The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Buzz Mohawk on "First Man"
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Commenter Buzz Mohawk writes:

I took Mrs. Mohawk to an IMAX theater on the first day of release.

My wife the Hungarian race realist noticed that there were no black people in the audience. We usually see disproportionate numbers of them in places like movie theaters and malls where this was. They have lots of disposable income and free time, but not for this movie apparently.

The opening scene, and some thereafter, conform to what Steve says: too much shaky camera. Chazelle uses this effect, plus extra dirt on everything, to give his audience the impression that this was tough stuff. Well, the real stuff, “The Right Stuff” was very tough but not quite that grimy, and the pilots all had colliculi, so their instruments didn’t look quite that vibrate-y to them. There were real times, though, when high g-forces threatened to black things out entirely.

Speaking of The Right Stuff, observant fans will catch a glimpse of someone playing Chuck Yeager saying that Armstrong “gets distracted,” right after Neil bounces an X-15 off the atmosphere and recovers. This film shows that, contrary to what Mr. Mach One famously said about the Mercury astronauts that Tom Wolfe wrote about, Apollo men were not “Spam in a can.” They were engineers who studied massive amounts of information, operated complex systems, piloted in the vacuum of space, and solved life-threatening problems when seconds counted.

Really observant movie fans will notice an homage to 2001: A Space Odyssey, when a pen floats loose in the X-15 cockpit.

This film is historically accurate. Every aerospace event depicted happened, and all of Armstrong’s impressive saves are shown. Yes, he did that. Since this is a movie, however, everything just necessarily goes by quickly.

Sets, props and costumes are right too. Space capsules are correctly cramped. The wood-paneled Armstrong household appears as it was (the astronaut’s sons Mark and Eric consulted on this).

The moon walk scene is as realistic as it can be, but it might not be worth the price or trouble of going to an IMAX theater. It is the only part of the film that was shot with an IMAX camera. If you are someone who has seen practically every Hasselblad photograph, every 16mm film, and every television transmission from the Moon, you don’t need to go to the extra trouble. You might even notice things that are slightly off.

This movie is not entirely about space anyway. It is also about Whitey. It even includes Gil Scott-Heron’s poem, “Whitey on the Moon,” which was recited during protests at the time. A mercifully brief effort is made here to show the unrest of the 1960s. Fifty years ago, blacks were shouting that money should be spent on them instead of on Whitey’s “giant leap for mankind.” Nothing has changed. Today, reviewers are lamenting the fact that this movie is very white. Well, white men went to the Moon, okay?

The book on which the film is based, First Man, The Life of Neil A. Armstrong, was written by historian James R. Hansen. It is the only authorized biography of Armstrong. As such, it is The source, and it will be that for as long as there are such creatures as historians. That makes it an important book. Neil Armstrong, a humble, white American from Ohio, was the First Man to stand on another world — and he will be that forever. It took Hansen two years to convince his subject that yes, maybe there should be a biography.

The challenge of going to the Moon was attempted because that’s who we are. The challenge of depicting Neil Armstrong’s feelings in a movie was tried because that’s what movies do.

Ryan Gosling’s difficult task was to portray emotions in a man who was known for not displaying any. In one scene he cries, convincingly, but who knows when Neil ever did? What we do know from the biography is that Armstrong’s sister, June, told Hansen that the death of Neil’s daughter, Karen, “crushed him.” In real life, the man said little to anyone about this loss, but the little girl’s death is a poignant thread that runs through the film.

Hansen speculated that Karen’s death might have been a factor in Neil’s decision to make a career change and apply to be an astronaut, and the movie blatantly portrays that as the sole reason. The truth, however, is not clear. Armstrong was already a NASA pilot, and his own boss urged him to apply.

There is no evidence, either, that Armstrong did the one sentimental act depicted on the Moon in the film. It is pure conjecture cooked up to conform to the aforementioned thread — and to make you cry.

If you are getting the picture that Armstrong’s story is best told in words, you are right. The cool truth cannot be shown on 138 minutes of film. The man himself said, “I guess we all like to be recognized not for one piece of fireworks but for the ledger of our daily work.” Nevertheless, this is an enjoyable, successful movie, sure to make Oscar news. The effort and talent that went into it are obvious, and only the necessities of film entertainment hold it back.

First Man succeeds in showing that Armstrong, his family and colleagues were, in many ways, typical Americans of their time. We are treated to a re-creation of their suburban, Houston life. Fake controversies about flags aside, the film makes it obvious that these were Americans who did those great things. They represent what we were, and what we should still be. What they did says all you need to know about what Americans can do. Like many of us, they were part of something much bigger than themselves — mothers rearing children, fathers chasing goals and sometimes dying.

Death is an undercurrent here. Neighbors and friends get killed on the job. The wife across the street suddenly becomes a widow; her children instantly become fatherless. That was the life of test pilots, astronauts, and their families.

Between tensely-smoked 60s cigarettes, Claire Foy gives an Oscar-nominatable performance, acting out family drama that might or might not have happened. Those who control Hollywood require movies, even movies about heroic men, to have this stuff. “I am astronaut’s wife. Hear me roar.”

Foy storms into Mission Control too, something the real Mrs. Armstrong actually did, to give the guys a piece of her mind when they cut off her audio connection to Gemini VIII. Her husband was struggling with a spaceship spinning out of control; he and co-pilot Dave Scott, another future moonwalker, were seconds away from blacking out forever.

At the very end of the film, there is a nice bit of symbolism: Mr. and Mrs. Armstrong are separated by the large, rectangular window of a quarantine chamber, trying to re-make contact. This represents the relationship between the man on the large, rectangular movie screen and the audience in the theater.

There is another connection to Kubrick’s 2001 here. Like Keir Dullea (astronaut Dave Bowman) in a Space Odyssey, Gosling’s Armstrong has gone from our Flatland world into another dimension, through that rectangular world of the movie screen. At the time of Apollo 11, there was intellectual talk about it being an evolutionary step analogous to when the first amphibians crawled upon land. Here Armstrong, like Bowman, has made a “giant leap” in evolution, and we can’t quite be there with him.

Like the moon he visited, Neil Armstrong was distant. He remained so for the rest of his life, while the world tried to make contact with him. Now Hollywood has tried to do the same.

Mrs. Mohawk liked the movie more than I did. Since she likes to watch stuff that women like to watch, I must conclude that Chazelle has succeeded in making a film about a male-oriented subject, with lots of cool stuff, while at the same time selling the story to women and checking most of the boxes required today. It’s still all about Whitey, though.

 
Hide 91 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anonymous[162] • Disclaimer says:

    Mrs. Mohawk liked the movie more than I did. Since she likes to watch stuff that women like to watch, I must conclude that Chazelle has succeeded in making a film about a male-oriented subject, with lots of cool stuff, while at the same time selling the story to women and checking most of the boxes required today. It’s still all about Whitey, though.

    That’s probably why it bombed. It was a space movie that was turned into a chick flick. That turns off the men, and the space stuff is going to turn off a lot of women no matter how much chick stuff you add.

    • Replies: @Thulean Friend
    @Anonymous

    I have seen the film. It is definitely not a 'chick flick'. The reason it bombed is because it deals with a heroic subject with an all-White cast in a way that isn't bombastic. There are no special effects. There are no smoke and mirrors. Armstrong himself is extremely hard to portray, enigmatic and self-enclosed. Such a character will be a hard sell in an era where extroversion and bombast are promoted as qualities in of themselves.

    Regarding the criticism of "shaky camera", I did notice a progression in the film. It starts very close to Armstrong and then gradually expands throughout the film. The first (and only) time you get to see a clear view of the entire spacecraft is when the beast called Apollo 11 finally thunders off from Earth. It is a magnificient scene. The underwhelming and cramped previous scenes act as a prelude to the final act and then you get to see it in all its glory.

    In a sense it is poetic. The cinematography expands along with the ambitions and the horizon of the film in a crescendo at the very end.

    Finally, I want to underline something Buzz wrote:


    They were engineers who studied massive amounts of information, operated complex systems, piloted in the vacuum of space, and solved life-threatening problems when seconds counted.
     
    This really came home to me during the film. I had always viewed astronauts as glorified pilots, but pilots nonetheless. Armstrong was so much more. The most impressive scenes in the film was actually before the moon landing.
    There were several where he had to make different calculations during extreme life-threatening stress and very severe physical pressures in order to save his own and his crew's lives. Armstrong was reading advanced physics books as preparation for his trips. He was a man of both significant intellect but also very impressive physical endurance. To top it off, he also had the mental strength to function under extreme stress. A trifecta which is extremely rare.

    His anti-hero personality just made it all more appealing, and alluring. And that inaccessability, along with his whiteness in an era where whiteness is something to be attacked and shunned, is what made the film hard to love for many. I really liked it. It wasn't just a great space film; it was a great film.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Desiderius

    , @dvorak
    @Anonymous


    That’s probably why it bombed.
     
    It wasn't aiming for a mass-moviegoing-demographic. Middlebrow is now too smart in our 94 IQ and falling America, with its 91 IQ young moviegoing generation. Middlebrow/highbrow doesn't sell movie tickets; it streams or it is on cable or PBS.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Lot, @Emblematic

  2. Buzz’s review was on par with yours: Result: it will be only the 3rd movie I will have gone to in 2018- normally I go to 50.

    • Agree: Desiderius, ic1000
  3. Anonymous[361] • Disclaimer says:

    “I guess we all like to be recognized not for one piece of fireworks but for the ledger of our daily work.”

    That harkens back to a quote from British-African aviatrix Beryl Markham’s memoir West With the Night: “If a man has any greatness in him it comes, not in one flamboyant hour, but in the ledger of his daily work.” The memoir didn’t become especially popular until the 80s, but it’s certainly a book Armstrong could have been acquainted with before then.

    Hemingway, who also callled her a “high-grade bitch,” wrote that Markham “could write rings around all of us who consider ourselves as writers.” It’s an excellent read.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Anonymous

    There is some speculation that West with the Night was ghost written by one of her husbands, as her other known work was not of the same caliber as West.

    I myself don't know, but the description in West of how rapidly the two men's appearance deteriorates while they are stranded with Markham on the African plateau trying to build a wilderness runway in the absence of clean shirts and shaving razors always struck me as the kind of observation that would be very obvious to a women and very un-obvious to a man.

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @Anonymous

    Hemingway, who also callled her a “high-grade bitch,”

    Hemingway, who was a high-grade SOB, probably wasn't the best judge of character, but he was a good judge of writing.

  4. Thanks for featuring Buzz’s review; it’s really good.

    Well done, Buzz.

    BTW, I agree that Claire Foy is an excellent actress. It’s such a shame she’s just another obnoxious luvvie in real life.

    • Agree: NickG
  5. Foy like most White actressess was not shy in expressing hate hate hate for Whitey, straight male edition. Bear that in mind.

    A society dominated by Straight White men goes to the moon. A society dominated by gays and White women gets immivated. Simple as that.

  6. Right on.Good to know it’s relatively accurate. I’ll probably see it now.

  7. Your daily reminder that female (consumer) power degrades everything.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @L Woods

    Another reason why we can't have nice things anymore: women. Such killjoys!

  8. @Anonymous

    Mrs. Mohawk liked the movie more than I did. Since she likes to watch stuff that women like to watch, I must conclude that Chazelle has succeeded in making a film about a male-oriented subject, with lots of cool stuff, while at the same time selling the story to women and checking most of the boxes required today. It’s still all about Whitey, though.
     
    That's probably why it bombed. It was a space movie that was turned into a chick flick. That turns off the men, and the space stuff is going to turn off a lot of women no matter how much chick stuff you add.

    Replies: @Thulean Friend, @dvorak

    I have seen the film. It is definitely not a ‘chick flick’. The reason it bombed is because it deals with a heroic subject with an all-White cast in a way that isn’t bombastic. There are no special effects. There are no smoke and mirrors. Armstrong himself is extremely hard to portray, enigmatic and self-enclosed. Such a character will be a hard sell in an era where extroversion and bombast are promoted as qualities in of themselves.

    Regarding the criticism of “shaky camera”, I did notice a progression in the film. It starts very close to Armstrong and then gradually expands throughout the film. The first (and only) time you get to see a clear view of the entire spacecraft is when the beast called Apollo 11 finally thunders off from Earth. It is a magnificient scene. The underwhelming and cramped previous scenes act as a prelude to the final act and then you get to see it in all its glory.

    In a sense it is poetic. The cinematography expands along with the ambitions and the horizon of the film in a crescendo at the very end.

    Finally, I want to underline something Buzz wrote:

    They were engineers who studied massive amounts of information, operated complex systems, piloted in the vacuum of space, and solved life-threatening problems when seconds counted.

    This really came home to me during the film. I had always viewed astronauts as glorified pilots, but pilots nonetheless. Armstrong was so much more. The most impressive scenes in the film was actually before the moon landing.
    There were several where he had to make different calculations during extreme life-threatening stress and very severe physical pressures in order to save his own and his crew’s lives. Armstrong was reading advanced physics books as preparation for his trips. He was a man of both significant intellect but also very impressive physical endurance. To top it off, he also had the mental strength to function under extreme stress. A trifecta which is extremely rare.

    His anti-hero personality just made it all more appealing, and alluring. And that inaccessability, along with his whiteness in an era where whiteness is something to be attacked and shunned, is what made the film hard to love for many. I really liked it. It wasn’t just a great space film; it was a great film.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Thulean Friend

    Apollo 13 was a big hit at the box office, both domestically and abroad. It also won a bunch of Oscars and was rated very highly by viewers and critics.

    I vaguely recall some family scenes in Apollo 13, but it was basically about the crew solving the technical challenge of returning home safely.

    , @Desiderius
    @Thulean Friend


    it was a great film.
     
    Y'all are making lemonade out of the lemons the current year are giving you, which is mighty white of you.

    Just don't go getting Stockholm Syndrome on me.
  9. I thought it was a pretty good review.

    But I’m still not going to see the movie.

    Movies today, with all the lights popping and sounds barking, make me panic.

    Turn around in your seat sometime and look at the reflected-light show on the rear wall of the cinema. It’s madness. Do the same for a movie filmed anytime up to the 80’s. See the difference?

    To overcome stimulation overload cinema has become ever more frenetic in its pacing of events and intensity of light and sound.

    We’re into psychosis-inducing territory from here on out.

    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @ThreeCranes


    ... cinema has become ever more frenetic...
     
    Yes.

    This trend began when digital editing was developed, circa 1990. I remember then seeing a demonstration system at a meeting I attended. Hollywood directors and editors where just beginning to make their cuts on digitized video with computers before physically cutting the film. This made it possible for them to experiment with vastly more and quicker cuts before committing to the physical labor of it. That's when the madness started.

    I'm sure there are other reasons, such as the ever increasing pace and impact of popular music, but digital editing definitely facilitated rapid cuts and transitions.

    Replies: @ThreeCranes, @Steve Sailer, @Pheasant

  10. @Anonymous

    Mrs. Mohawk liked the movie more than I did. Since she likes to watch stuff that women like to watch, I must conclude that Chazelle has succeeded in making a film about a male-oriented subject, with lots of cool stuff, while at the same time selling the story to women and checking most of the boxes required today. It’s still all about Whitey, though.
     
    That's probably why it bombed. It was a space movie that was turned into a chick flick. That turns off the men, and the space stuff is going to turn off a lot of women no matter how much chick stuff you add.

    Replies: @Thulean Friend, @dvorak

    That’s probably why it bombed.

    It wasn’t aiming for a mass-moviegoing-demographic. Middlebrow is now too smart in our 94 IQ and falling America, with its 91 IQ young moviegoing generation. Middlebrow/highbrow doesn’t sell movie tickets; it streams or it is on cable or PBS.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @dvorak

    Spielberg or Ron Howard could make a moon landing movie that is both wildly successful commercially and satisfying to more upscale viewers.

    My father, who is a typical Boomer and loved the space race and eats up all the patriotic WW2 and American history movies Hollywood puts out, was turned off by the trailer for First Man during the previews for another movie. The trailer has no flag or other American symbols, just lots of personal and family drama and a scene of Armstrong's wife berating him and some other men.

    , @Lot
    @dvorak

    US IQ is indeed falling but is nowhere near as low as 94.

    , @Emblematic
    @dvorak

    And he doesn't have any tattoos.

  11. OT evil laughter [activating suspensor belt] louder evil laughter [floating toward pseudo-ceiling] persistent evil laughter [allowing Mithraic drip of unknown dark liquid]

    Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) on Thursday referred Julie Swetnick and her attorney Michael Avenatti to the Justice Department to be criminally investigated for making possible false statements during the confirmation process of now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

    “When a well-meaning citizen comes forward with information relevant to the committee’s work, I take it seriously. It takes courage to come forward, especially with allegations of sexual misconduct or personal trauma. I’m grateful for those who find that courage,” Grassley said in a statement. “But in the heat of partisan moments, some do try to knowingly mislead the committee. That’s unfair to my colleagues, the nominees and others providing information who are seeking the truth. It stifles our ability to work on legitimate lines of inquiry. It also wastes time and resources for destructive reasons.”

    Avenatti responded on social media, vowing to “get to the bottom of Judge Kavanaugh’s lies and conduct.”

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/10/25/chairman-grassley-refers-michael-avenatti-julie-swetnick-to-doj-for-criminal-investigation/

  12. the large, rectangular window of a quarantine chamber, trying to re-make contact. This represents the relationship between the man on the large, rectangular movie screen and the audience in the theater.

    The red hat that Mrs. Armstrong wears in the second scene symbolizes her state of alienation in a patriarchal, technological world which has stripped her of her femininity. The bold, vaginal color is a woman’s act of rebellion and foreshadows the sexual liberation of th 1960s.

    Sorry, highschool flashback. The rectangular window was rectangular because that’s what it was.

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    @kihowi

    The point isn’t the shape of the window but that it’s a barrier that prevents contact. Buzz isn’t the “first man” to see a metaphor in a scene like that: in Star Trek Movie Memories, William Shatner says the plexiglass wall separating him from Spock during Spock’s death scene is a metaphor for Spock’s emotional isolation.

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @kihowi

    Sorry no. The window is in a theater-like setting, with rows of seats for conferences with the Astronauts in quarantine. The location is evocative of a theater. Furthermore, the window, along with Foy's tentative touching of it, is a reference to the monolith/movie screen rectangle of 2001. Very few things in a professional film are done by accident. I'm betting Chazelle knew exactly what he was doing with that scene.

    And as Dave Pinson just said, the window is a barrier that prevents contact.

    Metaphors, you know?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Mike Zwick

  13. istevefan says:

    Neil Armstrong, a humble, white American from Ohio, was the First Man to stand on another world —

    Don’t get me wrong. I am a big fan of the moon walkers and I wish I could have seen it as it happened. But why is Armstrong so definitively declared as the first man on the moon? I can see him being given such acclaim if he had gone on a solo mission like Charles Lindbergh crossing the Atlantic. But Buzz Aldrin was right there with him. And Buzz did walk on the moon.

    I am not trying to take anything away from Neil, but I think Buzz gets shortchanged by history. I think recognizing Buzz would be akin to recognizing two guys with a shared Nobel Prize for a collaborative effort. Buzz should get the same recognition as Neil, but he won’t. It’s a shame for Buzz, a stud who could still throw a nice punch at age 72.

    Though he did not walk on the moon, Michael Collins has an interesting place in history. While Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed together on the moon, and the world watched it unfold on television, Collins was orbiting above the moon in the command module. In the greatest moment in human history Michael Collins was the only human being who was not on the Earth or moon.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @istevefan

    Armstrong would certainly have agreed with what you just said. In fact he did say things like (paraphrasing from memory here) "There isn't much difference between being separated from the surface by a few feet of aluminum tubing or a quarter inch of boot sole. We arrived together."

    He and his crew mates also made it clear that they saw themselves as just three members of a team of thousands.

    It wasn't just Armstrong's personality that made him avoid drawing attention to himself, it was also everything you have pointed out.

    It is funny how we, or most of us, seem to need to focus on a "First Man," instead of "First Men."

    Aldrin, not to his credit, lobbied hard to be the first one down the ladder. He wanted that fame. He annoyed everyone so much with his campaign that his boss had to tell him to knock it off. His own father did some lobbying too, and after the flight lobbied to try to have everything say "First Men on the Moon."

    Higher ups at NASA met in the weeks before Apollo 11 and agreed that Aldrin should definitely NOT be the first out. They knew his personality, and they have been proven correct in the years since.

    In fact, Deke Slayton, astronaut boss, gave Neil the opportunity to replace Buzz with Jim Lovell. Other astronauts found Aldrin hard to work with, and Deke did not want Armstrong to have that burden. Neil's response was that he didn't want to rob Lovell of his own command, and that Aldrin was not a problem. Aldrin owes all his fame to that gracious decision by Armstrong. Lovell, unfortunately, was therefore fated to command Apollo 13.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqzbnSymE2w

    Replies: @DB Cooper

    , @Jack D
    @istevefan

    And when Collins's orbit took him to the back side of the moon, he was out of communications with earth and the most alone that any human being has ever been. I'm sure his training took over and he just kept watching the instruments and pushing buttons or whatever it was he was supposed to do, but that kind of enormous isolation had to have an impact.

    , @Jack D
    @istevefan

    The reason that Armstrong got all the credit is that we have a deep seated need for heroes who succeed in single combat. David slaying Goliath. St. George slaying the dragon. The chief of the tribe, King Arthur, Stalin, etc. The same reason no one remembers who any President's VP was. Alcock and Brown crossed the Atlantic almost a decade before Lindbergh (Newfoundland to Ireland) but no one remembers them in part because there were two of them. Edwin Peary was not alone when he reached (or did not reach) the North Pole - with him were not only Henson but 4 Eskimos, but Peary got all the credit. Sir Edmund Hillary. Columbus. Etc. So it was inevitable that whoever set foot on the moon first would be the one remembered because that's how the human mind operates.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Authenticjazzman, @Desiderius

    , @Seth Largo
    @istevefan

    I take it the film doesn't show Aldrin taking communion on the moon?

  14. Anon[220] • Disclaimer says:

    This movie failed because it didn’t know its audience: patriotic American whites (which there are fewer and fewer of these days). In contrast to Buzz’s statement about “fake flag controversies”, I think the controversy was very real and definitely impacted the movie-going demographic they needed to make this thing work. “First Man” was marketed as an “international/team effort” sort of deal when 1. international audiences don’t care about that 2. patriotic American whites aren’t interested in “international” crap, they want a movie that makes them feel good about their country. This movie should have been more about the race between a good, wholesome America versus a bad, oppressive Soviet Union and the men like Armstrong caught in between – men who may have been frightened out of their minds and dealing with personal problems but who still rose to the occasion none-the-less and did something amazing for a good reason. Good vs. evil, courage/bravery, American vs. bad guys … that sort of thing.

    From what has been described, they made this thing some sort of character study so as to not appear jingoistic plus tried to make it chic friendly. Big mistake. There ain’t no audience for that. And they’ve done something similar with recent Superman movies, too. Notice how the phrase “Truth, Justice, and the American Way” has been omitted or abridged to remove the American part. You can tell a lot about a country or empire and the phase it is in just by its art. We seem to be in the decline phase where imperial subjects throw off national identity and keep their heads down, mostly sticking to family and close friends until the old order falls.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anon


    First Man” was marketed as an “international/team effort” sort of deal...
     
    One does wonder if the value placed today on international ticket sales had some impact on these decisions.

    As for how the film could have been made, my own thoughts are that a good independent film could be made that would focus on the fact that Armstrong ended up being the First Man mostly by happenstance, by the progress of each previous flight, and where he was in the lineup. He himself said this and that all the emphasis on him is only because he climbed down a ladder twenty minutes before another man did. Also, there could be an almost surreal approach to how paradoxical it is that an ordinary-seeming personality ended up with a unique place in history. It would be an art film that would look at how we think about all this, and probably nobody would watch it.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Mr. Anon, @John Mansfield

  15. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thulean Friend
    @Anonymous

    I have seen the film. It is definitely not a 'chick flick'. The reason it bombed is because it deals with a heroic subject with an all-White cast in a way that isn't bombastic. There are no special effects. There are no smoke and mirrors. Armstrong himself is extremely hard to portray, enigmatic and self-enclosed. Such a character will be a hard sell in an era where extroversion and bombast are promoted as qualities in of themselves.

    Regarding the criticism of "shaky camera", I did notice a progression in the film. It starts very close to Armstrong and then gradually expands throughout the film. The first (and only) time you get to see a clear view of the entire spacecraft is when the beast called Apollo 11 finally thunders off from Earth. It is a magnificient scene. The underwhelming and cramped previous scenes act as a prelude to the final act and then you get to see it in all its glory.

    In a sense it is poetic. The cinematography expands along with the ambitions and the horizon of the film in a crescendo at the very end.

    Finally, I want to underline something Buzz wrote:


    They were engineers who studied massive amounts of information, operated complex systems, piloted in the vacuum of space, and solved life-threatening problems when seconds counted.
     
    This really came home to me during the film. I had always viewed astronauts as glorified pilots, but pilots nonetheless. Armstrong was so much more. The most impressive scenes in the film was actually before the moon landing.
    There were several where he had to make different calculations during extreme life-threatening stress and very severe physical pressures in order to save his own and his crew's lives. Armstrong was reading advanced physics books as preparation for his trips. He was a man of both significant intellect but also very impressive physical endurance. To top it off, he also had the mental strength to function under extreme stress. A trifecta which is extremely rare.

    His anti-hero personality just made it all more appealing, and alluring. And that inaccessability, along with his whiteness in an era where whiteness is something to be attacked and shunned, is what made the film hard to love for many. I really liked it. It wasn't just a great space film; it was a great film.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Desiderius

    Apollo 13 was a big hit at the box office, both domestically and abroad. It also won a bunch of Oscars and was rated very highly by viewers and critics.

    I vaguely recall some family scenes in Apollo 13, but it was basically about the crew solving the technical challenge of returning home safely.

  16. Based on Steve and Buzz’s reviews I may actually see it now. However, from a marketing perspective, I am still amazed at the stupid business decision to not show the flag.

    Step 1. Make a movie glorifying the real life accomplishments of the main villains of our woke age: white men. In other words, they made a movie that would mainly appeal to bad whites.

    Step 2. Make sure you significantly lessen the appeal to bad white men by not showing the flag.

    I guess this is what happens when good whites try to make a film targeted at bad whites, a group they know nothing about yet despise

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Hark, hark! The snark.
    @TheBoom

    It’s a space movie for white people made by white people. But the success of another sort of recent space movie suggests a sequel to it with the moon shot theme...
    “Hidden Figures: Fly Me to the Moon”

  17. @ThreeCranes
    I thought it was a pretty good review.

    But I'm still not going to see the movie.

    Movies today, with all the lights popping and sounds barking, make me panic.

    Turn around in your seat sometime and look at the reflected-light show on the rear wall of the cinema. It's madness. Do the same for a movie filmed anytime up to the 80's. See the difference?

    To overcome stimulation overload cinema has become ever more frenetic in its pacing of events and intensity of light and sound.

    We're into psychosis-inducing territory from here on out.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    … cinema has become ever more frenetic…

    Yes.

    This trend began when digital editing was developed, circa 1990. I remember then seeing a demonstration system at a meeting I attended. Hollywood directors and editors where just beginning to make their cuts on digitized video with computers before physically cutting the film. This made it possible for them to experiment with vastly more and quicker cuts before committing to the physical labor of it. That’s when the madness started.

    I’m sure there are other reasons, such as the ever increasing pace and impact of popular music, but digital editing definitely facilitated rapid cuts and transitions.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Oh, and I'm one of those oddballs who, when they say "pretty good", means "better than just plain old good", as in really good. (remember that discussion people had here about the use of the modifier "pretty" a while back?)

    , @Steve Sailer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    In 1983, everybody said "The Right Stuff" had "MTV cuts."

    Probably the shower scene in Psycho was a landmark toward quicker cutting.

    Silent movies were becoming more MTV like, but then talkies came along and made movies visually stodgier.

    , @Pheasant
    @Buzz Mohawk

    The usual suspects (1995) was edited the old fashioned way as the director thought the new school of editors using physical editing methods were not as good as the old school types.

  18. @kihowi

    the large, rectangular window of a quarantine chamber, trying to re-make contact. This represents the relationship between the man on the large, rectangular movie screen and the audience in the theater.
     
    The red hat that Mrs. Armstrong wears in the second scene symbolizes her state of alienation in a patriarchal, technological world which has stripped her of her femininity. The bold, vaginal color is a woman's act of rebellion and foreshadows the sexual liberation of th 1960s.

    Sorry, highschool flashback. The rectangular window was rectangular because that's what it was.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @Buzz Mohawk

    The point isn’t the shape of the window but that it’s a barrier that prevents contact. Buzz isn’t the “first man” to see a metaphor in a scene like that: in Star Trek Movie Memories, William Shatner says the plexiglass wall separating him from Spock during Spock’s death scene is a metaphor for Spock’s emotional isolation.

  19. Anonymous[276] • Disclaimer says:
    @dvorak
    @Anonymous


    That’s probably why it bombed.
     
    It wasn't aiming for a mass-moviegoing-demographic. Middlebrow is now too smart in our 94 IQ and falling America, with its 91 IQ young moviegoing generation. Middlebrow/highbrow doesn't sell movie tickets; it streams or it is on cable or PBS.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Lot, @Emblematic

    Spielberg or Ron Howard could make a moon landing movie that is both wildly successful commercially and satisfying to more upscale viewers.

    My father, who is a typical Boomer and loved the space race and eats up all the patriotic WW2 and American history movies Hollywood puts out, was turned off by the trailer for First Man during the previews for another movie. The trailer has no flag or other American symbols, just lots of personal and family drama and a scene of Armstrong’s wife berating him and some other men.

  20. Good review. I too am now inclined to see it.

  21. @Buzz Mohawk
    @ThreeCranes


    ... cinema has become ever more frenetic...
     
    Yes.

    This trend began when digital editing was developed, circa 1990. I remember then seeing a demonstration system at a meeting I attended. Hollywood directors and editors where just beginning to make their cuts on digitized video with computers before physically cutting the film. This made it possible for them to experiment with vastly more and quicker cuts before committing to the physical labor of it. That's when the madness started.

    I'm sure there are other reasons, such as the ever increasing pace and impact of popular music, but digital editing definitely facilitated rapid cuts and transitions.

    Replies: @ThreeCranes, @Steve Sailer, @Pheasant

    Oh, and I’m one of those oddballs who, when they say “pretty good”, means “better than just plain old good”, as in really good. (remember that discussion people had here about the use of the modifier “pretty” a while back?)

  22. @kihowi

    the large, rectangular window of a quarantine chamber, trying to re-make contact. This represents the relationship between the man on the large, rectangular movie screen and the audience in the theater.
     
    The red hat that Mrs. Armstrong wears in the second scene symbolizes her state of alienation in a patriarchal, technological world which has stripped her of her femininity. The bold, vaginal color is a woman's act of rebellion and foreshadows the sexual liberation of th 1960s.

    Sorry, highschool flashback. The rectangular window was rectangular because that's what it was.

    Replies: @Dave Pinsen, @Buzz Mohawk

    Sorry no. The window is in a theater-like setting, with rows of seats for conferences with the Astronauts in quarantine. The location is evocative of a theater. Furthermore, the window, along with Foy’s tentative touching of it, is a reference to the monolith/movie screen rectangle of 2001. Very few things in a professional film are done by accident. I’m betting Chazelle knew exactly what he was doing with that scene.

    And as Dave Pinson just said, the window is a barrier that prevents contact.

    Metaphors, you know?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    My wife asked after seeing the "rectangle" scene: So, did the Armstrongs get divorced?

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Buzz Mohawk

    , @Mike Zwick
    @Buzz Mohawk

    A lot of younger people will not pick up on these metaphors.

  23. The marketing of the movie hasn’t done it any favours, nor has Claire Foy’s Penis envy won’t have helped amongst the demographic to whom the film would likely appeal.

    Gosling’s perpetual smirk is a deal breaker for me. Though I will probably see the film when it comes around on Netflix.

  24. Anon[173] • Disclaimer says:

    “It wasn’t aiming for a mass-moviegoing-demographic.”

    The movie being poorly marketed didn’t help, plus leftist critics aren’t much into promoting America-centric patriotic movies these days. I wonder if this movie will get a higher Rotten Tomatoes critic score than that dumb Spike Lee movie that came out a few months ago.

    “Middlebrow is now too smart in our 94 IQ and falling America, with its 91 IQ young movie-going generation.”

    Unfortunately, true. I remember Sailer had an article, if I recall, from the 2000s where he speculated that the growing share of 90 IQ Hispanics in the population was ruining the movies*; specifically, he noted how Hispanics, about 14% of the population then, made up about 25% of the movie-going audience for the Phantom Menace. Hispanic males seem disproportionately represented in audiences for crap, low-IQ blockbusters. True, these types of films were never really high-brow to begin with, but they were at least trying back when the smart white audiences demanded quality. Now, all Hollywood has to do to make money is put in some explosions and fire plus lame “comedy” and they automatically do mega bucks. THAT explains why movies have gotten so terrible. Hollywood figures there is no reason to concern themselves with narrative quality when D’tavious, Keith, and Mario are your key demographics, and they’ll take whatever garbage you put in front of them.

    Compare the quality of schlock blockbusters then and now:

    Independence Day (1996) vs. Independence Day: Resurgence

    Terminator 2 (1991) vs. Terminator: Genysis

    Star Wars (1970s, 80s) vs. every Star Wars movie since

    Predator (1987) vs. Shane Black’s The Predator

    Jurassic Park (1993) vs. latest Jurassic Park movie

    Robocop (1987) vs. Robocop remake

    Ghostbusters (1984) vs. Ghostbusters (2016)

    Alien/Aliens (70s/80s) vs. Alien: Covenant

    Poltergeist (1980s) vs. Annabelle

    Halloween vs. Rob Zombie Halloween

    Akira (1988) vs. Lucy (rip-off of Akira, basically)

    Die Hard (1988) vs. any dumb action movie these days

    Interview with the Vampire vs. Twilight

    When Hollywood isn’t ripping off Japanese anime, they are making inferior trash compared to yesteryear. Even Micheal Moore’s hack documentaries have fallen in quality.

    *They are also ruining the American video game scene. That’s why “Americans” are increasingly playing vapid, story-less multiplayer shooters and dumb racing games while the high-IQ Japanese continue playing high-brow RPGs, shutting Microsoft out of their market in the process.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Anon

    "Interview with the Vampire vs. Twilight"

    I see. You're like Steve Sailer. He doesn't get Twilight either, as commenter Priss Factory used to say! Lol!
    Where's the one and only Priss when we need him?

  25. @Anon
    This movie failed because it didn't know its audience: patriotic American whites (which there are fewer and fewer of these days). In contrast to Buzz's statement about "fake flag controversies", I think the controversy was very real and definitely impacted the movie-going demographic they needed to make this thing work. "First Man" was marketed as an "international/team effort" sort of deal when 1. international audiences don't care about that 2. patriotic American whites aren't interested in "international" crap, they want a movie that makes them feel good about their country. This movie should have been more about the race between a good, wholesome America versus a bad, oppressive Soviet Union and the men like Armstrong caught in between - men who may have been frightened out of their minds and dealing with personal problems but who still rose to the occasion none-the-less and did something amazing for a good reason. Good vs. evil, courage/bravery, American vs. bad guys ... that sort of thing.

    From what has been described, they made this thing some sort of character study so as to not appear jingoistic plus tried to make it chic friendly. Big mistake. There ain't no audience for that. And they've done something similar with recent Superman movies, too. Notice how the phrase "Truth, Justice, and the American Way" has been omitted or abridged to remove the American part. You can tell a lot about a country or empire and the phase it is in just by its art. We seem to be in the decline phase where imperial subjects throw off national identity and keep their heads down, mostly sticking to family and close friends until the old order falls.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    First Man” was marketed as an “international/team effort” sort of deal…

    One does wonder if the value placed today on international ticket sales had some impact on these decisions.

    As for how the film could have been made, my own thoughts are that a good independent film could be made that would focus on the fact that Armstrong ended up being the First Man mostly by happenstance, by the progress of each previous flight, and where he was in the lineup. He himself said this and that all the emphasis on him is only because he climbed down a ladder twenty minutes before another man did. Also, there could be an almost surreal approach to how paradoxical it is that an ordinary-seeming personality ended up with a unique place in history. It would be an art film that would look at how we think about all this, and probably nobody would watch it.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @Buzz Mohawk


    how paradoxical it is that an ordinary-seeming personality ended up with a unique place in history
     
    Nothing paradoxical at all about it here in Ohio, and not just Ohio. That's the America we know up close and personal.

    Replies: @Authenticjazzman

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Buzz Mohawk

    From what I have read, I believe that Armstrong was selected for command of Apollo 11 because he was the most adept at flying the LM. That was a kind of flying that nobody had ever done before prior to Apollo - standing on a rocket platform and guiding it in for a soft landing on the ground. In addition to whtever manual dexterity Armstrong had, his temperment suited him for it. NASA's management also probably figured that Armstrong wouldn't make an ass of himself afterwords or demean the accomplishment in some crass or vulgar way. And they were proved right.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @John Mansfield
    @Buzz Mohawk

    My favorite moon movie is "For All Mankind" (1989), a dreamy 80-minute documentary with lots of landscapes, a Brian Eno soundtrack, and voice-overs by unnamed astronauts describing what it felt like to be there. As one of them said, billions of people would never experience the moon directly, so it was the responsibility of the handful of men who made the voyage to experience it on behalf of all mankind.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

  26. Anon[173] • Disclaimer says:

    “Gosling’s perpetual smirk is a deal breaker for me.”

    Can’t stand the guy, but all the LA gays think he’s cute since La La Land, so he keeps getting good press and movie roles. Personally, I think the guy looks like he could’ve fit into “Dude, Where’s My Car?” with ease. Not a Gosling fan.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    @Anon

    I adore him! He is not a leading man, for sure, but he works like a dog. I prefer dogs to humans :) He also, like a dog to a master, know that Damien is the "real deal."

  27. @Anon
    "Gosling’s perpetual smirk is a deal breaker for me."

    Can't stand the guy, but all the LA gays think he's cute since La La Land, so he keeps getting good press and movie roles. Personally, I think the guy looks like he could've fit into "Dude, Where's My Car?" with ease. Not a Gosling fan.

    Replies: @Lagertha

    I adore him! He is not a leading man, for sure, but he works like a dog. I prefer dogs to humans 🙂 He also, like a dog to a master, know that Damien is the “real deal.”

  28. I liked the Whitey song being inserted because it emphasized two important things:

    – It was Whites who went to the moon

    – Blacks, and the Left more generally, thought it was a waste of time and money

    • Replies: @Neuday
    @RichardTaylor

    For wastes of time and money, compare the Apollo missions to the welfare state. At least we don't have millions of multigenerational addicts to moon launches.

    Replies: @HunInTheSun

    , @danindc
    @RichardTaylor

    Yes! and it showed the Left (and blacks) to be buzzkill losers...normal people would have been very tuned off by that scene and those people...and that's a great thing

    , @Authenticjazzman
    @RichardTaylor

    " Blacks and the Left more generally , thought it was a waste of time and money"

    Well myself, white and ultra conservative, I consider ALL space exploration, including those hundred million dollar telescopes, to be a bombastic waste of money, seeing all of it being paid for by the tapped-out US tax-slaves who get up at five in the morning and trek off to their menial lobs, simply to provide the parasitic "reseachers" with their research toys, through billions of Dollars of tax revenue.

    If the the "researchers" finance their hobby out of their own pocket, fine, however when they are milking the poor working stiffs to death, then the whole thing must be reconsidered and altered.

    AJM

  29. @istevefan

    Neil Armstrong, a humble, white American from Ohio, was the First Man to stand on another world —
     
    Don't get me wrong. I am a big fan of the moon walkers and I wish I could have seen it as it happened. But why is Armstrong so definitively declared as the first man on the moon? I can see him being given such acclaim if he had gone on a solo mission like Charles Lindbergh crossing the Atlantic. But Buzz Aldrin was right there with him. And Buzz did walk on the moon.

    I am not trying to take anything away from Neil, but I think Buzz gets shortchanged by history. I think recognizing Buzz would be akin to recognizing two guys with a shared Nobel Prize for a collaborative effort. Buzz should get the same recognition as Neil, but he won't. It's a shame for Buzz, a stud who could still throw a nice punch at age 72.

    Though he did not walk on the moon, Michael Collins has an interesting place in history. While Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed together on the moon, and the world watched it unfold on television, Collins was orbiting above the moon in the command module. In the greatest moment in human history Michael Collins was the only human being who was not on the Earth or moon.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Jack D, @Seth Largo

    Armstrong would certainly have agreed with what you just said. In fact he did say things like (paraphrasing from memory here) “There isn’t much difference between being separated from the surface by a few feet of aluminum tubing or a quarter inch of boot sole. We arrived together.”

    He and his crew mates also made it clear that they saw themselves as just three members of a team of thousands.

    It wasn’t just Armstrong’s personality that made him avoid drawing attention to himself, it was also everything you have pointed out.

    It is funny how we, or most of us, seem to need to focus on a “First Man,” instead of “First Men.”

    Aldrin, not to his credit, lobbied hard to be the first one down the ladder. He wanted that fame. He annoyed everyone so much with his campaign that his boss had to tell him to knock it off. His own father did some lobbying too, and after the flight lobbied to try to have everything say “First Men on the Moon.”

    Higher ups at NASA met in the weeks before Apollo 11 and agreed that Aldrin should definitely NOT be the first out. They knew his personality, and they have been proven correct in the years since.

    In fact, Deke Slayton, astronaut boss, gave Neil the opportunity to replace Buzz with Jim Lovell. Other astronauts found Aldrin hard to work with, and Deke did not want Armstrong to have that burden. Neil’s response was that he didn’t want to rob Lovell of his own command, and that Aldrin was not a problem. Aldrin owes all his fame to that gracious decision by Armstrong. Lovell, unfortunately, was therefore fated to command Apollo 13.

    • Replies: @DB Cooper
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I also read somewhere that the reason they have the 1202 alarm going down was because Buzz turned on the rendezvous radar when the LM start descending, which was not part of the procedure and has never been simulated. Buzz thought that in case the LM needs to have an emergency abort the LM can quickly get a lock at the command module. The computer on the LM wasn't powerful enough to process both the landing radar and the rendezvous radar at the same time, resulting in arithmetic overflow, hence the 1202 alarm.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D

  30. @dvorak
    @Anonymous


    That’s probably why it bombed.
     
    It wasn't aiming for a mass-moviegoing-demographic. Middlebrow is now too smart in our 94 IQ and falling America, with its 91 IQ young moviegoing generation. Middlebrow/highbrow doesn't sell movie tickets; it streams or it is on cable or PBS.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Lot, @Emblematic

    US IQ is indeed falling but is nowhere near as low as 94.

  31. @Thulean Friend
    @Anonymous

    I have seen the film. It is definitely not a 'chick flick'. The reason it bombed is because it deals with a heroic subject with an all-White cast in a way that isn't bombastic. There are no special effects. There are no smoke and mirrors. Armstrong himself is extremely hard to portray, enigmatic and self-enclosed. Such a character will be a hard sell in an era where extroversion and bombast are promoted as qualities in of themselves.

    Regarding the criticism of "shaky camera", I did notice a progression in the film. It starts very close to Armstrong and then gradually expands throughout the film. The first (and only) time you get to see a clear view of the entire spacecraft is when the beast called Apollo 11 finally thunders off from Earth. It is a magnificient scene. The underwhelming and cramped previous scenes act as a prelude to the final act and then you get to see it in all its glory.

    In a sense it is poetic. The cinematography expands along with the ambitions and the horizon of the film in a crescendo at the very end.

    Finally, I want to underline something Buzz wrote:


    They were engineers who studied massive amounts of information, operated complex systems, piloted in the vacuum of space, and solved life-threatening problems when seconds counted.
     
    This really came home to me during the film. I had always viewed astronauts as glorified pilots, but pilots nonetheless. Armstrong was so much more. The most impressive scenes in the film was actually before the moon landing.
    There were several where he had to make different calculations during extreme life-threatening stress and very severe physical pressures in order to save his own and his crew's lives. Armstrong was reading advanced physics books as preparation for his trips. He was a man of both significant intellect but also very impressive physical endurance. To top it off, he also had the mental strength to function under extreme stress. A trifecta which is extremely rare.

    His anti-hero personality just made it all more appealing, and alluring. And that inaccessability, along with his whiteness in an era where whiteness is something to be attacked and shunned, is what made the film hard to love for many. I really liked it. It wasn't just a great space film; it was a great film.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Desiderius

    it was a great film.

    Y’all are making lemonade out of the lemons the current year are giving you, which is mighty white of you.

    Just don’t go getting Stockholm Syndrome on me.

  32. @Buzz Mohawk
    @kihowi

    Sorry no. The window is in a theater-like setting, with rows of seats for conferences with the Astronauts in quarantine. The location is evocative of a theater. Furthermore, the window, along with Foy's tentative touching of it, is a reference to the monolith/movie screen rectangle of 2001. Very few things in a professional film are done by accident. I'm betting Chazelle knew exactly what he was doing with that scene.

    And as Dave Pinson just said, the window is a barrier that prevents contact.

    Metaphors, you know?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Mike Zwick

    My wife asked after seeing the “rectangle” scene: So, did the Armstrongs get divorced?

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @Steve Sailer

    My thought as well.

    Turns out they did. 1994. So perhaps I've idealized the strength of their marriage back then.

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Steve Sailer

    Chazelle clearly knows how to make film communicate with women.

  33. @Buzz Mohawk
    @istevefan

    Armstrong would certainly have agreed with what you just said. In fact he did say things like (paraphrasing from memory here) "There isn't much difference between being separated from the surface by a few feet of aluminum tubing or a quarter inch of boot sole. We arrived together."

    He and his crew mates also made it clear that they saw themselves as just three members of a team of thousands.

    It wasn't just Armstrong's personality that made him avoid drawing attention to himself, it was also everything you have pointed out.

    It is funny how we, or most of us, seem to need to focus on a "First Man," instead of "First Men."

    Aldrin, not to his credit, lobbied hard to be the first one down the ladder. He wanted that fame. He annoyed everyone so much with his campaign that his boss had to tell him to knock it off. His own father did some lobbying too, and after the flight lobbied to try to have everything say "First Men on the Moon."

    Higher ups at NASA met in the weeks before Apollo 11 and agreed that Aldrin should definitely NOT be the first out. They knew his personality, and they have been proven correct in the years since.

    In fact, Deke Slayton, astronaut boss, gave Neil the opportunity to replace Buzz with Jim Lovell. Other astronauts found Aldrin hard to work with, and Deke did not want Armstrong to have that burden. Neil's response was that he didn't want to rob Lovell of his own command, and that Aldrin was not a problem. Aldrin owes all his fame to that gracious decision by Armstrong. Lovell, unfortunately, was therefore fated to command Apollo 13.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqzbnSymE2w

    Replies: @DB Cooper

    I also read somewhere that the reason they have the 1202 alarm going down was because Buzz turned on the rendezvous radar when the LM start descending, which was not part of the procedure and has never been simulated. Buzz thought that in case the LM needs to have an emergency abort the LM can quickly get a lock at the command module. The computer on the LM wasn’t powerful enough to process both the landing radar and the rendezvous radar at the same time, resulting in arithmetic overflow, hence the 1202 alarm.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @DB Cooper

    I remember some back-and-forth statements about that over the years. It's not clear whether or not he was supposed to do that, and I couldn't tell if there was genuine uncertainty or if they were just protecting Aldrin's reputation.

    The same kind of speculation occurred after they got back and everybody noticed that Buzz hadn't taken any real photographs of Neil on the Moon. Did he not do so on purpose, or just because it was not written into the checklist? That sort of thing.

    I don't want to crap too much on Buzz Aldrin. The mission, a real stretch that the crew felt had a 50/50 chance, was successful, and that's all that mattered. Whatever his failings may be, I am not worthy to shine his shoes.

    , @Jack D
    @DB Cooper

    What is really amazing is that the computers on Apollo had computing power and memory storage that is roughly equivalent to that of a TI-83 programmable calculator today, not even close to even what a low end smartphone has, let alone a modern desktop or an iPhone.

    Replies: @BB753, @Romanian

  34. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anon


    First Man” was marketed as an “international/team effort” sort of deal...
     
    One does wonder if the value placed today on international ticket sales had some impact on these decisions.

    As for how the film could have been made, my own thoughts are that a good independent film could be made that would focus on the fact that Armstrong ended up being the First Man mostly by happenstance, by the progress of each previous flight, and where he was in the lineup. He himself said this and that all the emphasis on him is only because he climbed down a ladder twenty minutes before another man did. Also, there could be an almost surreal approach to how paradoxical it is that an ordinary-seeming personality ended up with a unique place in history. It would be an art film that would look at how we think about all this, and probably nobody would watch it.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Mr. Anon, @John Mansfield

    how paradoxical it is that an ordinary-seeming personality ended up with a unique place in history

    Nothing paradoxical at all about it here in Ohio, and not just Ohio. That’s the America we know up close and personal.

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
    @Desiderius

    " Ordinary-seeming personality"

    Not only "ordinary" but wierd and contradictory as well, seeing as he threw in with the insane Democrats upon entering politics.

    " That's the America we know up close and personal".

    Yeah we sure do know how manifest crazy they, the Democrats, are, and that he, Armstrong, chose to align with them perplexed me and tossed me for loop way back then. There is simply no rationalization for a sane person teaming up with them, the lunatic Democrats.

    Authenticjazzman "Mensa" qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz artist.

    Replies: @Desiderius

  35. @Steve Sailer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    My wife asked after seeing the "rectangle" scene: So, did the Armstrongs get divorced?

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Buzz Mohawk

    My thought as well.

    Turns out they did. 1994. So perhaps I’ve idealized the strength of their marriage back then.

  36. @Buzz Mohawk
    @ThreeCranes


    ... cinema has become ever more frenetic...
     
    Yes.

    This trend began when digital editing was developed, circa 1990. I remember then seeing a demonstration system at a meeting I attended. Hollywood directors and editors where just beginning to make their cuts on digitized video with computers before physically cutting the film. This made it possible for them to experiment with vastly more and quicker cuts before committing to the physical labor of it. That's when the madness started.

    I'm sure there are other reasons, such as the ever increasing pace and impact of popular music, but digital editing definitely facilitated rapid cuts and transitions.

    Replies: @ThreeCranes, @Steve Sailer, @Pheasant

    In 1983, everybody said “The Right Stuff” had “MTV cuts.”

    Probably the shower scene in Psycho was a landmark toward quicker cutting.

    Silent movies were becoming more MTV like, but then talkies came along and made movies visually stodgier.

  37. @Steve Sailer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    My wife asked after seeing the "rectangle" scene: So, did the Armstrongs get divorced?

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Buzz Mohawk

    Chazelle clearly knows how to make film communicate with women.

  38. @DB Cooper
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I also read somewhere that the reason they have the 1202 alarm going down was because Buzz turned on the rendezvous radar when the LM start descending, which was not part of the procedure and has never been simulated. Buzz thought that in case the LM needs to have an emergency abort the LM can quickly get a lock at the command module. The computer on the LM wasn't powerful enough to process both the landing radar and the rendezvous radar at the same time, resulting in arithmetic overflow, hence the 1202 alarm.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D

    I remember some back-and-forth statements about that over the years. It’s not clear whether or not he was supposed to do that, and I couldn’t tell if there was genuine uncertainty or if they were just protecting Aldrin’s reputation.

    The same kind of speculation occurred after they got back and everybody noticed that Buzz hadn’t taken any real photographs of Neil on the Moon. Did he not do so on purpose, or just because it was not written into the checklist? That sort of thing.

    I don’t want to crap too much on Buzz Aldrin. The mission, a real stretch that the crew felt had a 50/50 chance, was successful, and that’s all that mattered. Whatever his failings may be, I am not worthy to shine his shoes.

  39. Anon[815] • Disclaimer says:

    “US IQ is indeed falling but is nowhere near as low as 94.”

    The last back-of-the-envelope calculation I did put it in the 97/98 range. I wouldn’t be surprised if the under 18 cohort comes in at 95/96 when all is said and done. He isn’t really far off, and with the white birth rate in free fall and the white suicide rate at historical highs, we may get there sooner than you think. As an aside, countries with a mean IQ of 90 and below generally struggle with maintaining a functioning democracy. We’re already seeing trouble on that front.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Anon

    Drug overdose is now the leading cause of death among young adults. I wonder whether this is eugenic in that the people who tend to overdose are lower IQ than the survivors? In any case, it's a huge waste of societal resources spent on raising and educating these folks to adulthood, only to have them check out early.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  40. @dvorak
    @Anonymous


    That’s probably why it bombed.
     
    It wasn't aiming for a mass-moviegoing-demographic. Middlebrow is now too smart in our 94 IQ and falling America, with its 91 IQ young moviegoing generation. Middlebrow/highbrow doesn't sell movie tickets; it streams or it is on cable or PBS.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Lot, @Emblematic

    And he doesn’t have any tattoos.

  41. Anonymous[204] • Disclaimer says:

    Haven’t seen the flick yet and only read TRS, did not watch it. One thing that I wonder though is the impact of Vietnam on the NASA pilots. Just curious, no big gotcha. My uncle told me he was invited to apply for astronaut program but passed because he got a promotion to be a CAG. He ended up flying every aircraft in the wing and got a Navy Cross. He just felt like it was a bigger deal. Not saying the astronauts were not elite pilots, sure they were. But I don’t automatically assume that it was all the cream of the crop or there were others more interested in combat than space.

  42. Tremendous review; thanks so much Buzz Mohawk.

    To tie in some more historical points, some of you may know that:

    – The Armstrong surname originates as one of the “border clans” of Scotland with England. The “Borderers”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Armstrong
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Borderers

    were among the more rough and tumble of the Scottish clans, because their lands were on the most suitable punitive expedition invasion routes for English kings when they felt risible because of some perceived slight by the Scots or Scottish king, or just because. The Armstrongs were especially notorious for being “hard to control”, rustling livestock from estates on both sides of the border and being just a general pain in the ass.

    They were eventually mostly chased out of Scotland in the 17th century, with most settling in Northern Ireland, then many immigrating to the America and the New World as part of Hackett Fischer’s final, and largest, of the the four waves of original British Isles founders and settlers of the 13 colonies.

    From outlaws and ornery frontiersmen to first human to set foot on the moon over the span of 400-ish years…not too bad…

    • Agree: Desiderius
  43. @Buzz Mohawk
    @kihowi

    Sorry no. The window is in a theater-like setting, with rows of seats for conferences with the Astronauts in quarantine. The location is evocative of a theater. Furthermore, the window, along with Foy's tentative touching of it, is a reference to the monolith/movie screen rectangle of 2001. Very few things in a professional film are done by accident. I'm betting Chazelle knew exactly what he was doing with that scene.

    And as Dave Pinson just said, the window is a barrier that prevents contact.

    Metaphors, you know?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Mike Zwick

    A lot of younger people will not pick up on these metaphors.

  44. @DB Cooper
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I also read somewhere that the reason they have the 1202 alarm going down was because Buzz turned on the rendezvous radar when the LM start descending, which was not part of the procedure and has never been simulated. Buzz thought that in case the LM needs to have an emergency abort the LM can quickly get a lock at the command module. The computer on the LM wasn't powerful enough to process both the landing radar and the rendezvous radar at the same time, resulting in arithmetic overflow, hence the 1202 alarm.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D

    What is really amazing is that the computers on Apollo had computing power and memory storage that is roughly equivalent to that of a TI-83 programmable calculator today, not even close to even what a low end smartphone has, let alone a modern desktop or an iPhone.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Jack D

    It's a miracle nobody died during the moon landings. What were the odds?

    , @Romanian
    @Jack D

    Their computing was weaker, but their development process led them to capabilities the US was hard pressed to recreate today, involving reverse engineering the units they still had.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2013/04/how-nasa-brought-the-monstrous-f-1-moon-rocket-back-to-life/

  45. @Anon
    "US IQ is indeed falling but is nowhere near as low as 94."

    The last back-of-the-envelope calculation I did put it in the 97/98 range. I wouldn't be surprised if the under 18 cohort comes in at 95/96 when all is said and done. He isn't really far off, and with the white birth rate in free fall and the white suicide rate at historical highs, we may get there sooner than you think. As an aside, countries with a mean IQ of 90 and below generally struggle with maintaining a functioning democracy. We're already seeing trouble on that front.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Drug overdose is now the leading cause of death among young adults. I wonder whether this is eugenic in that the people who tend to overdose are lower IQ than the survivors? In any case, it’s a huge waste of societal resources spent on raising and educating these folks to adulthood, only to have them check out early.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    it’s a huge waste of societal resources spent on raising and educating these folks to adulthood

    That increases GDP. Good for the economy.

  46. @istevefan

    Neil Armstrong, a humble, white American from Ohio, was the First Man to stand on another world —
     
    Don't get me wrong. I am a big fan of the moon walkers and I wish I could have seen it as it happened. But why is Armstrong so definitively declared as the first man on the moon? I can see him being given such acclaim if he had gone on a solo mission like Charles Lindbergh crossing the Atlantic. But Buzz Aldrin was right there with him. And Buzz did walk on the moon.

    I am not trying to take anything away from Neil, but I think Buzz gets shortchanged by history. I think recognizing Buzz would be akin to recognizing two guys with a shared Nobel Prize for a collaborative effort. Buzz should get the same recognition as Neil, but he won't. It's a shame for Buzz, a stud who could still throw a nice punch at age 72.

    Though he did not walk on the moon, Michael Collins has an interesting place in history. While Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed together on the moon, and the world watched it unfold on television, Collins was orbiting above the moon in the command module. In the greatest moment in human history Michael Collins was the only human being who was not on the Earth or moon.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Jack D, @Seth Largo

    And when Collins’s orbit took him to the back side of the moon, he was out of communications with earth and the most alone that any human being has ever been. I’m sure his training took over and he just kept watching the instruments and pushing buttons or whatever it was he was supposed to do, but that kind of enormous isolation had to have an impact.

  47. @istevefan

    Neil Armstrong, a humble, white American from Ohio, was the First Man to stand on another world —
     
    Don't get me wrong. I am a big fan of the moon walkers and I wish I could have seen it as it happened. But why is Armstrong so definitively declared as the first man on the moon? I can see him being given such acclaim if he had gone on a solo mission like Charles Lindbergh crossing the Atlantic. But Buzz Aldrin was right there with him. And Buzz did walk on the moon.

    I am not trying to take anything away from Neil, but I think Buzz gets shortchanged by history. I think recognizing Buzz would be akin to recognizing two guys with a shared Nobel Prize for a collaborative effort. Buzz should get the same recognition as Neil, but he won't. It's a shame for Buzz, a stud who could still throw a nice punch at age 72.

    Though he did not walk on the moon, Michael Collins has an interesting place in history. While Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed together on the moon, and the world watched it unfold on television, Collins was orbiting above the moon in the command module. In the greatest moment in human history Michael Collins was the only human being who was not on the Earth or moon.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Jack D, @Seth Largo

    The reason that Armstrong got all the credit is that we have a deep seated need for heroes who succeed in single combat. David slaying Goliath. St. George slaying the dragon. The chief of the tribe, King Arthur, Stalin, etc. The same reason no one remembers who any President’s VP was. Alcock and Brown crossed the Atlantic almost a decade before Lindbergh (Newfoundland to Ireland) but no one remembers them in part because there were two of them. Edwin Peary was not alone when he reached (or did not reach) the North Pole – with him were not only Henson but 4 Eskimos, but Peary got all the credit. Sir Edmund Hillary. Columbus. Etc. So it was inevitable that whoever set foot on the moon first would be the one remembered because that’s how the human mind operates.

    • Agree: Buzz Mohawk
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    The first people to fly across the Atlantic were a U.S. Navy team in several seaplanes. Nobody remembers them anymore.

    Replies: @Kyle

    , @Authenticjazzman
    @Jack D

    And nobody remembers the Italian team who scaled K2, a far more dangerous climb, before Hillary went up Everest.

    Authenticjazzman "Mensa" qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz musician.

    , @Desiderius
    @Jack D


    Edwin Peary was not alone when he reached (or did not reach) the North Pole – with him were not only Henson but 4 Eskimos, but Peary got all the credit. Sir Edmund Hillary. Columbus. Etc. So it was inevitable that whoever set foot on the moon first would be the one remembered because that’s how the human mind operates.
     
    If only Buzz were black, he'd be featured in all the history textbooks like Henson is.

    At least Chazelle made him Jewish, so he's halfway there.
  48. @Anonymous
    “I guess we all like to be recognized not for one piece of fireworks but for the ledger of our daily work."

    That harkens back to a quote from British-African aviatrix Beryl Markham's memoir West With the Night: "If a man has any greatness in him it comes, not in one flamboyant hour, but in the ledger of his daily work." The memoir didn't become especially popular until the 80s, but it's certainly a book Armstrong could have been acquainted with before then.

    Hemingway, who also callled her a "high-grade bitch," wrote that Markham "could write rings around all of us who consider ourselves as writers." It's an excellent read.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Harry Baldwin

    There is some speculation that West with the Night was ghost written by one of her husbands, as her other known work was not of the same caliber as West.

    I myself don’t know, but the description in West of how rapidly the two men’s appearance deteriorates while they are stranded with Markham on the African plateau trying to build a wilderness runway in the absence of clean shirts and shaving razors always struck me as the kind of observation that would be very obvious to a women and very un-obvious to a man.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Almost Missouri

    Supposedly, these claims have been refuted in that she had already submitted a manuscript to her publisher even before she met this guy. He probably did help edit it but that doesn't make him the author.

    The sad/funny thing is that when Markham's book was rediscovered in the early '80s, she (herself in her 80s - she was about as old as the century) was still alive but living in poverty (still in Kenya and still working as a horse trainer at the Nairobi race track). She had recently been beaten up in the course of a robbery by her vibrant Kenyan neighbors. The newfound popularity of the book meant that she was able to spend her few remaining years in slightly less vibrant surroundings.

  49. Would I be wrong that the designer and chief engineer on the Saturn 5 rocket Arthur Rudolph recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor for extraordinary services (later withdrawn) was expelled from the USA after pressure from the Jews.
    The Saturn 5 was the last all liquid fuelled 3 stage rocket to leave the earth , in total 13 times without a fail , all the other later rockets are glorified fire works with solid fuel boosters , an easier engineering feat to achieve.
    A time when the USA dreamed large and had the will and skill to make it happen.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @RouterAl

    You forgot to mention why he was expelled.

    Rudolph was operations director for V-2 missile production in the underground factory at Mittelwerk. Between 12–20,000 (mostly Jewish) prisoners died while building the V-2 rockets at Mittelwerk, which is more than the number that died in actual V-2 bombardments. So the V-2 may have been the only weapon in history that killed more production workers than enemy citizens.

