PDA

View Full Version : Tearing Apart Apollo 11 Inaccuracies



Fraser
2010-Dec-18, 06:10 PM
The movie trailer for Transformers 3 came out over a week ago, and seeing it is a facepalm moment for any true human spaceflight follower, fan, aficionado, or historian. I mean really, — and yes, I know this is a movie — but how could they portray what they call “a generation’s greatest achievement” so [...]

More... (http://www.universetoday.com/81812/tearing-apart-apollo-11-inaccuracies/)

Paul Beardsley
2010-Dec-18, 08:51 PM
Speaking as someone who gets annoyed when movies and TV shows promote misconceptions, I do have to say, this is taking nitpicking too far.

Clearly, the premise of the movie is, "What if the Apollo 11 crew found a transformer when they landed on the moon?" So the aim of the trailer is to portray this in a (mostly visually) dramatic way that is going to grab the attention of people who are wondering what to go and see next Saturday.

It's not a documentary. Playing it as one could have been interesting - a frame-by-frame re-enactment of the original footage with a diverging secret scene could make a great drama - but that's obviously not the way to play it for a Transformers movie.

(Not that I've ever seen a Transformer movie - nor will I ever.)

I think if Armstrong or Aldrin had removed their helmet, that would have been too far. As indeed was the reference to the far side of the moon, but that might have been an issue with the trailer - they are not always in chronological order, not always in context, not always cut the way they will be in the actual movie, and sometimes they are even playfully mixed up to give a misleading impression (the trailer to the final episode of Buffy being a particularly amusing example of this).

forrest noble
2010-Dec-18, 10:35 PM
The movie trailer for Transformers 3 came out over a week ago, and seeing it is a facepalm moment for any true human spaceflight follower, fan, aficionado, or historian. I mean really, — and yes, I know this is a movie — but how could they portray what they call “a generation’s greatest achievement” so [...]

More... (http://www.universetoday.com/81812/tearing-apart-apollo-11-inaccuracies/)

Haven't seen the trailer yet. Thought the past movies were cool. Will definitely see the next one since along with the space trivia and characterizations, there was humor and a nice looking girl, somewhat of a plot, cool special effects. I like to think of transformer movies in the same category as Superman, Batman, Iron man, Green Hornet, etc. mostly just fun, unrealistic sci fi. comic book type material.

I will look for the Apollo 11 Inaccuracies -- anything to sell movies. Maybe its just that I am getting older and wiser, but it seems to me that I see a lot more historical inaccuracies in movies nowadays than I used to but they've always been there, for the most part probably to enhance public appeal concerning the story line. I think Paul Beardsley expresses a light-hearted perspective concerning the lack of importance of such a "humorous" comic-book portrayal.

R.A.F.
2010-Dec-18, 10:37 PM
Why not "use" a fake Apollo mission as other movies have done?...because they wanted to take advantage of the 40th anniversary of A11??

I don't care if it is a movie. There are enough people that think A11 was faked that we simply don't need this kind of "junk" to confuse them further.

Wouldn't see this movie if you payed me...it's an insult to the risks the astronauts took going to the Moon.

R.A.F.
2010-Dec-18, 10:42 PM
...it seems to me that I see a lot more historical inaccuracies in movies nowadays...

This movie is not an example of an "historical inaccuracy"...it's a flat out lie.

That people would say, "why be upset...it's only a movie"...amazes me. edit to add...I'm not singling out Paul here, I'm referring to the comments on the linked page.

I'd like to know how much of the film's proceeds will be given to Armstrong and Aldrin for the "honor" of being lied about??

Strange
2010-Dec-18, 11:05 PM
This movie is not an example of an "historical inaccuracy"...it's a flat out lie.

How can a work of fiction be a lie? It's fiction.

Paul Beardsley
2010-Dec-18, 11:28 PM
How can a work of fiction be a lie? It's fiction.

Absolutely. It is not being passed off as an expose of actual events, it's the third in a series of movies based on a kids' cartoon series.

Perspective.

Incidentally, I wonder how it will be received by the conspiracy crowd. Nobody ever went to the moon, and Neil and Buzz found an alien robot while they were on the moon. Never let a colossal contradiction get in the way of a conspiracy theory...

Graham2001
2010-Dec-18, 11:28 PM
How can a work of fiction be a lie? It's fiction.

When it's promoting Richard Hoaglands idea that "We went to the Moon but lied about what we found", it's dangerous fiction. This is right up there with the Dark Skies episode where they have Ranger 6 reach the moon, photograph an alien spacecraft and then have someone announce to the world that the cameras failed.

There is something that was missed in the Collectspace article. At 01:14 in the trailer you can see what looks like Lunik 2 sitting on the lunar surface. Assuming it is meant to depict Lunik 2, then that means the films version of Apollo 11 came down in the Sea of Serenity. Why on (or off) Earth did Bay not simply use a fictitious mission?

Paul Beardsley
2010-Dec-18, 11:33 PM
When it's promoting Richard Hoaglands idea that "We went to the Moon but lied about what we found", it's dangerous fiction.

Fiction is only dangerous fiction when it's passed off as non-fiction.

KaiYeves
2010-Dec-19, 01:52 AM
Well, I'm with you on this, Nancy.

Paul Beardsley
2010-Dec-19, 12:31 PM
So what are we supposed to be afraid of?

That audiences will think Neil and Buzz actually found alien technology on the moon?

Or that audiences will think Neil and Buzz took two Hasselblad cameras to the moon instead of just one?

mike alexander
2010-Dec-19, 04:23 PM
Goodness, life is somewhat dangerous.

'Dangerous fiction' is around us everyday. I know I'm not nearly clever enough to filter what others should see and hear.

R.A.F.
2010-Dec-19, 05:07 PM
So what are we supposed to be afraid of?

??? did I say anything about being afraid??...I would characterize my "position" as being mad, not being afraid.


That audiences will think Neil and Buzz actually found alien technology on the moon?

If you don't mind lies being told about the space program in the "name of entertainment", well that's fine...but why must the rest of us who do mind accept those lies without comment?

R.A.F.
2010-Dec-19, 05:11 PM
Why on (or off) Earth did Bay not simply use a fictitious mission?

My question exactly...there is no "purpose" other than "using" the accomplishments of Apollo 11 in order to make money.

Lying about this country's accomplishments in space in order to make money doesn't strike me as being very honorable...but that's just me. :)