NOTE IMDb
4,9/10
9,2 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.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire au total
Whit K. Lee
- Featured in Civilian Astronaut Footage
- (as a different name)
Avis à la une
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Approaching the Unknown?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 10 232 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 6 476 $US
- 5 juin 2016
- Montant brut mondial
- 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 En approchant l'inconnu (2016) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre