VALUTAZIONE IMDb
4,9/10
9266
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA U.S. astronaut prepares for a mission to Mars.A U.S. astronaut prepares for a mission to Mars.A U.S. astronaut prepares for a mission to Mars.
- Premi
- 1 vittoria in totale
Whit K. Lee
- Featured in Civilian Astronaut Footage
- (as a different name)
Recensioni in evidenza
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.
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.
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.
I can see why 'Approaching the Unknown' would not be to everyone's liking. It's very much a slow-burner of a film and is really more of a character study than anything else. With space movies I think people have come to expect drama filled, save-the-world type films and this is simply not that. This is the story of a man who has embarked on a mission that very few people on Earth would be brave enough to do, and the struggle he consequently went through.
I actually quite enjoyed it for the most part. A film with basically only one character is never going to be the most exhilarating watch, however the pacing of the film doesn't feel overly slow. Mark Strong in the lead role does a good job of being just interesting enough in what would have been a very tough role to take on.
As mentioned, this won't be for everyone. People who go into this expecting an 'Armegeddon' or even 'Gravity' type film are going to be let down and I suspect that is a lot of the reason why this film has not been received very well. However if you go in simply expecting a solid exploration of astronaut life and the challenges they can go through mentally, I think you will find yourself quite enjoying this one.
I actually quite enjoyed it for the most part. A film with basically only one character is never going to be the most exhilarating watch, however the pacing of the film doesn't feel overly slow. Mark Strong in the lead role does a good job of being just interesting enough in what would have been a very tough role to take on.
As mentioned, this won't be for everyone. People who go into this expecting an 'Armegeddon' or even 'Gravity' type film are going to be let down and I suspect that is a lot of the reason why this film has not been received very well. However if you go in simply expecting a solid exploration of astronaut life and the challenges they can go through mentally, I think you will find yourself quite enjoying this one.
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.
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.
I had great expectations for this movie after seen the trailer, that looked amazing. Well, what a disappointment this film was. Is not that the acting was bad, or the production values. Neither the visual effects, which are OK. It's just that NOTHING happens... at least nothing that can move the spectators to feel, or even THINK something. The whole thing is an exercise on futility, good concepts wasted and pretentious sequences of slow motion stuff trying to be philosophical or something, but just coming out... lame. If you want to see an exciting, deep, or even entertaining sci fi space film, look somewhere else.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizWorsley (Charles Baker) and Greenstreet (Anders Danielsen Lie) (the crew of the refuelling station) are both named after members of the crew of Ernest Shackleton's ill-fated Antarctic expedition of 1914-1917. They were the Captain and First Officer respectively, as they are in this film.
- BlooperThroughout the film, when Captain William Stanaforth communicates with Earth by, there is no delay in receiving a reply. The farther from Earth he is the delay would increase to many minutes between sending a signal and receiving a reply.
- Citazioni
William D. Stanaforth: Our bodies are more space than matter. There's an unfathomable distance between each atom, each particle. What keeps us solid? Why don't we dissolve?
- ConnessioniReferenced in It Takes Two: Sol Brothers (2021)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Approaching the Unknown?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 10.232 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 6476 USD
- 5 giu 2016
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 10.232 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 30min(90 min)
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti





