Also checked out the new thoughtful science fiction film Ad Astra. This one is produced by and stars Brad Pitt and is an earnest, if flawed, attempt as heady, mindful, intelligent science fiction. It’s only flaw is that it tries too hard and, in so doing, falls down.
So Ad Astra is set in nearish future where we have all the same social and political problems but have at least managed to colonize the Moon and Mars. It seems science and technology are in ascendance and there’s a strong push to detect signals from other intelligences in the galaxy. In an effort to do that, a science team is sent out to the orbit of Neptune to listen for signals… but the mission fails and all contact is lost. Years later, the Earth is bombarded by cosmic rays from the direction of Neptune, knocking out technology and killing hundreds of thousands of people. It’s up to Brad Pitt, the son of the astronaut in charge of the mission, to figure out what’s going on. Roughly speaking.
This is a strange, inconsistent film that’s hard to figure out who will enjoy it. I think the most likely fans will be people who like art house cinema but who aren’t really picky about accuracy in their science fiction films. Now, scientific accuracy is only an issue in sci-fi when the sci-fi is clearly trying to be accurate and intelligent. This film succeeds at this… sometimes. And when it gets things wrong, it’s noticeable. If you don’t give a damn about accuracy, then no harm no foul.
But I’m the kind of person who, if you try for realism but then fail to deliver, it’s gonna bug me. And this movie bugged me. The very premise of the film… that the military has to recruit Brad Pitt’s character to send a message to his dad has a huge logical flaw. They have to get him off Earth, send him to the Moon, and from there to Mars in order to send a signal to Neptune. I’m afraid you can send a signal to Neptune from Earth… I mean… what am I missing? But that’s just one issue…. and honestly not an insignificant one since it’s the core plot of the film. There are other, smaller problems that, on their own, would be ok – but they kept compounding.
And all my hand-wringing over the tech is contingent upon the fact they do some otherwise great world-building. The technology on display is believable and not too fantastical. Pitt’s character gets to the moon via chemical rocket… a commercial flight via Virgin Galactic rocketship. The ship is expensive but still caters to passengers and FEELS like a real launch. But also, space is largely just a job for most of the people in the film. Sometimes a boring, routine job.
Regardless of my negatives, this film is a thoughtful, reasonably intelligent, somber, and meditative film. Brad Pitt’s character is a well-written, fully-developed character (and Pitt does some great acting). He’s also very distant, uncommunicative, and depressed…. he barely speaks in the movie and we only know him through a lot of inner philosophizing monologues. This is a very thoughtful movie that shares no small about of DNA with 2001: A Space Odyssey and Interstellar (it’s kind of in the middle ground between those two films as far as art house and populism goes). I highly respect the mood and tone this film is going for.
However, I don’t think this is a film the casual everyday movie audience is going to “get”. The movie is a classic “slow burn” with a lot of nothing but ruminating about life, the universe, and everything in between slow, dreamy sequences of slow, dreamy space travel. I’m predicting it won’t click with many… except those art house movie lovers and the more tolerant science fiction fans.
But this introduces another problem with the flick… it feels like the movie was compromised in production and someone inserted “Cool Action Scenes” throughout the first act. Action scenes that don’t really fit the mood of the film… and sometimes don’t really fit the story. There’s one action scene on the Moon involving multiple rovers and a lot of gunfire that only fits the film in that maybe its world-building (we colonized the moon and brought all our violent bullshit with us). But there’s a truly baffling scene that follows involving an SOS signal that had me scratching my head through the whole picture. No spoilers on that one.
So… yeah… not sure who this movie is for. It hamfistedly tries to insert cool action scenes into an art house film, satisfying neither casual movie goers nor art house fans. Art house fans will probably love it if they aren’t sci-fi grognards. Sci-fi fans who demand accuracy and realism will be dissatisfied by the glaring mistakes. There’s so much that I like about this film that its failures are all too annoying. I respect the hell out of the attempt to make a Terrence Mallick Meets Christopher Nolan sci-fi film that borrows heavily from Stanley Kubrick though. I just wish they had more confidence in what they were making.
Score: 82