First Man - What Went Wrong? - Houston, We Have a Problem.....

[Jessie]

36 minutes ago, aabattery said:

 

Neil was an engineer himself. He didn't exactly sit around doing nothing while people put the rockets and landers and what-not together. The astronauts had a lot of valuable input on getting all that stuff working.

I thought all astronauts were engineers? obviously these guys are smart but they aren't the geniuses who actually invented the rocket ship, they are there to maintain their craft and know what to do should a problem arise. I just think it's silly how someone like Neil Armstrong is much more famous and 'important' than someone like Buzz Aldren simply because he called shotgun at some point during the flight.

[aabattery]

26 minutes ago, Jessie said:

I thought all astronauts were engineers? obviously these guys are smart but they aren't the geniuses who actually invented the rocket ship, they are there to maintain their craft and know what to do should a problem arise. I just think it's silly how someone like Neil Armstrong is much more famous and 'important' than someone like Buzz Aldren simply because he called shotgun at some point during the flight.

 

I dunno. Genius is obviously a strong word, but almost all of the Apollo guys were insanely qualified. They weren't just throwing random test pilots up there. I know you've made up your mind on the missions being pointless wastes of money, but they got a lot of good science done. There might have been more effective ways to do it, sure, but there's a lot of collective good that can come from projects like Apollo.

 

Anyway, Neil walked first because he was the mission commander. They didn't just flip a coin. I'd say both guys can be considered important, but there's always a bit more glamour in being first. I don't think there's much anyone can do about that. It's just human nature.

[Jessie]

33 minutes ago, aabattery said:

 

I dunno. Genius is obviously a strong word, but almost all of the Apollo guys were insanely qualified. They weren't just throwing random test pilots up there. I know you've made up your mind on the missions being pointless wastes of money, but they got a lot of good science done. There might have been more effective ways to do it, sure, but there's a lot of collective good that can come from projects like Apollo.

 

Anyway, Neil walked first because he was the mission commander. They didn't just flip a coin. I'd say both guys can be considered important, but there's always a bit more glamour in being first. I don't think there's much anyone can do about that. It's just human nature.

 

I think it's more to do with media emphasising on the 'first man' to walk on the moon whereas they should have just had 'first men' and given everyone a fair share of the limelight. in hindsight I bet Buzz wished he'd just pushed in front

[aabattery]

8 minutes ago, Jessie said:

 

I think it's more to do with media emphasising on the 'first man' to walk on the moon whereas they should have just had 'first men' and given everyone a fair share of the limelight. in hindsight I bet Buzz wished he'd just pushed in front

 

Eh. Buzz still got a lot of coverage. I'd say most people who can name Armstrong can name Aldrin as well. Michael Collins, on the other hand; if anyone drew a short straw, it's him.

[filmscholar]

1 hour ago, Jessie said:

Autumn  (or shall o say Fall) has been kind to exciting Sci fi blockbusters like Gravity, interstellar and The Martian because they were more exciting for the general audience therefore become massive crowd pleasers. First Man doesn't really have the same appeal as those, I don't think we should blame the performance on competition.

 

Competition was a factor but it wasn't the end all be all as you said.  I haven't seen the film so I don't know if it's better than the other 3 but all seemed to at least get good critical reception.     But you can't deny Two Historic 80 Million OW Oct Grossers with a huge Romantic Film with "First Man" being sandwiched in the middle of all that wasn't good for it.   

Edited October 23, 2018 by filmscholar

[CoolioD1]

buzz aldrin met optimus prime. who's the real winner here?

Edited October 23, 2018 by CoolioD1

[Jessie]

46 minutes ago, filmscholar said:

 

Competition was a factor but it wasn't the end all be all as you said.  I haven't seen the film so I don't know if it's better than the other 3 but all seemed to at least get good critical reception.     But you can't deny Two Historic 80 Million OW Oct Grossers with a huge Romantic Film with "First Man" being sandwiched in the middle of all that wasn't good for it.   

interstellar had more competition and still thrived. personally I think First Man would have performanced the same even if it opened in a dead month

[4815162342]

1 hour ago, CoolioD1 said:

buzz aldrin met optimus prime. who's the real winner here?

 

Optimus Prime

[SofNascimento]

Watched it today. Really good, I was expecting long segments of family drama but the pace was spot on. Most scenes felt they were as long as they needed. Not the launch of the Saturn V though, the film should had had 1 more hour just for that. 

I missed more Buzz Aldrin. For most of the movie I didn't even know who was playing him. 

Now let's put someone on Mars already, I want to watch that on Youtube. 

[Curtis1986]

Looking at another brutal drop this weekend. It's time to stick a fork in this film.

[Tau Ceti]

6 minutes ago, Curtis1986 said:

Looking at another brutal drop this weekend. It's time to stick a fork in this film.

I'd say its holds have been ordinary not brutal. It's still pacing for a 3 multi.

 

But it's clearly not behaving like an adult-oriented award contender. And there's not enough slack left in its overseas markets to make up the difference there. It will take a write down. A shame.

[Zakiyyah6]

A 3.0 multi is not good enough for a well reviewed adult film that only opened with 16mil. Fact is, the film should have had 4.0 in the bag considering how tiny it's opening was. There is a disconnect between critics and audiences. Audiences think that it is decent/okay at best while critics think that it's one of the best of the year. Bohemian Rhapsody will probably finish it off next weekend. 

[LegendaryBen]

2 hours ago, Tau Ceti said:

I'd say its holds have been ordinary not brutal. It's still pacing for a 3 multi.

 

But it's clearly not behaving like an adult-oriented award contender. And there's not enough slack left in its overseas markets to make up the difference there. It will take a write down. A shame.

3.0 is still bad though even if it reaches that.