    We had our own native rocket genius, Robert Goddard and didn't need Nazi war criminals. von Braun and his circle considered Goddard to be a god, but in his own country he was a prophet without honor during his lifetime. The US Army was just not interested in rockets until the Germans started dropping them on London.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous, @Joe Stalin

  50. @RichardTaylor
    I liked the Whitey song being inserted because it emphasized two important things:

    - It was Whites who went to the moon

    - Blacks, and the Left more generally, thought it was a waste of time and money

    Replies: @Neuday, @danindc, @Authenticjazzman

    For wastes of time and money, compare the Apollo missions to the welfare state. At least we don’t have millions of multigenerational addicts to moon launches.

    • Replies: @HunInTheSun
    @Neuday

    Too bad.

  51. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anon


    First Man” was marketed as an “international/team effort” sort of deal...
     
    One does wonder if the value placed today on international ticket sales had some impact on these decisions.

    As for how the film could have been made, my own thoughts are that a good independent film could be made that would focus on the fact that Armstrong ended up being the First Man mostly by happenstance, by the progress of each previous flight, and where he was in the lineup. He himself said this and that all the emphasis on him is only because he climbed down a ladder twenty minutes before another man did. Also, there could be an almost surreal approach to how paradoxical it is that an ordinary-seeming personality ended up with a unique place in history. It would be an art film that would look at how we think about all this, and probably nobody would watch it.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Mr. Anon, @John Mansfield

    From what I have read, I believe that Armstrong was selected for command of Apollo 11 because he was the most adept at flying the LM. That was a kind of flying that nobody had ever done before prior to Apollo – standing on a rocket platform and guiding it in for a soft landing on the ground. In addition to whtever manual dexterity Armstrong had, his temperment suited him for it. NASA’s management also probably figured that Armstrong wouldn’t make an ass of himself afterwords or demean the accomplishment in some crass or vulgar way. And they were proved right.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Mr. Anon

    The crew of Apollo 10 did all the same stuff as 11 but they didn't actually land. They got down quite close to the surface and I imagine in retrospect that they regretted not actually landing-they were fully equipped to do all the stuff on the surface that 11 did in case it wound up happening.

    Also in retrospect, Armstrong should have replaced Aldrin with Lovell even if Lovell weren't fated to have a bad flight. Aldrin would have been better off not having been put in that position,and Lovell would have probably had a command later in the rotation, as Aldrin would had he not been a problem actor.

    Remember, none of these guys thought Apollo was going to be the summit of the US space program. They were figuring on a Moon base or even Mars before they retired.

  52. @RichardTaylor
    I liked the Whitey song being inserted because it emphasized two important things:

    - It was Whites who went to the moon

    - Blacks, and the Left more generally, thought it was a waste of time and money

    Replies: @Neuday, @danindc, @Authenticjazzman

    Yes! and it showed the Left (and blacks) to be buzzkill losers…normal people would have been very tuned off by that scene and those people…and that’s a great thing

  53. Anon[369] • Disclaimer says:

    “Drug overdose is now the leading cause of death among young adults. I wonder whether this is eugenic in that the people who tend to overdose are lower IQ than the survivors?”

    There’s definitely a correlation with IQ, but it’s not absolute. And it’s not something we should accept even if it were. Those whites who are checking out tend to have IQs 7-8 points higher than the mean Mexican IQ and over 10 points higher than the black mean. Any eugenic effect from their loss will be swamped by the dysgenic affect their absence will have on the nation as a whole in terms of lessening our ability to oppose demographic change at the ballot box. The fewer of them, the less political power more capable whites have. Over all, the effect is dysgenic. I can think of other, more effective, eugenic policies than having poor whites suicide themselves.

  54. @Jack D
    @Anon

    Drug overdose is now the leading cause of death among young adults. I wonder whether this is eugenic in that the people who tend to overdose are lower IQ than the survivors? In any case, it's a huge waste of societal resources spent on raising and educating these folks to adulthood, only to have them check out early.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    it’s a huge waste of societal resources spent on raising and educating these folks to adulthood

    That increases GDP. Good for the economy.

  55. I had the usual preparation for this movie of already knowing most of the historical content, but also an unusual preparation of being by my wife when she died 42 hours before, after a year facing cancer. With the eleven-night hospice stay concluded very early Thursday morning, I took the younger children to the zoo on Friday afternoon. Then Friday night I took the older children and my wife’s parents to see “First Man.”

    So, within seconds I recognized that the movie was starting out in the X-15, which seemed like an excellent place to start. Then minutes later I was reminded, “That’s right. Armstrong’s daughter died when he was at Edwards,” and I sat next to my mother-in-law, whose daughter died 42 hours earlier, as Armstrong was depicted burying his daughter. Not at all the second plot point I was expecting. In my emotionally tender state, the choice to make Armstrong haunted by death was probably more vivid for me than most. Probably, I am the only one who started sobbing at the sight of the Apollo 1 test capsule; fortunately I had a handkerchief to muffle it.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @John Mansfield

    My condolences to you, Sir. Thank you for your comments. May you and your family be comforted and strong.

    , @Jack D
    @John Mansfield

    I am sorry for your loss. It really does get better with time.

    , @Desiderius
    @John Mansfield

    I had tears there too. We lost my brother when he was five. You lean on each other because it hits different family members at different times.

  56. @Buzz Mohawk
    @ThreeCranes


    ... cinema has become ever more frenetic...
     
    Yes.

    This trend began when digital editing was developed, circa 1990. I remember then seeing a demonstration system at a meeting I attended. Hollywood directors and editors where just beginning to make their cuts on digitized video with computers before physically cutting the film. This made it possible for them to experiment with vastly more and quicker cuts before committing to the physical labor of it. That's when the madness started.

    I'm sure there are other reasons, such as the ever increasing pace and impact of popular music, but digital editing definitely facilitated rapid cuts and transitions.

    Replies: @ThreeCranes, @Steve Sailer, @Pheasant

    The usual suspects (1995) was edited the old fashioned way as the director thought the new school of editors using physical editing methods were not as good as the old school types.

  57. @istevefan

    Neil Armstrong, a humble, white American from Ohio, was the First Man to stand on another world —
     
    Don't get me wrong. I am a big fan of the moon walkers and I wish I could have seen it as it happened. But why is Armstrong so definitively declared as the first man on the moon? I can see him being given such acclaim if he had gone on a solo mission like Charles Lindbergh crossing the Atlantic. But Buzz Aldrin was right there with him. And Buzz did walk on the moon.

    I am not trying to take anything away from Neil, but I think Buzz gets shortchanged by history. I think recognizing Buzz would be akin to recognizing two guys with a shared Nobel Prize for a collaborative effort. Buzz should get the same recognition as Neil, but he won't. It's a shame for Buzz, a stud who could still throw a nice punch at age 72.

    Though he did not walk on the moon, Michael Collins has an interesting place in history. While Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed together on the moon, and the world watched it unfold on television, Collins was orbiting above the moon in the command module. In the greatest moment in human history Michael Collins was the only human being who was not on the Earth or moon.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Jack D, @Seth Largo

    I take it the film doesn’t show Aldrin taking communion on the moon?

  58. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anon


    First Man” was marketed as an “international/team effort” sort of deal...
     
    One does wonder if the value placed today on international ticket sales had some impact on these decisions.

    As for how the film could have been made, my own thoughts are that a good independent film could be made that would focus on the fact that Armstrong ended up being the First Man mostly by happenstance, by the progress of each previous flight, and where he was in the lineup. He himself said this and that all the emphasis on him is only because he climbed down a ladder twenty minutes before another man did. Also, there could be an almost surreal approach to how paradoxical it is that an ordinary-seeming personality ended up with a unique place in history. It would be an art film that would look at how we think about all this, and probably nobody would watch it.

    Replies: @Desiderius, @Mr. Anon, @John Mansfield

    My favorite moon movie is “For All Mankind” (1989), a dreamy 80-minute documentary with lots of landscapes, a Brian Eno soundtrack, and voice-overs by unnamed astronauts describing what it felt like to be there. As one of them said, billions of people would never experience the moon directly, so it was the responsibility of the handful of men who made the voyage to experience it on behalf of all mankind.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @John Mansfield


    As one of them said, billions of people would never experience the moon directly, so it was the responsibility of the handful of men who made the voyage to experience it on behalf of all mankind.
     
    That is a very good thought.

    I saw a similar movie maybe 15 years ago at a little art cinema, but I don't remember the name of it. It also featured interviews with those men, plus generous clips from TV transmissions and 16mm film taken on the surface.

    I feel lucky to have been alive and old enough to understand what was going on when it all happened. Apollo has been an interest of mine ever since. I don't feel like a geek for that, because it is undeniably one of the most significant events in history, and I was one of the people around when it happened. There are history buffs, etc., and I am a buff for this history.

    Your other comment about your loss and your own, current history has moved me. My sister was taken by cancer when the year 2001 was six days old. I happened to know Keir Dullea then, the actor who played Dave Bowman in 2001: A Space Odyssey, and I remember thinking how that year turned out very different from my childhood dreams.

  59. @Anon
    "It wasn’t aiming for a mass-moviegoing-demographic."

    The movie being poorly marketed didn't help, plus leftist critics aren't much into promoting America-centric patriotic movies these days. I wonder if this movie will get a higher Rotten Tomatoes critic score than that dumb Spike Lee movie that came out a few months ago.

    "Middlebrow is now too smart in our 94 IQ and falling America, with its 91 IQ young movie-going generation."

    Unfortunately, true. I remember Sailer had an article, if I recall, from the 2000s where he speculated that the growing share of 90 IQ Hispanics in the population was ruining the movies*; specifically, he noted how Hispanics, about 14% of the population then, made up about 25% of the movie-going audience for the Phantom Menace. Hispanic males seem disproportionately represented in audiences for crap, low-IQ blockbusters. True, these types of films were never really high-brow to begin with, but they were at least trying back when the smart white audiences demanded quality. Now, all Hollywood has to do to make money is put in some explosions and fire plus lame "comedy" and they automatically do mega bucks. THAT explains why movies have gotten so terrible. Hollywood figures there is no reason to concern themselves with narrative quality when D'tavious, Keith, and Mario are your key demographics, and they'll take whatever garbage you put in front of them.

    Compare the quality of schlock blockbusters then and now:

    Independence Day (1996) vs. Independence Day: Resurgence

    Terminator 2 (1991) vs. Terminator: Genysis

    Star Wars (1970s, 80s) vs. every Star Wars movie since

    Predator (1987) vs. Shane Black's The Predator

    Jurassic Park (1993) vs. latest Jurassic Park movie

    Robocop (1987) vs. Robocop remake

    Ghostbusters (1984) vs. Ghostbusters (2016)

    Alien/Aliens (70s/80s) vs. Alien: Covenant

    Poltergeist (1980s) vs. Annabelle

    Halloween vs. Rob Zombie Halloween

    Akira (1988) vs. Lucy (rip-off of Akira, basically)

    Die Hard (1988) vs. any dumb action movie these days

    Interview with the Vampire vs. Twilight

    When Hollywood isn't ripping off Japanese anime, they are making inferior trash compared to yesteryear. Even Micheal Moore's hack documentaries have fallen in quality.

    *They are also ruining the American video game scene. That's why "Americans" are increasingly playing vapid, story-less multiplayer shooters and dumb racing games while the high-IQ Japanese continue playing high-brow RPGs, shutting Microsoft out of their market in the process.

    Replies: @BB753

    “Interview with the Vampire vs. Twilight”

    I see. You’re like Steve Sailer. He doesn’t get Twilight either, as commenter Priss Factory used to say! Lol!
    Where’s the one and only Priss when we need him?

  60. @Jack D
    @DB Cooper

    What is really amazing is that the computers on Apollo had computing power and memory storage that is roughly equivalent to that of a TI-83 programmable calculator today, not even close to even what a low end smartphone has, let alone a modern desktop or an iPhone.

    Replies: @BB753, @Romanian

    It’s a miracle nobody died during the moon landings. What were the odds?

  61. @Almost Missouri
    @Anonymous

    There is some speculation that West with the Night was ghost written by one of her husbands, as her other known work was not of the same caliber as West.

    I myself don't know, but the description in West of how rapidly the two men's appearance deteriorates while they are stranded with Markham on the African plateau trying to build a wilderness runway in the absence of clean shirts and shaving razors always struck me as the kind of observation that would be very obvious to a women and very un-obvious to a man.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Supposedly, these claims have been refuted in that she had already submitted a manuscript to her publisher even before she met this guy. He probably did help edit it but that doesn’t make him the author.

    The sad/funny thing is that when Markham’s book was rediscovered in the early ’80s, she (herself in her 80s – she was about as old as the century) was still alive but living in poverty (still in Kenya and still working as a horse trainer at the Nairobi race track). She had recently been beaten up in the course of a robbery by her vibrant Kenyan neighbors. The newfound popularity of the book meant that she was able to spend her few remaining years in slightly less vibrant surroundings.

