie regardless.
Drama queens?
Coupled with Hollywood's well-documented reputation in recent times of not being pro-America, and the actor's own words quoted in the article (of which I will not defend or attack, I don't know what it's reliability is), I think it is a valid criticism of a movie telling a well known historic story that apparently is leaving out one key piece of the story. I've looked at the previews to the movie and have seen only the one flag being pulled up on a flag pole attached to a front porch. The lack of the flag in the previews is not in itself a concern, but when the actor who portrays the key role states what he did in the article, why should I not have concerns over the accuracy of this movie?
I've stated already that I am a sucker for movies about the space program. I count The Right Stuff and Apollo 13 as among the best that I've seen. I will see First Man. If there is no American flag displayed at any point during Armstrong's moon walk, I will consider that an incredible disappointment and will be hard-pressed to consider the movie in the same light as these other two. I don't need a John Rambo/Jack Ryan/Captain America ultra-patriotic moment, but to attempt to say that this is a human achievement rather than what it was - an AMERICAN achievement - is problematic.
** I have not seen the IMAX preview that you mention. If you have a link to it, post it please.
Coupled with Hollywood's well-documented reputation in recent times of not being pro-America, and the actor's own words quoted in the article (of which I will not defend or attack, I don't know what it's reliability is), I think it is a valid criticism of a movie telling a well known historic story that apparently is leaving out one key piece of the story. I've looked at the previews to the movie and have seen only the one flag being pulled up on a flag pole attached to a front porch. The lack of the flag in the previews is not in itself a concern, but when the actor who portrays the key role states what he did in the article, why should I not have concerns over the accuracy of this movie?
I've stated already that I am a sucker for movies about the space program. I count The Right Stuff and Apollo 13 as among the best that I've seen. I will see First Man. If there is no American flag displayed at any point during Armstrong's moon walk, I will consider that an incredible disappointment and will be hard-pressed to consider the movie in the same light as these other two. I don't need a John Rambo/Jack Ryan/Captain America ultra-patriotic moment, but to attempt to say that this is a human achievement rather than what it was - an AMERICAN achievement - is problematic.
** I have not seen the IMAX preview that you mention. If you have a link to it, post it please.
Context in an interview matters. We have no idea what the question was, or what Gosling said before/after. Go back and read the "interview" and notice how the most controversial part isn't an actual quote, but the Telegraph putting in their own words what Gosling may or may not have meant. I say this only because it happens all the time in print interviews.
But again, THE FLAG IS ON THE MOON, IN THE MOVIE. This is a fact. It's in the IMAX footage that played before M:I6 (which isn't online), and multiple people who have now seen the movie itself say there are quite a few shots of the flag on the moon. So that basically negates what is being implied as Gosling's supposed message in that context. If only because the U.S. is still obviously getting credit by the very existence of the flag on the moon in the movie. What I'm interpreting is that the filmmakers simply didn't want to make the landing itself mainly about it being one country over another. The country angle is obviously part of the subtext, by the inclusion of the flag in many shots, but what they wanted to focus on primarily is that it was a human achievement.
For some reasons certain posters think both can't be done simultaneously; that to emphasize the human aspect the country aspect was eliminated entirely. Except it wasn't eliminated. It's there. Clearly.
But again, THE FLAG IS ON THE MOON, IN THE MOVIE. This is a fact. It's in the IMAX footage that played before M:I6 (which isn't online), and multiple people who have now seen the movie itself say there are quite a few shots of the flag on the moon. So that basically negates what is being implied as Gosling's supposed message in that context. If only because the U.S. is still obviously getting credit by the very existence of the flag on the moon in the movie. What I'm interpreting is that the filmmakers simply didn't want to make the landing itself mainly about it being one country over another. The country angle is obviously part of the subtext, by the inclusion of the flag in many shots, but what they wanted to focus on primarily is that it was a human achievement.
For some reasons certain posters think both can't be done simultaneously; that to emphasize the human aspect the country aspect was eliminated entirely. Except it wasn't eliminated. It's there. Clearly.
Somewhere I read that Gosling's answer was not about the American flag but why a Canadian is playing Armstrong. If that's the case, then it appears that a reporter is trying to create controversy.
