What a disappointment !!
After hearing all the hoop-la on radio stations, reviews, newspapers, digital media, I thought this was the new 2001 Space Odyssey, with a new take on it fifty years later by a new breed of idealists and space poets.
1. the opening scene of him falling to Earth from high-rise antenna, is completely gratuitous. What's the meaning? it is just a stunt.
2. the character acted by actor Donald Sutherland, he appears at the beginning and then disappears, never to be seen again. What was he for? why not use his talent for a more lengthy cross-webbing of storytelling?
3. The scene of a monkey eating human flesh, isn't that kitsch? it sure has that shock factor. Why put it there? It really doesn't help much on the overall narrative. What purpose does it have in the overall narrative?
4. The science, physics, and math to support that stunt at the end of him catapulting from the rotating antenna of one spaceship, to get back to his spaceship, and flying in space through a Saturn belt of orbiting rocks, all this while protecting himself with a metal shield, conveniently retrieved from the antenna's cover, is just laughable on the ridiculous. The probability of targeting the mother ship, on a 0.000001 arc sec maximum tolerance, is infinitesimally small.
Woke up the next day and had nothing good to tell or say about it. Woke up 50 years after seeing 2001 Space Odyssey, and I have alot to talk about.
After hearing all the hoop-la on radio stations, reviews, newspapers, digital media, I thought this was the new 2001 Space Odyssey, with a new take on it fifty years later by a new breed of idealists and space poets.
1. the opening scene of him falling to Earth from high-rise antenna, is completely gratuitous. What's the meaning? it is just a stunt.
2. the character acted by actor Donald Sutherland, he appears at the beginning and then disappears, never to be seen again. What was he for? why not use his talent for a more lengthy cross-webbing of storytelling?
3. The scene of a monkey eating human flesh, isn't that kitsch? it sure has that shock factor. Why put it there? It really doesn't help much on the overall narrative. What purpose does it have in the overall narrative?
4. The science, physics, and math to support that stunt at the end of him catapulting from the rotating antenna of one spaceship, to get back to his spaceship, and flying in space through a Saturn belt of orbiting rocks, all this while protecting himself with a metal shield, conveniently retrieved from the antenna's cover, is just laughable on the ridiculous. The probability of targeting the mother ship, on a 0.000001 arc sec maximum tolerance, is infinitesimally small.
Woke up the next day and had nothing good to tell or say about it. Woke up 50 years after seeing 2001 Space Odyssey, and I have alot to talk about.