  62. If you support Hollywood by going to the movies, you support the Left and all its endeavors. Simple as that. Admittedly if this sick-looking creature can convincingly portray an actual human being of an earlier and infinitely better era, that truly is a feat of acting (or direction)- but why should I support her career by paying to see the movie? https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2018/10/20/rage-british-actress-claire-foy-derides-trump-giant-penis-america-has

  63. @John Mansfield
    I had the usual preparation for this movie of already knowing most of the historical content, but also an unusual preparation of being by my wife when she died 42 hours before, after a year facing cancer. With the eleven-night hospice stay concluded very early Thursday morning, I took the younger children to the zoo on Friday afternoon. Then Friday night I took the older children and my wife's parents to see "First Man."

    So, within seconds I recognized that the movie was starting out in the X-15, which seemed like an excellent place to start. Then minutes later I was reminded, "That's right. Armstrong's daughter died when he was at Edwards," and I sat next to my mother-in-law, whose daughter died 42 hours earlier, as Armstrong was depicted burying his daughter. Not at all the second plot point I was expecting. In my emotionally tender state, the choice to make Armstrong haunted by death was probably more vivid for me than most. Probably, I am the only one who started sobbing at the sight of the Apollo 1 test capsule; fortunately I had a handkerchief to muffle it.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Desiderius

    My condolences to you, Sir. Thank you for your comments. May you and your family be comforted and strong.

  64. @John Mansfield
    @Buzz Mohawk

    My favorite moon movie is "For All Mankind" (1989), a dreamy 80-minute documentary with lots of landscapes, a Brian Eno soundtrack, and voice-overs by unnamed astronauts describing what it felt like to be there. As one of them said, billions of people would never experience the moon directly, so it was the responsibility of the handful of men who made the voyage to experience it on behalf of all mankind.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    As one of them said, billions of people would never experience the moon directly, so it was the responsibility of the handful of men who made the voyage to experience it on behalf of all mankind.

    That is a very good thought.

    I saw a similar movie maybe 15 years ago at a little art cinema, but I don’t remember the name of it. It also featured interviews with those men, plus generous clips from TV transmissions and 16mm film taken on the surface.

    I feel lucky to have been alive and old enough to understand what was going on when it all happened. Apollo has been an interest of mine ever since. I don’t feel like a geek for that, because it is undeniably one of the most significant events in history, and I was one of the people around when it happened. There are history buffs, etc., and I am a buff for this history.

    Your other comment about your loss and your own, current history has moved me. My sister was taken by cancer when the year 2001 was six days old. I happened to know Keir Dullea then, the actor who played Dave Bowman in 2001: A Space Odyssey, and I remember thinking how that year turned out very different from my childhood dreams.

  65. @Neuday
    @RichardTaylor

    For wastes of time and money, compare the Apollo missions to the welfare state. At least we don't have millions of multigenerational addicts to moon launches.

    Replies: @HunInTheSun

    Too bad.

  66. @L Woods
    Your daily reminder that female (consumer) power degrades everything.

    Replies: @BB753

    Another reason why we can’t have nice things anymore: women. Such killjoys!

  67. @TheBoom
    Based on Steve and Buzz's reviews I may actually see it now. However, from a marketing perspective, I am still amazed at the stupid business decision to not show the flag.

    Step 1. Make a movie glorifying the real life accomplishments of the main villains of our woke age: white men. In other words, they made a movie that would mainly appeal to bad whites.

    Step 2. Make sure you significantly lessen the appeal to bad white men by not showing the flag.

    I guess this is what happens when good whites try to make a film targeted at bad whites, a group they know nothing about yet despise

    Replies: @Hark, hark! The snark.

    It’s a space movie for white people made by white people. But the success of another sort of recent space movie suggests a sequel to it with the moon shot theme…
    “Hidden Figures: Fly Me to the Moon”

  68. I’ve recently been watching episodes of First Flights with Neil Armstrong on Amazon Prime. His love of flying and flying machines is very apparent. Obviously one of the most prominent names in aviation, in this documentary he puts the plane and pilot ahead of himself.

  69. @Anonymous
    “I guess we all like to be recognized not for one piece of fireworks but for the ledger of our daily work."

    That harkens back to a quote from British-African aviatrix Beryl Markham's memoir West With the Night: "If a man has any greatness in him it comes, not in one flamboyant hour, but in the ledger of his daily work." The memoir didn't become especially popular until the 80s, but it's certainly a book Armstrong could have been acquainted with before then.

    Hemingway, who also callled her a "high-grade bitch," wrote that Markham "could write rings around all of us who consider ourselves as writers." It's an excellent read.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Harry Baldwin

    Hemingway, who also callled her a “high-grade bitch,”

    Hemingway, who was a high-grade SOB, probably wasn’t the best judge of character, but he was a good judge of writing.

  70. It is also about Whitey. It even includes Gil Scott-Heron’s poem, “Whitey on the Moon,” which was recited during protests at the time. A mercifully brief effort is made here to show the unrest of the 1960s. Fifty years ago, blacks were shouting that money should be spent on them instead of on Whitey’s “giant leap for mankind.”

    which begs the question, why didn’t Jet or Ebony or even the MSM media bring up the “hidden figures” gals to counter these arguments? Seems kinda weird that we had to wait 50 years to find out that we weren’t going to the moon unless these girls did the math……something isn’t adding up.

  71. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Anon
    @Buzz Mohawk

    From what I have read, I believe that Armstrong was selected for command of Apollo 11 because he was the most adept at flying the LM. That was a kind of flying that nobody had ever done before prior to Apollo - standing on a rocket platform and guiding it in for a soft landing on the ground. In addition to whtever manual dexterity Armstrong had, his temperment suited him for it. NASA's management also probably figured that Armstrong wouldn't make an ass of himself afterwords or demean the accomplishment in some crass or vulgar way. And they were proved right.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    The crew of Apollo 10 did all the same stuff as 11 but they didn’t actually land. They got down quite close to the surface and I imagine in retrospect that they regretted not actually landing-they were fully equipped to do all the stuff on the surface that 11 did in case it wound up happening.

    Also in retrospect, Armstrong should have replaced Aldrin with Lovell even if Lovell weren’t fated to have a bad flight. Aldrin would have been better off not having been put in that position,and Lovell would have probably had a command later in the rotation, as Aldrin would had he not been a problem actor.

    Remember, none of these guys thought Apollo was going to be the summit of the US space program. They were figuring on a Moon base or even Mars before they retired.

  72. Tis wonderful when a movie is historically accurate to fiction.

    Popcorn more enjoyable especially with extra “butter”.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @bjondo


    Tis wonderful when a movie is historically accurate to fiction.
     
    What does "to fiction" mean?

    Replies: @bjondo

  73. @Jack D
    @istevefan

    The reason that Armstrong got all the credit is that we have a deep seated need for heroes who succeed in single combat. David slaying Goliath. St. George slaying the dragon. The chief of the tribe, King Arthur, Stalin, etc. The same reason no one remembers who any President's VP was. Alcock and Brown crossed the Atlantic almost a decade before Lindbergh (Newfoundland to Ireland) but no one remembers them in part because there were two of them. Edwin Peary was not alone when he reached (or did not reach) the North Pole - with him were not only Henson but 4 Eskimos, but Peary got all the credit. Sir Edmund Hillary. Columbus. Etc. So it was inevitable that whoever set foot on the moon first would be the one remembered because that's how the human mind operates.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Authenticjazzman, @Desiderius

    The first people to fly across the Atlantic were a U.S. Navy team in several seaplanes. Nobody remembers them anymore.

    • Replies: @Kyle
    @Anonymous

    According to British television, the first people to fly across the Atlantic were English pilots, veterans of the First World War. I believe in 1919, and I don’t recall their names. British pop culture and American pop culture are totally different when recalling the story of the first man to fly across the atlantic. It’s funny.

  74. @RouterAl
    Would I be wrong that the designer and chief engineer on the Saturn 5 rocket Arthur Rudolph recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor for extraordinary services (later withdrawn) was expelled from the USA after pressure from the Jews.
    The Saturn 5 was the last all liquid fuelled 3 stage rocket to leave the earth , in total 13 times without a fail , all the other later rockets are glorified fire works with solid fuel boosters , an easier engineering feat to achieve.
    A time when the USA dreamed large and had the will and skill to make it happen.

    Replies: @Jack D

    You forgot to mention why he was expelled.

    Rudolph was operations director for V-2 missile production in the underground factory at Mittelwerk. Between 12–20,000 (mostly Jewish) prisoners died while building the V-2 rockets at Mittelwerk, which is more than the number that died in actual V-2 bombardments. So the V-2 may have been the only weapon in history that killed more production workers than enemy citizens.

    We had our own native rocket genius, Robert Goddard and didn’t need Nazi war criminals. von Braun and his circle considered Goddard to be a god, but in his own country he was a prophet without honor during his lifetime. The US Army was just not interested in rockets until the Germans started dropping them on London.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    Why, pray tell, were these workers dying? Were the Germans killing them on purpose, or were they dying of disease and starvation? It doesn't make sense that you would kill people building your weapons for you on purpose nor that you would not make a good faith effort to keep them able to work.

    And in the real world, you don't expel someone from your country even if he did rotten things if you invited him in and he contributed significantly to your own war effort. If the leadership of a country can't say NO to a tiny but noisy minority group the noisy minority group needs to be kicked out no matter whether the noisy minority group is right or wrong. Even if they are an asset in many ways, they are just too powerful for the majority to tolerate.

    , @Anonymous
    @Jack D


    Rudolph was operations director for V-2 missile production in the underground factory at Mittelwerk. Between 12–20,000 (mostly Jewish) prisoners died while building the V-2 rockets at Mittelwerk
     
    Any such deaths were almost certainly accidental. You wouldn't want to lose your manufacturing workers in the middle of a war.
    , @Joe Stalin
    @Jack D

    "These documents surfaced when the Office of Special Investigations was formed in the Justice Department to investigate war crimes. The office conducted an investigation and interviewed survivors of forced labor at the V-2 factory. Fred Sher, the director of special investigations, said that this evidence was presented to Mr. Rudolph and that he signed a document agreeing to relinquish his United States citizenship. In return, the Justice Department agreed not to pursue his case in the United States.

    "The Justice Department handed the information over to West Germany. In 1987 that Government ruled there was insufficient evidence to justify trying Mr. Rudolph.

    "Feeling vindicated, Mr. Rudolph began trying to regain his American citizenship and return to the United States. Some present and former employees at the Marshall center and elsewhere at NASA supported him, saying that Mr. Rudolph's contribution to the American space program had never received the proper credit.

    https://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/03/us/arthur-rudolph-89-developer-of-rocket-in-first-apollo-flight.html

    "ARTHUR RUDOLPH AND THE ROCKET THAT TOOK US TO THE MOON"

    "Arthur Clarke recently
    observed that the 20th century will be
    remembered, not for the world wars,
    or other horrible events, but for the
    first manned landing on the Moon.
    Arthur Rudolph will be
    remembered by history as the man
    who managed the Saturn V rocket
    program, that took men to the Moon."
    https://www.scientistsandfriends.com/files/arthur.pdf

  75. @John Mansfield
    I had the usual preparation for this movie of already knowing most of the historical content, but also an unusual preparation of being by my wife when she died 42 hours before, after a year facing cancer. With the eleven-night hospice stay concluded very early Thursday morning, I took the younger children to the zoo on Friday afternoon. Then Friday night I took the older children and my wife's parents to see "First Man."

    So, within seconds I recognized that the movie was starting out in the X-15, which seemed like an excellent place to start. Then minutes later I was reminded, "That's right. Armstrong's daughter died when he was at Edwards," and I sat next to my mother-in-law, whose daughter died 42 hours earlier, as Armstrong was depicted burying his daughter. Not at all the second plot point I was expecting. In my emotionally tender state, the choice to make Armstrong haunted by death was probably more vivid for me than most. Probably, I am the only one who started sobbing at the sight of the Apollo 1 test capsule; fortunately I had a handkerchief to muffle it.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Desiderius

    I am sorry for your loss. It really does get better with time.

  76. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    @RouterAl

    You forgot to mention why he was expelled.

    Rudolph was operations director for V-2 missile production in the underground factory at Mittelwerk. Between 12–20,000 (mostly Jewish) prisoners died while building the V-2 rockets at Mittelwerk, which is more than the number that died in actual V-2 bombardments. So the V-2 may have been the only weapon in history that killed more production workers than enemy citizens.

    We had our own native rocket genius, Robert Goddard and didn't need Nazi war criminals. von Braun and his circle considered Goddard to be a god, but in his own country he was a prophet without honor during his lifetime. The US Army was just not interested in rockets until the Germans started dropping them on London.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous, @Joe Stalin

    Why, pray tell, were these workers dying? Were the Germans killing them on purpose, or were they dying of disease and starvation? It doesn’t make sense that you would kill people building your weapons for you on purpose nor that you would not make a good faith effort to keep them able to work.