However, I disagree that showing Armstrong raise the flag would detract from the personal story. That would be the culmination of 7 years tireless dedication for him and thousands of other people. Lot's of those guys lost their marriages over it. It was all about beating the Russians. Without that source of motivation, it never would have happened.
However, I disagree that showing Armstrong raise the flag would detract from the personal story. That would be the culmination of 7 years tireless dedication for him and thousands of other people. Lot's of those guys lost their marriages over it. It was all about beating the Russians. Without that source of motivation, it never would have happened.
I always get a chuckle out of these "controversies" whipped up before a movie comes out. It's always some political issue that's battled over to the point of tedium and when the movie comes out it turns out to be nothing. Before Beauty and The Beast came out we had Gaston and his servant dude but****ing each other and in the movie it was a minor thing that lasted about 2 seconds. This will probably be the same.
Quote:
Rick Armstrong and Mark Armstrong released a statement jointly with "First Man" author James R. Hansen on Friday in the wake of claims that the lack of the flag planting in the movie is unpatriotic.
"We do not feel this movie is anti-American in the slightest," the trio said. "Quite the opposite. But don't take our word for it. We'd encourage everyone to go see this remarkable film and see for themselves."
Quote:
Chazelle also stood by the film Friday amid the outcry.
"In 'First Man' I show the American flag standing on the lunar surface, but the flag being physically planted into the surface is one of several moments of the Apollo 11 lunar EVA that I chose not to focus upon," he said in a statement. "To address the question of whether this was a political statement, the answer is no. My goal with this movie was to share with audiences the unseen, unknown aspects of America's mission to the moon - particularly Neil Armstrong's personal saga and what he may have been thinking and feeling during those famous few hours."
"I wanted the primary focus in that scene to be on Neil's solitary moments on the moon - his point of view as he first exited the LEM, his time spent at Little West Crater, the memories that may have crossed his mind during his lunar EVA," Chazelle added. "This was a feat beyond imagination; it was truly a giant leap for mankind. This film is about one of the most extraordinary accomplishments not only in American history, but in human history. My hope is that by digging under the surface and humanizing the icon, we can better understand just how difficult, audacious and heroic this moment really was."
So was all this faux controversy, outrage, and response all just brilliant marketing?
If all they cared about was box office, I wouldn't put that past them at all. But this is the kind of controversy that can really affect an Oscar campaign (see Zero Dark Thirty), and I can't see them risking that, since this was basically made for the awards hunt (and box office, too, no doubt, as evident by the splashy IMAX push).
I just assumed they didn't feel the need, or didnt want to , to show him planting the flag because that has been done many times before.
Every Apollo movie has shown the launch too. That doesn't mean it would be a good idea to skip it this time around. Some things are compelling enough to show every time. To me, the launch is #1 (I hope they do it better than Apollo 13), the landing is #2, ascent from moon is #3, trans earth injection #4, and reentry #5. Those are all things where one mistake would likely have killed the astronauts. On the moon there are 2 big moments: the first step and planting the flag. All the above should be shown at a minimum. Skipping any of those would detract from any movie about Apollo 11.
Based on further reports from another screening last night at Telluride, here's the primary technical reason the flag planting isn't shown, expounding on what I was talking about earlier...
The majority of the moon landing is apparently shown first person from Armstrong's point of view. We are his eyes, and we see what he sees as he exits the lander, walks on the moon, etc., which is pretty cool. We got a taste of this in the IMAX footage with M:I6 and it was AWESOME. This is also apparently combined with, as I said prior, flashes of what Armstrong is primarily thinking about... his family and the sacrifice he made to achieve this moment.
Outside of all that, I'm sorry, but this footage simply isn't all that cinematic...
If I had to choose, I would MUCH rather have a visceral, uniquely cool POV sequence, especially when we still DO see the flag multiple times.
Further, the more people who see the movie, the more disbelief there is at this ridiculous "controversy." There are multiple reports of the movie just oozing patriotism and featuring a distinct, pro-American angle.
You guys can keep whining all you want, but from every indication, this is a NOTHING issue, to the point where all this b*tching and moaning is going to sound idiotic once everyone sees the film for themselves next month.
The majority of the moon landing is apparently shown first person from Armstrong's point of view. We are his eyes, and we see what he sees as he exits the lander, walks on the moon, etc., which is pretty cool. We got a taste of this in the IMAX footage with M:I6 and it was AWESOME. This is also apparently combined with, as I said prior, flashes of what Armstrong is primarily thinking about... his family and the sacrifice he made to achieve this moment.
