ÉVALUATION IMDb
4,9/10
9,3 k
MA NOTE
Un astronaute américain se prépare pour une mission vers Mars.Un astronaute américain se prépare pour une mission vers Mars.Un astronaute américain se prépare pour une mission vers Mars.
- Prix
- 1 victoire au total
Whit K. Lee
- Featured in Civilian Astronaut Footage
- (as a different name)
Avis en vedette
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)
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)
This movie is good. I honestly understand the bad rating, because its not mainstream and you need to understand the "zen-spirit" of it.You need to have sensitivity and some wisdom to appreciate a movie like this.Its atmospheric and poetic.Lets you experience space from an angle of basic reality and not heroism nor action.
The slow descend into madness, his monologues, it is good.
A good story isn't about a lot of action, a lot of events, it lies in the subtleties and how they come together.
Just a good movie. I guess, blade runner also had a bad reception when it was released. This movie is perhaps not meant for this generation of action spoiled viewers. I really hope this will get some appreciation along the line, so that we may see more of this quality. Real sci-fi fans will love this movie for what it is.
The slow descend into madness, his monologues, it is good.
A good story isn't about a lot of action, a lot of events, it lies in the subtleties and how they come together.
Just a good movie. I guess, blade runner also had a bad reception when it was released. This movie is perhaps not meant for this generation of action spoiled viewers. I really hope this will get some appreciation along the line, so that we may see more of this quality. Real sci-fi fans will love this movie for what it is.
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.
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.
The daily routines, boredom, fixing the issues as he goes along.. it's all a very good projection of what one would go through on a trip that far in space. One initially might think it an exciting journey and while it would be, it's the daily monotony, repeating itself and enduring that which would be the major challenge .. assuming the ship has allvthe tech and science it needs to get one there. I found it interesting. Good watch.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesWorsley (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.
- GaffesThroughout 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.
- Citations
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?
- ConnexionsReferenced in It Takes Two: Sol Brothers (2021)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Approaching the Unknown?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Bilinmeze Yolculuk
- Lieux de tournage
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 10 232 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 6 476 $ US
- 5 juin 2016
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 10 232 $ US
- Durée1 heure 30 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Approaching the Unknown (2016) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre