(SPOILERS OBVIOUSLY)
Crazy anti-mater accident flash-frying Earth and maybe our galaxy, is a broken mechanism. They blow it up, none of this matters for the plot, it's never mentioned again or expanded upon, and we don't care about that HUGE situation on which the entire movie is based.
Full fail.
This movie is daddy issues family drama disguised as a sci-fi. The sci-fi parts were all bonkers, the daddy issues family drama parts were quite enjoyable tho'.
They should've removed all the sci-fi pretenses and go full on as family drama that simply was set in space. Or just use Mount Everest, Mariana Trench, or even The Moon (instead of far more far-fetched as Uranus.)
It is a requirement for the plot that it take place near Uranus. It would not have worked if it took place in the aforementioned locations.
The reason *Uranus is important is because it is the farthest planet in our solar system. Humans cannot conceivably go farther in pursuit of God. The distance is simply too great. A rational person would break at the tragedy of pioneering travels throughout the entire solar system and ultimately being unsuccessful in his mission. A rational person would admit that there is no God and we are alone and we are our own creators because we give birth to children. But, father is too stubborn or too guilty (absence from his creation's life) to admit defeat.
You didn't understand.
*EDIT: Meant Neptune.
I didn't understand. Okay.
shareIt was all very EASY to understand. It was too easy, and I was hoping for a little more thought to be involved. They even dumbed it down with internal dialog slapping you in the cerebral cortex every 5 minutes. Yes, daddy issues with underdeveloped characters we didn't care about... what's so hard to understand?
I wanted the film from the trailer, and this was not it.
[deleted]
Why even watch movies? Just watch trailers.
shareYou're not here for interesting discussion. Got it.
shareLol kind of a strange, off the wall comment there, huh?
Yeah its strange sometimes how far off the movie can be from the trailer. Bridge to Terabithia (sp)...looked fantastical, amazing, mind-blowing even. Was a story about a kid that dies and leaves his best friend having to deal with it. Not even resembling what the trailer represented =P
Why look for God on another planet in the first place? Why far from Earth? If fur from Earth is a requirement you can certainly go farther than Uranus or Neptune
share"If fur from Earth is a requirement you can certainly go farther than Uranus or Neptune."
No, actually you can't. You can see farther. The father located lots of new empty Godless locations, but mankind has reached a limit at that point in terms of reasonable exploratory possibility, absent unrealistic sci-fi contrivances such as warp drives.
This is because there is simply too much distance between the limits of our solar system and the next explorable area. Furthermore, solar systems and galaxies are constantly moving away from us at massive speeds. Absent sci-fi contrivances, the fastest space vehicle cannot match the speed at which things are moving away from us. Neptune is only not moving away because it's captured in the sun's orbit.
How do you know the region beyond Uranus is godless?
shareI said he didn't find god in the locations far beyond Neptune that he photographed using telescope photography.
shareGod is visible by telescope?
shareThat was the goal of the father, to find God. So I'm looking at it from his perspective.
Ofcourse, if you ask ME, then your question is completely nonsensical because there is no God. God is as real as Elves are real and fantasies are real, if humans make up that God is invisible then that's the mythos, just as humans made up that Elves have pointy ears.
"...there is no God." You sure about that, Geff? I only ask because there's been a couple thousand years of some pretty interesting philosophical thought on the matter. And many different conceptions of God and different ideas about the nature of the universe. Panentheism is an interesting worldview, for example, but there are others. It's an interesting subject if you're ever inclined to do the research. But if your mind is made up, then it's made up.
shareThere is definitely no God. Which one do you even mean? Atheism is the only way we will stop killing each other for our imaginary gods.
shareAre you saying an atheist has never killed anyone before?
shareI'm not sure "enjoyable" is the word I'd use. It's nice to see Pitt's character reach a point of catharsis in regard to his father, but the journey to the end is a rather depressing one, and even the final moments are bittersweet.
shareYeah, I meant the performance, or the film as an artform (on the drama part) is enjoyable to me. Total opposite of the sci-fi part which was too disjointed and ridiculous at times.
shareI thought the performances were good and the film is also a technical marvel with some very strong visuals. It also had some interesting and novel ideas (like moon pirates) and some thrilling scenes (like the opening skydiving sequence).
But it just didn't all come together into a truly satisfying experience.
True. Movie looks like a compilation of nice ideas on the sci-fi part, just not quite well working as a whole. The one I liked the most is the idea that there is no intelligent alien life that we can possibly find. That's new for a space movie.
shareThe plot is a vehicle for the underlying philosophy, which you didn't understand.
Btw, if you were paying attention, you would realize that the anti-matter explosions were somehow related to the old ships broken down engine. But again, it doesn't matter. It not mattering is not okay, according to you. That is fine, just watch Avatar or Aliens (2), those are films that are more your speed.
Sorry guy, there is nothing to suggest that op 'didn't understand' the underlying philosophy of the film (lol how pretentious).
Since they aren't commenting on that aspect of it at all - rather the contrived plot devices that fail this film.
Yes, there are contrived plot devices which are a platform for the themes and philosophies being presented. The plot takes a back seat. There is nothing wrong with this. This is not uncommon in certain films.
Take Melancholia as a classic example. Does that film use a "contrived plot device"? Is it scientifically accurate that characters are still on the planet as another is in the midst of colliding with Earth, or would the characters have died long before the other planet collided due to forces exerted prior to the collision?
Geff, you liked Ad Astra.
shareI don't know if that's a question. Whether or not I liked it is not a relevant factor. Likes and dislikes are subjective. Not everyone has to like the same things.
I didn't like Avatar, yet a lot of people liked it a lot. I do judge them for liking it, just as you might judge me for not liking it.
Avatar sucked.
You liked Ad Astra.
Are you making a statement or are you asking a question? If you are asking a question use a question mark. If you are making a statement, I don't understand the purpose of it.
shareConsidering you don't actually answer any questions people ask you, why does it matter if they are asking you a question or not?
sharehahahaa nice insults. I've never watched Avatar a second time. I GOT this film, a 9 year old could "Get" this film. What I didn't get was a properly resolved plot. Who cares WHY the antimatter failed in this forgettable film.... it didn't matter in the end anyway. They fixed that issue easily and it mattered not in the plot - UNLIKE the trailer was bragging about.
shareI seriously almost turned it off after a few minutes when they fell at lightning speed off of ladders IN SPACE. Then I though well maybe it was a space elevator and they weren't fully in zero G...nope...wrong. The whole premise was stupid. Brad Pitt sucked. My pulse remained below 45.
share