PDA

View Full Version : Under a Soviet Moon



ToSeek
2006-Apr-04, 04:53 PM
Strange "mockumentary" to keep an eye out for:

Under a Soviet Moon (http://www.livescience.com/blogs/2006/04/03/under-a-soviet-moon/)


While it’s not exactly new, director Alexey Fedorchenko’s First on the Moon – a mock-documentary about a secret Soviet cosmonaut program in the 1930s – is quite a statement both on Russia’s once-grand lunar ambitions and the division of state and individual during the country’s communist era.

Shot mostly in grainy black and white, Fedorchenko’s film follows the exploits of pilot-turned-cosmonaut Ivan Kharlmov, who along with three other heros of the CCCP (another pilot, a female athlete and a circus midget) train for what is ultimately the first manned space mission in 1938. Kharlmov wins out and launches to the Moon in 1938, then returns to a crash landing in Chile and crosses the Pacific Ocean and much of Asia with the NKVD (Communist Secret Police) on his tail.

The film premiered in Russia last September at the Venice Film Festival, where it went on to win the Horizons Documentary Prize despite its faux subject matter. I got a chance to see it here with Fedorchenko – and a bunch of other people to be sure – during a Saturday screening with the Museum of Modern Art’s New Directors series.

Moose
2006-Apr-04, 06:22 PM
Strange "mockumentary" to keep an eye out for:

Under a Soviet Moon (http://www.livescience.com/blogs/2006/04/03/under-a-soviet-moon/)

Now the question is: who's going to point to it as "truth" first? Hoagland or Sibrel?

ToSeek
2006-Apr-04, 10:55 PM
Maybe I should start a thread on GLP and see what happens. :evil:

Doodler
2006-Apr-06, 02:40 AM
Maybe I should start a thread on GLP and see what happens. :evil:

Daaaaang, and they thing I've got a mean streak. :D

publiusr
2006-Apr-06, 06:46 PM
I liked the novel RED MOON.

PhantomWolf
2006-Apr-07, 07:40 AM
Now the question is: who's going to point to it as "truth" first? Hoagland or Sibrel?

This is a little unfair is a way since Hoagland doesn't actually disbelieve Apollo, and even helped worked on a reasonable Moon Hoax debunking page.

Moose
2006-Apr-07, 11:25 AM
This is a little unfair is a way since Hoagland doesn't actually disbelieve Apollo, and even helped worked on a reasonable Moon Hoax debunking page.

Hoagland believes there are cities on the moon, PhantomWolf. My suggestion was mild. He can just as easily point to the mocumentary as "proof the Russians were visiting those cities as early as blah blah blah" as Sibrel could about NASA being "so far behind they had no choice but to blah blah blah and more proof they could have faked it blah blah blah".

It's not unfair at all for me to suggest that either has a track record such that it can be easily expected they'd be keen to take a fake documentary such as this one and somehow roll it into their pet fantasy. The only real question, in my mind, is which conspiracy fantasist would claim that ground first?

My money's on Sibrel. (No, not really.) The fruit(cake) is somewhat lower from his perch.

PhantomWolf
2006-Apr-08, 07:02 AM
Hoagland believes there are cities on the moon

I know what him believes. I do think that he does believe it too, I think Sibral knows that what he claims is wrong, but is in it for the money and therefore more likely to hook up for anything to push his spin, though I doubt he'd claim to the Soviets having gotten the moon because it'd cause his VA Belts calims wrong.

I think that while he has his faults, Hoagland would be more likely to see through any such claim, while ** would just ignore it because it'd be detrimental.