    And in the real world, you don’t expel someone from your country even if he did rotten things if you invited him in and he contributed significantly to your own war effort. If the leadership of a country can’t say NO to a tiny but noisy minority group the noisy minority group needs to be kicked out no matter whether the noisy minority group is right or wrong. Even if they are an asset in many ways, they are just too powerful for the majority to tolerate.

  77. @John Mansfield
    I had the usual preparation for this movie of already knowing most of the historical content, but also an unusual preparation of being by my wife when she died 42 hours before, after a year facing cancer. With the eleven-night hospice stay concluded very early Thursday morning, I took the younger children to the zoo on Friday afternoon. Then Friday night I took the older children and my wife's parents to see "First Man."

    So, within seconds I recognized that the movie was starting out in the X-15, which seemed like an excellent place to start. Then minutes later I was reminded, "That's right. Armstrong's daughter died when he was at Edwards," and I sat next to my mother-in-law, whose daughter died 42 hours earlier, as Armstrong was depicted burying his daughter. Not at all the second plot point I was expecting. In my emotionally tender state, the choice to make Armstrong haunted by death was probably more vivid for me than most. Probably, I am the only one who started sobbing at the sight of the Apollo 1 test capsule; fortunately I had a handkerchief to muffle it.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jack D, @Desiderius

    I had tears there too. We lost my brother when he was five. You lean on each other because it hits different family members at different times.

  78. @Jack D
    @DB Cooper

    What is really amazing is that the computers on Apollo had computing power and memory storage that is roughly equivalent to that of a TI-83 programmable calculator today, not even close to even what a low end smartphone has, let alone a modern desktop or an iPhone.

    Replies: @BB753, @Romanian

    Their computing was weaker, but their development process led them to capabilities the US was hard pressed to recreate today, involving reverse engineering the units they still had.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2013/04/how-nasa-brought-the-monstrous-f-1-moon-rocket-back-to-life/

  79. NASA was stretching that extra mile to reach lunacy in jargon. In the manuals for what the Apollo astronauts and their families could do for recreation they recommended a trip to the «hydro-terrestrial interface», back on earth know as the beach.

  80. @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    The first people to fly across the Atlantic were a U.S. Navy team in several seaplanes. Nobody remembers them anymore.

    Replies: @Kyle

    According to British television, the first people to fly across the Atlantic were English pilots, veterans of the First World War. I believe in 1919, and I don’t recall their names. British pop culture and American pop culture are totally different when recalling the story of the first man to fly across the atlantic. It’s funny.

  81. @Desiderius
    @Buzz Mohawk


    how paradoxical it is that an ordinary-seeming personality ended up with a unique place in history
     
    Nothing paradoxical at all about it here in Ohio, and not just Ohio. That's the America we know up close and personal.

    Replies: @Authenticjazzman

    ” Ordinary-seeming personality”

    Not only “ordinary” but wierd and contradictory as well, seeing as he threw in with the insane Democrats upon entering politics.

    ” That’s the America we know up close and personal”.

    Yeah we sure do know how manifest crazy they, the Democrats, are, and that he, Armstrong, chose to align with them perplexed me and tossed me for loop way back then. There is simply no rationalization for a sane person teaming up with them, the lunatic Democrats.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz artist.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @Authenticjazzman

    The Democrats are only intermittently insane. The Republicans are pretty consistently mediocre.

  82. @Jack D
    @istevefan

    The reason that Armstrong got all the credit is that we have a deep seated need for heroes who succeed in single combat. David slaying Goliath. St. George slaying the dragon. The chief of the tribe, King Arthur, Stalin, etc. The same reason no one remembers who any President's VP was. Alcock and Brown crossed the Atlantic almost a decade before Lindbergh (Newfoundland to Ireland) but no one remembers them in part because there were two of them. Edwin Peary was not alone when he reached (or did not reach) the North Pole - with him were not only Henson but 4 Eskimos, but Peary got all the credit. Sir Edmund Hillary. Columbus. Etc. So it was inevitable that whoever set foot on the moon first would be the one remembered because that's how the human mind operates.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Authenticjazzman, @Desiderius

    And nobody remembers the Italian team who scaled K2, a far more dangerous climb, before Hillary went up Everest.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz musician.

  83. @bjondo
    Tis wonderful when a movie is historically accurate to fiction.

    Popcorn more enjoyable especially with extra "butter".

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Tis wonderful when a movie is historically accurate to fiction.

    What does “to fiction” mean?

    • Replies: @bjondo
    @Anonymous

    Compare 60s computers to 2018 computers. Same with materials other technologies.

    If we actually went to moon in 69, kids today should be able to go ... on their own ... every wkend.

    Today's toy drones more advanced than Apollo.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  84. @Jack D
    @RouterAl

    You forgot to mention why he was expelled.

    Rudolph was operations director for V-2 missile production in the underground factory at Mittelwerk. Between 12–20,000 (mostly Jewish) prisoners died while building the V-2 rockets at Mittelwerk, which is more than the number that died in actual V-2 bombardments. So the V-2 may have been the only weapon in history that killed more production workers than enemy citizens.

    We had our own native rocket genius, Robert Goddard and didn't need Nazi war criminals. von Braun and his circle considered Goddard to be a god, but in his own country he was a prophet without honor during his lifetime. The US Army was just not interested in rockets until the Germans started dropping them on London.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous, @Joe Stalin

    Rudolph was operations director for V-2 missile production in the underground factory at Mittelwerk. Between 12–20,000 (mostly Jewish) prisoners died while building the V-2 rockets at Mittelwerk

    Any such deaths were almost certainly accidental. You wouldn’t want to lose your manufacturing workers in the middle of a war.

  85. @RichardTaylor
    I liked the Whitey song being inserted because it emphasized two important things:

    - It was Whites who went to the moon

    - Blacks, and the Left more generally, thought it was a waste of time and money

    Replies: @Neuday, @danindc, @Authenticjazzman

    ” Blacks and the Left more generally , thought it was a waste of time and money”

    Well myself, white and ultra conservative, I consider ALL space exploration, including those hundred million dollar telescopes, to be a bombastic waste of money, seeing all of it being paid for by the tapped-out US tax-slaves who get up at five in the morning and trek off to their menial lobs, simply to provide the parasitic “reseachers” with their research toys, through billions of Dollars of tax revenue.

    If the the “researchers” finance their hobby out of their own pocket, fine, however when they are milking the poor working stiffs to death, then the whole thing must be reconsidered and altered.

    AJM

  86. @Jack D
    @RouterAl

    You forgot to mention why he was expelled.

    Rudolph was operations director for V-2 missile production in the underground factory at Mittelwerk. Between 12–20,000 (mostly Jewish) prisoners died while building the V-2 rockets at Mittelwerk, which is more than the number that died in actual V-2 bombardments. So the V-2 may have been the only weapon in history that killed more production workers than enemy citizens.

    We had our own native rocket genius, Robert Goddard and didn't need Nazi war criminals. von Braun and his circle considered Goddard to be a god, but in his own country he was a prophet without honor during his lifetime. The US Army was just not interested in rockets until the Germans started dropping them on London.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous, @Joe Stalin

    “These documents surfaced when the Office of Special Investigations was formed in the Justice Department to investigate war crimes. The office conducted an investigation and interviewed survivors of forced labor at the V-2 factory. Fred Sher, the director of special investigations, said that this evidence was presented to Mr. Rudolph and that he signed a document agreeing to relinquish his United States citizenship. In return, the Justice Department agreed not to pursue his case in the United States.

    “The Justice Department handed the information over to West Germany. In 1987 that Government ruled there was insufficient evidence to justify trying Mr. Rudolph.

    “Feeling vindicated, Mr. Rudolph began trying to regain his American citizenship and return to the United States. Some present and former employees at the Marshall center and elsewhere at NASA supported him, saying that Mr. Rudolph’s contribution to the American space program had never received the proper credit.

    https://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/03/us/arthur-rudolph-89-developer-of-rocket-in-first-apollo-flight.html

    “ARTHUR RUDOLPH AND THE ROCKET THAT TOOK US TO THE MOON”

    “Arthur Clarke recently
    observed that the 20th century will be
    remembered, not for the world wars,
    or other horrible events, but for the
    first manned landing on the Moon.
    Arthur Rudolph will be
    remembered by history as the man
    who managed the Saturn V rocket
    program, that took men to the Moon.”
    https://www.scientistsandfriends.com/files/arthur.pdf

  87. @Anonymous
    @bjondo


    Tis wonderful when a movie is historically accurate to fiction.
     
    What does "to fiction" mean?

    Replies: @bjondo

    Compare 60s computers to 2018 computers. Same with materials other technologies.

    If we actually went to moon in 69, kids today should be able to go … on their own … every wkend.

    Today’s toy drones more advanced than Apollo.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @bjondo

    When introduced in 1963 a P&W PT-6 aircraft engine cost the price of a very nice house in Orange County, with a new Corvette thrown in if you didn’t get a good OEM discount.

    Still does. Power output, specific fuel consumption and TBO are improved, but cost still makes owning one impossible for most GA aircraft owners.

    A really good upland bird gun, a bowed string instrument suitable for playing in a professional string quartet, or a basic working machinist’s tool set are all about the same today as then in adjusted dollars as long as you are not looking at British top tier double guns or Old Cremona or Stainer violins or Tourte bows, which are several times their 1963 value.

    Televisions are way cheaper though.

  88. @Jack D
    @istevefan

    The reason that Armstrong got all the credit is that we have a deep seated need for heroes who succeed in single combat. David slaying Goliath. St. George slaying the dragon. The chief of the tribe, King Arthur, Stalin, etc. The same reason no one remembers who any President's VP was. Alcock and Brown crossed the Atlantic almost a decade before Lindbergh (Newfoundland to Ireland) but no one remembers them in part because there were two of them. Edwin Peary was not alone when he reached (or did not reach) the North Pole - with him were not only Henson but 4 Eskimos, but Peary got all the credit. Sir Edmund Hillary. Columbus. Etc. So it was inevitable that whoever set foot on the moon first would be the one remembered because that's how the human mind operates.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Authenticjazzman, @Desiderius

    Edwin Peary was not alone when he reached (or did not reach) the North Pole – with him were not only Henson but 4 Eskimos, but Peary got all the credit. Sir Edmund Hillary. Columbus. Etc. So it was inevitable that whoever set foot on the moon first would be the one remembered because that’s how the human mind operates.

    If only Buzz were black, he’d be featured in all the history textbooks like Henson is.

    At least Chazelle made him Jewish, so he’s halfway there.

  89. @Authenticjazzman
    @Desiderius

    " Ordinary-seeming personality"

    Not only "ordinary" but wierd and contradictory as well, seeing as he threw in with the insane Democrats upon entering politics.

    " That's the America we know up close and personal".

    Yeah we sure do know how manifest crazy they, the Democrats, are, and that he, Armstrong, chose to align with them perplexed me and tossed me for loop way back then. There is simply no rationalization for a sane person teaming up with them, the lunatic Democrats.

    Authenticjazzman "Mensa" qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz artist.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    The Democrats are only intermittently insane. The Republicans are pretty consistently mediocre.

  90. ” The Republicans are pretty consistently mediocre”

    Just which population groupings do the Democrat voting blocks consist of?

    First off, the millions of urban high school drop-out, unread, uninformed, outside of the left-wing media, low IQ, BC/HC/BO worshiping DT haters.

    Secondly, the air-brained academic clique with their BS degrees in “social/gender studies”, “art history, and other worthless nonsense.

    Thirdly, the drugged-up, moronic Hollywood shiot-talkers, and their Dummkopf followers.

    Add to these fools the media and most attorneys, and judges, and you have the most “mediocre” voting blocks possible.

    AJM

  91. Anonymous[271] • Disclaimer says:
    @bjondo
    @Anonymous

    Compare 60s computers to 2018 computers. Same with materials other technologies.

    If we actually went to moon in 69, kids today should be able to go ... on their own ... every wkend.

    Today's toy drones more advanced than Apollo.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    When introduced in 1963 a P&W PT-6 aircraft engine cost the price of a very nice house in Orange County, with a new Corvette thrown in if you didn’t get a good OEM discount.

    Still does. Power output, specific fuel consumption and TBO are improved, but cost still makes owning one impossible for most GA aircraft owners.

    A really good upland bird gun, a bowed string instrument suitable for playing in a professional string quartet, or a basic working machinist’s tool set are all about the same today as then in adjusted dollars as long as you are not looking at British top tier double guns or Old Cremona or Stainer violins or Tourte bows, which are several times their 1963 value.

    Televisions are way cheaper though.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS