En approchant l'inconnu

If you are looking for a typical Hollywood Mars movie this isn't it. Film's story and its main focus is inside the mind of the main character and the struggle he is facing on his journey to Mars, as opposed to more straightforward action in a 3-piece act. It may also come across as pessimistic as it deals with questions of fate and what life can bring on a one way journey, as life really is, into the unknown; Mars, future, afterlife etc. It isn't satisfying in sense that it brings you a "proper" conclusion to the story, but rather makes you wonder, which can easily turn into dissatisfaction that you were cheated as you waited for the story to bring something forth, instead it leaves you wondering. I applaud the risk the story took to delve into the mind of an engineer and how it handled it. I also applaud Mark Strong for his captivating performance. I don't recommend this to everyone, but to those who don't mind to be left with an unfinished story, come to the conclusion on your own, or keep searching.

I actually loved this film, the great sense of emptiness and solitude and of the austerity of the inside of the space craft. The photography was beautifully done and really captured the mood; That sense of total isolation really came through. The allure of outer space, like any expedition, is the means to counter the technological conundrums presented and a space film presents the possibility of infinite fascination with a world we don't know and the ability to utilise technology to perform a successful expedition. This film fails miserably in an area where it was most important not to and even an 'F' student in a high school would have spotted the anomalies. You can't derive oxygen and hydrogen from dirt, it;s a silicate. Even if you could then the resultant re-combining of oxygen and hydrogen presents the same kind of instability as a weapons grade bomb. Where was all the dirt stored? Why not store more water? Secondly, in a complex space craft, surely someone remembered to install breakers or even fuses! The gyroscope was almost as incongruous as a wind up gramaphone; computers do all the guidance. Whywas the battery which was only intermittently shorted, bleeding redstuff into the water? Why did the rocket lose four boosters between theground and earths upper atmosphere- they just weren't there any more?Why was Stanaforth sent into the desert with untested equipment. Whywas he called Stanaforth, its a stupid and unconvincing name. Why wasmark strong compelled to speak with that generic mid-western Americanaccent, he was useless at it and I like him as an actor. It's all toobad as the film was visually stunning but letdown by appalling scienceand plain bad screen writing. I hate it when something so potentially brilliant is ruined by slapdash research and poor writing; this film was truly worth more than that and should be remade with the problem areas addressed. Lastly; the title is lame.

I was told that this movie was going to be better than Gravity. Man, that's big shoes to fill and Approaching the Unknown could not fill them. For the most part, the film is total propaganda for all of us who support getting to Mars. In that sense, the film has a great concept.

Mark Strong plays an astronaut who willingly signed up for a one way trip to Mars not just so that he could get to Mars, but so that we as a whole can finally get to Mars.

It will appeal to you regardless, if you are a fan of the recent campaigns to go to Mars, but I need to warn you, if you heard the same rumor that this was as good as Gravity, it's not at all.

The story is exciting but the film making is not. I don't want to judge the filmmakers harshly on what is a low budget film with some cool art direction (I did like the space suit Strong wears), but this movie does nothing with the little they had.

All the actors in it who also include Luke Wilson and Sanaa Lathan seem to be phoning in their performances, this may have a lot to do with the bad writing to a cool story. The movie counts on a lot of dialogue that is not that interesting and puts me to sleep.

Mark Strong in Approaching the Unknown is not as interesting to watch for 90mins as Matt Damon in the Martian for over two hours. It's pretty much the same film in a lot of ways, but Strong, who I like, was not as charismatic and could not grasps me enough to keep me interesting.

I'm on the same boat as Approaching the Unknown as I would love to see Mars even if it means never coming back to Earth, and I wished this movie was better, but it's boring.

Following the success of movies like Moon, someone thought it would be a good idea to try with a movie about a mission towards Mars. Mark Strong starts off as an astronaut that is sent there and thinks about his place in the world and talks to people on Earth. It got me excited. Yet by the end I couldn't decide if I am to feel stupid or offended.

Alarm bells started to ring in my mind almost immediately. The personality of the guy was unstable to being cowboyish. The science didn't add up. The atmospheric dye effects had no connection to space or to the story. The water got contaminated by a battery short?! The astronaut's motivation to go to Mars was specifically because he liked the feeling of dying. I mean, come on!

But even with all this aside - and I am capable to putting aside the technical aspects - the film is actually saying nothing concrete. Should we abandon going to space because it is folly or is it that the writer has so little faith in NASA that he thinks all astronauts will be allowed to be depressed artists that write their journal with pencils and feel lonely in space? Is there a point to all the inner dialogues of the guy or is he just losing his mind in this really slow movie? We don't know.

Bottom line: I liked the production values of the film and the acting, but I couldn't get my head around what the writer/director was trying to say. It's time artsy folk understand that not only engineers are a completely different type of people from them, but that writing and directing your own movie is only rarely a good idea.

First, this is menial budget movie . . . All the bad reviewers were more used to high budget fancy space genre movies. Ignore such reviews.

Second, the plot of the movie runs on the lines of meta-physical monologue of the protagonist., which is quintessentially the very fundamental element of this genre.

In most high-budget movies, to cater the broader audience, this element is generally faded out romance elements, human conflicts, moral paradoxes. Not in this. This strictly confined to meta-physical aspects of existentialism one faces when they are alone and divorced off the world.

I could have given 10, but I am disappointed by the ending. Wish, there is more philosophical monologue in the end. That's the only disappointment of this film.

In the beginning, the plot seems way too cliche. Please understand, its just setting stage for the character. If you could push through the part and involve meditative with the character, trust me, its a beautiful movie.

Give it a try with your heart . . . It won't disappoint.