Reviews

Why are sci fi films so slow? Adopting the same storyline as the excellent Contact, three geeky scientists make that discovery after 90 minutes of a minor subplot and then it gets silly. Despite searching for evidence they have no memory and the computer battery is running out. Instead of dropping everything to head for that elusive battery they decide they need to collect their bits and pieces - oh come on! The film then wakes us up with a race to the Ever Ready ending, Thunderbirds style in the last second. Good acting spent mostly inside the car, good dialogue but hampered by a silly plot.

Simply that after threading several intriguing storyline together and recreating cold War East Berlin and its rather over-polished Ladas well, none of the stories were completed.

....as some reviewers appear to. This is a marmite film; if you understand the calm, intelligent character needed to land on the moon then you will appreciate this. Neil Armstrong was such and it is a strength that Ryan Gosling presents him as such. I do not know how tense the relationship was in the marriage but if you are risking your life as the astronauts did, it is hardly surprising. But the interspersing of family life is another strength since we should know more about the Christopher Columbus of our generation. I liked the muted orchestral soundtrack; a Titanic or brash rock music soundtrack would have been out of place. And pace? Well there were many minutes when I was so engrossed by the rattling old rockets and shaky camera work that I swear I didn't breathe, such was the tension. Time flew, a sign of a good film.

...but this is a sensitive, emotional and very well acted and directed film starring Arnold Schwartzenegger. After watching it I wondered why the IMDb score was relatively low at 5.9. It seems that the reviews are split down the middle between those like me who were pleasantly surprised and those who expected and can't get their heads around the fact that Arnie can play such a good, multi faceted role. SPOILER : My one criticism is that (and I may have missed it) the film makes no reference to the findings of the Inquiry into the air crash and the role played by the air traffic controller.

I actually attended this film without knowing of any of the reviews (I normally live in a place without a theatre or daily newspapers and slow internet access). What I found was acting so wooden they should have built the ark out of it. The film was about 120 minutes too long and as others have said the CGI effects were awful. Russell Crowe seems to be replaying the serious, mumbly Gladiator role but without a decent script. I love the way that the film tries to provide a serious message about the future of humanity and the planet in such a dopey context. Reading the other comments, why do people who believe in creationism and miracles say that those transformers undermined the credibility of the story?