Outside of all that, I'm sorry, but this footage simply isn't all that cinematic...
If I had to choose, I would MUCH rather have a visceral, uniquely cool POV sequence, especially when we still DO see the flag multiple times.
Further, the more people who see the movie, the more disbelief there is at this ridiculous "controversy." There are multiple reports of the movie just oozing patriotism and featuring a distinct, pro-American angle.
You guys can keep whining all you want, but from every indication, this is a NOTHING issue, to the point where all this b*tching and moaning is going to sound idiotic once everyone sees the film for themselves next month.
It's really weird that people would overreact so much before even seeing the movie....
I fully admit to falling prey to hype at times, but never something this stupid.
IF it is accurate that they filmed a flag planting scene and subsequently decided to edit it out because the "achievement transcended countries and borders", then the controversy and criticism would absolutely be warranted and justified. The question is wether that IF is accurate or not.
I realize that the director and others are denying it, but many of us are wondering if they are honest in those denials or if are merely trying to spin their way out of it to keep any sort of boycott from happening.
I realize that the director and others are denying it, but many of us are wondering if they are honest in those denials or if are merely trying to spin their way out of it to keep any sort of boycott from happening.
I cannot believe I'm engaging you again, but for the sake of dispelling misinformation, neither Chazelle, Gosling, the Amrstrongs, or anyone else has even remotely indicated that they filmed the flag planting scene, but then chose to leave it out. Once again, this is such disingenuous bullsh*t. You're basically jumping to a conclusion no one has mentioned simply to boost the credibility of your argument. Where are you even getting this "IF it is accurate..." crap? Literally no one and no report has given even the whiff of a hint that they filmed it but left it out.
My guess is that if they had decided to go all in for a political point, then they'd just admit it up front. There's no reason to think any of them are lying about it.aTmAg said:
I realize that the director and others are denying it, but many of us are wondering if they are honest in those denials or if are merely trying to spin their way out of it to keep any sort of boycott from happening.
It's just an artistic direction, not a political statement. It's similar to how Nolan handled Dunkirk last summer.
I'm driving right now, but I thought I read in a tweet yesterday that it was "edited out". I'll try to find it later, and if I can't, then I'll retract that part.
Nevertheless, if it was omitted because the "achievement transcended countries and borders" the criticism is completely justified.
If Gosling merely screwed up and misspoke off the cuff, then he should just say so. All would be forgiven with me.
Nevertheless, if it was omitted because the "achievement transcended countries and borders" the criticism is completely justified.
If Gosling merely screwed up and misspoke off the cuff, then he should just say so. All would be forgiven with me.
I was not aware of any such controversy with Dunkirk.Belton Ag said:My guess is that if they had decided to go all in for a political point, then they'd just admit it up front. There's no reason to think any of them are lying about it.aTmAg said:
I realize that the director and others are denying it, but many of us are wondering if they are honest in those denials or if are merely trying to spin their way out of it to keep any sort of boycott from happening.
It's just an artistic direction, not a political statement. It's similar to how Nolan handled Dunkirk last summer.
I think that if they merely left out the flag scene for artistic reasons, then they don't really understand the true essence of the entire endeavour. It would be like leaving out any mention of Kevin Costner's dad in Field of Dreams, 9/11 out of Zero Dark Thirty, the wedding shootout from Kill Bill, etc. National pride was the central motivation of every person working on the project. The planting of the flag was the culmination of all of that.
Featured Stories
See All
Slimmer Regis again helps his draft stock at Pro Day
by Olin Buchanan
TexAgs Internship Program
by TexAgs
7:55
10h ago
1.1k
Sights & Sounds: Texas A&M's 2026 Pro Day
by Kaylee Dreyer
9:48
14h ago
2.0k
40:24
11h ago
2.0k
UntoldSpirit
WARNING FOR COMFORT SUITES ON TEXAS FOR FOOTBALL SEASON
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
3
gigemags-99
WARNING FOR COMFORT SUITES ON TEXAS FOR FOOTBALL SEASON
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
2
rca21978
Coen Echols feels A&M's O-line can be amongst the nation's best
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
2