En approchant l'inconnu

This movie is unbelievably terrible! All scientific facts are wrong and the story is excruciatingly trivial and stupid!

After seeing this movie, I was really thrilled and thought I had seen something worth seeing. Yet I can also understand why many other don't feel that way. This movie doesn't aim to please all audiences, it really targets a specific group of viewers you may or may not be part of.

As other reviewers already stated: if you're looking for an action-packed sci-fi or anticipation movie, move along because this one is not for you. If you're looking for an uplifting, Hollywood-style feel good movie... move along. If you're after great landscapes of Mars and big spaceships roaming about, you should also probably look for other movies. Yet this movie has a lot going for it, as long as you realize what you're in for:

This is a story about a character who is willing to leave everything behind for the greater good, for science and for the slim chance of becoming the first human on Mars. The whole movie is basically a "huis clos", a closed stage in a cramped vessel, where you follow a single individual during his journey of 270 days in space, alone. He has to fight boredom, madness and growing technical issues he is partly responsible for due to his overconfidence and his belief that he can solve everything on his own. He also has to cope with the burden of the entire humanity back on Earth cheering for him and placing the highest expectations on his shoulders. Yet he's just a man. Hopes, successes, failures... They are all part of the journey, and the lead character confronts each in a very believable way.

Acting is spot on (bravo Mark Strong), and the reactions never feel alien or unrealistic. FX are good enough, but this movie doesn't rely on them heavily at all.

There is one very big leap of faith the audience is supposed to make: I find it highly dubious for various reasons that humanity would send a single person on such a long journey without backup: way too dangerous. Yet if you're willing to go with it, you'll find this movie to picture a very believable analysis of human nature when confronted to loneliness, various pressures and challenging situations.

All in all, this movie is more of a psychological approach of long journeys in isolation and adversity, rather than a sci-fi/anticipation movie on colonizing Mars.

I would definitely recommend this movie to those among you who like slow-paced, "psychological" movies such as (with some similarities): - Solaris (2002) - 2001 Space odyssey - Silent running - Das Boot (in some ways) - 127 hours (in some ways) - The survivalist (in some ways)

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 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.

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.