From: psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid   
      
   On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 10:35:17 +1300, Your Name    
   wrote:   
      
   >On 2021-10-06 16:01:08 +0000, novaste...@gmail.com said:   
   >> On Friday, September 24, 2021 at 9:15:42 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:   
   >>> On Thu, 23 Sep 2021 20:05:12 -0600, Joe Pfeiffer   
   >>>  wrote:   
   >>>> Paul S Person  writes:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> I finally rented this from Amazon and saw it last night.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> It is a well-done film and would be worth four stars except for one   
   >>>>> small problem: it is as dull as dishwater. Three stars, then.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> This may not be apparent unless you view it, as I did, as being in the   
   >>>>> same "realistic space movie" category as /Apollo 13/. Comparing the   
   >>>>> two shows the difference between a really good movie and one that is   
   >>>>> well-done but ... dispensible.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> IMHO, of course.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> And not a HO I share in the slightest. I had the same sense of constant   
   >>>> tension in the Martian as I did in Apollo 13.   
   >>>   
   >>> There is no need for you to share my HO. You are entitled to your own.   
   >>>   
   >>> I had the blahs all too much of the time.   
   >>>   
   >>> And, the moment they skipped the pre-launch tests because "they only   
   >>> catch a problem one time in twenty" I /knew/ the rocket was going to   
   >>> explode. It was cinematically inevitable.   
   >>>   
   >>> I will concede that the climax was a bit exciting, although, again, it   
   >>> was cinematically impossible for the attempt to fail. So any tension   
   >>> was of the "how do they manage it" rather than "will they manage it"   
   >>> variety.   
   >>>   
   >>> Just as, when I watched /The Bad Seed/, I shortly found I could tell   
   >>> when someone would be knocking at the door: the conversation was   
   >>> heading toward a point where two characters would be able to compare   
   >>> notes and figure what was going on, and /that/ couldn't be allowed.   
   >>> The knock at the door stopped the conversation every time -- and it   
   >>> never resumed from the point of interruption.   
   >>>   
   >>> The climax, while quite rushed, was, however, a suprise.   
   >>>   
   >>> The child abuse at the end was ... well, I am old enough to recognize   
   >>> that it was amusing to the audience, but I no longer find it so.   
   >>>   
   >>>> I'll say having any tension at all in Apollo 13 is a *real* tribute to   
   >>>> everyone involved in the film, since we all know how it came out decades   
   >>>> before the movie was made.   
   >>>   
   >>> Which is what makes it a /much/ better movie.   
   >>>   
   >>> And /2001/ did it better as well.   
   >   
   >The only thing "2001" did 'well' was put people to sleep ... it's a   
   >great cure for insomnia.  :-\   
      
   If you say so.   
      
   >> This is typical of most moviegoers now.  They expect nonstop CGI   
   >> action, and if it's a space movie, it's gotta have alien invaders.   
   >> People now don't want a movie where you have to think.   
   >   
   >The author of 'The Martian' book has written another 'space novel'   
   >called "Project Hail Mary", which this time does include an alien ...   
   >and not one that can be done by Hollyweird as a human actor wearing   
   >bits stuck on their face. The movie version is already planned.   
   >   
      
   I'll probably see it, if it looks at all attractive.   
   --   
   "I begin to envy Petronius."   
   "I have envied him long since."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)