Approaching the Unknown (2016) User Reviews

Important to go in with the right mind-set

[jtindahouse · 6/10 · 6 July 2017]

I can see why 'Approaching the Unknown' would not be to everyone's liking. It's very much a slow-burner of a film and is really more of a character study than anything else. With space movies I think people have come to expect drama filled, save-the-world type films and this is simply not that. This is the story of a man who has embarked on a mission that very few people on Earth would be brave enough to do, and the struggle he consequently went through.

I actually quite enjoyed it for the most part. A film with basically only one character is never going to be the most exhilarating watch, however the pacing of the film doesn't feel overly slow. Mark Strong in the lead role does a good job of being just interesting enough in what would have been a very tough role to take on.

As mentioned, this won't be for everyone. People who go into this expecting an 'Armegeddon' or even 'Gravity' type film are going to be let down and I suspect that is a lot of the reason why this film has not been received very well. However if you go in simply expecting a solid exploration of astronaut life and the challenges they can go through mentally, I think you will find yourself quite enjoying this one.

Don't let writers design Mars missions

[siderite · 6/10 · 7 August 2016]

Following the success of movies like Moon, someone thought it would be a good idea to try with a movie about a mission towards Mars. Mark Strong starts off as an astronaut that is sent there and thinks about his place in the world and talks to people on Earth. It got me excited. Yet by the end I couldn't decide if I am to feel stupid or offended.

Alarm bells started to ring in my mind almost immediately. The personality of the guy was unstable to being cowboyish. The science didn't add up. The atmospheric dye effects had no connection to space or to the story. The water got contaminated by a battery short?! The astronaut's motivation to go to Mars was specifically because he liked the feeling of dying. I mean, come on!

But even with all this aside - and I am capable to putting aside the technical aspects - the film is actually saying nothing concrete. Should we abandon going to space because it is folly or is it that the writer has so little faith in NASA that he thinks all astronauts will be allowed to be depressed artists that write their journal with pencils and feel lonely in space? Is there a point to all the inner dialogues of the guy or is he just losing his mind in this really slow movie? We don't know.

Bottom line: I liked the production values of the film and the acting, but I couldn't get my head around what the writer/director was trying to say. It's time artsy folk understand that not only engineers are a completely different type of people from them, but that writing and directing your own movie is only rarely a good idea.

Not great, but certainly not terrible

[Daggyy · 5/10 · 2 October 2017]

There are a lot of people saying this movie is absolute garbage. And I can understand that some, or many, people might feel they just wasted their time.

For it is a slow movie, and there are very few actual happenings. But this is a psychological movie, more so a thriller than anything else. The film didn't need any more character development or action, as it was just supposed to be a relatively short movie with just the bare minimum of most devices.

It shows us what we need to know (SPOILERS): A desperate man on a mission to experience something new. He knows what is on Earth, and wants one moment of pure wonder as he ventures into space and eventually Mars. Furthermore, he is actually psychotic in this need to experience, as he completely disregards Houston's orders and his friend Skinny's advice and efforts to help when his water generator breaks.

He was, however, scared to be completely alone, like he will be since his colleague Maddox had to turn around. The movie ends abruptly, and we have no idea on whether he can fix his water supply or if he will just wither away and die.

Zen-spirit atmosphere space movie

[Johndemontaigne-32806 · 8 June 2016]

This movie is good. I honestly understand the bad rating, because its not mainstream and you need to understand the "zen-spirit" of it.You need to have sensitivity and some wisdom to appreciate a movie like this.Its atmospheric and poetic.Lets you experience space from an angle of basic reality and not heroism nor action.

The slow descend into madness, his monologues, it is good.

A good story isn't about a lot of action, a lot of events, it lies in the subtleties and how they come together.

Just a good movie. I guess, blade runner also had a bad reception when it was released. This movie is perhaps not meant for this generation of action spoiled viewers. I really hope this will get some appreciation along the line, so that we may see more of this quality. Real sci-fi fans will love this movie for what it is.

Pathetic attempt at a psychological drama

[deltaforce7 · 1/10 · 6 June 2016]

I kind of think that a movie director has to make up his mind about a movie first making sure that at least he clearly knows what it is going to be about. This movie seems like an attempt at a psychological drama of loneliness and failure. Why did they even bother with the space theme? It could've been filmed entirely in a couple of studio apartments somewhere. The movie fails at many points. KEEP IN MIND that people ALREADY have real-life experience of spending up to 437.7 (!!!)days in space in ZERO gravity (Valeri Polyakov, Russia, Soyuz TM-18). Here are a few of the most obvious failures: 1) Solitary space travel? Why? To make more room for this "psychological" drama? 2) No teamwork, failure to obey the chain of command. This is no way to fly into space. 3) Building an entire super-expensive interplanetary mission around a poorly tested water-making machine? Plus, if EVERYTHING depends upon such a machine, why not carry at least one more to be safe? 4) What kind of a ship comes complete with a whole SHOWER, but has no significant reserve of water for drinking? 5) Who accelerates a space ship, then stops it for some "shopping" for extra "supplies" (while we don't even get to see them or know what they are needed for), and then accelerates it AGAIN? What? "The fuel is no problem, 'cause we got plenty of it?" 6) If a pilot of the space ship is such an expert on the ship itself, then how come that he screws everything up so constantly? 7) They couldn't store enough water on the ship, but instead they filled it with dirt for this unreliable "reactor" to be extracting water from this dirt? WHY? At first, I though they wanted to run tests on the water reactor using some samples of soil, but who could imagine that they were going to rely upon it during the entire 270 days of flight? 8) First there are complaints about excessive water condensation, but the next moment there are complaints about aridity and dry air. It could not be both at the same time. 9) The pilot of the space ship takes off from Earth sitting in a vertical position instead of lying down. Weird. Also, should he be able to see anything during takeoff through a "shroud" that protects his module? The "shroud" is ejected when a space ship reaches space. Then they can look through windows. 10) What kind of a water supply system could be built in such way that some electrical malfunction would contaminate water with battery chemicals? I see it this way: this movie was made by some wannabe "psychologists" who wanted to make a drama, who lacked technical background, so the movie turned out as a display of their own phobias, personal weaknesses, suicidal tendencies, and fears of failure. Well, they manage to achieve a full-scale failure with this movie! If you are a sci-fi fan like myself, then watch something else.

90 Minutes

[mrodieck · 1/10 · 5 June 2016]

This is 90 minutes of my life I will never get back. Premise is terrible. Characters have nothing to like. Why was there only one astronaut in each space craft? Why was there a space station three weeks from earth? Why would you stop a spaceship three weeks from earth to resupply when it has built up momentum to get to Mars? Where were the science advisors for this pathetic attempt at science fiction? Cinematography is worthless. And it only got worse as it went on. Someone, please, send me to Mars by myself so I never have to endure another movie like this. Please warn me if this writer, director, or studio executive is ever allowed to make another movie. I wish there was an alien to eat my brain after watching this.

Two things happen in this movie...

[illegalmonkey1 · 1/10 · 4 June 2016]

The first thing that happens is the guy takes off into space with the goal of landing on Mars. The 2nd thing that happens is the guy lands on Mars and the credits roll. In between all that literally NOTHING happens. Ninety minutes of nothing happening at all. On top of that the movie has so many implausible things going on it's, at best, a good example of poor technical knowledge. For starters NASA would never send an entire rocket into space with one guy, then immediately launch another, similar rocket with yet another solitary astronaut. That's a huge waste of resources. Speaking of which.... they have a full fledged shower on board?? They don't even have this on the space station we have in orbit and seems like that too would be a giant waste of space and resources for such a long journey. ANYways, this movie literally ends with the guy just landing and standing on Mars for a couple seconds. No big climax, no big obstacle to overcome. He just goes into space and lands on Mars 90 minutes later. Don't waste your time on this.

Not for everyone

[njapt · 7/10 · 23 September 2017]

If you are looking for a typical Hollywood Mars movie this isn't it. Film's story and its main focus is inside the mind of the main character and the struggle he is facing on his journey to Mars, as opposed to more straightforward action in a 3-piece act. It may also come across as pessimistic as it deals with questions of fate and what life can bring on a one way journey, as life really is, into the unknown; Mars, future, afterlife etc. It isn't satisfying in sense that it brings you a "proper" conclusion to the story, but rather makes you wonder, which can easily turn into dissatisfaction that you were cheated as you waited for the story to bring something forth, instead it leaves you wondering. I applaud the risk the story took to delve into the mind of an engineer and how it handled it. I also applaud Mark Strong for his captivating performance. I don't recommend this to everyone, but to those who don't mind to be left with an unfinished story, come to the conclusion on your own, or keep searching.

As exciting as watching grass grow...

[falcon1111 · 3/10 · 3 June 2016]

I had great expectations for this movie after seen the trailer, that looked amazing. Well, what a disappointment this film was. Is not that the acting was bad, or the production values. Neither the visual effects, which are OK. It's just that NOTHING happens... at least nothing that can move the spectators to feel, or even THINK something. The whole thing is an exercise on futility, good concepts wasted and pretentious sequences of slow motion stuff trying to be philosophical or something, but just coming out... lame. If you want to see an exciting, deep, or even entertaining sci fi space film, look somewhere else.

I enjoyed it...

[Blumanowar · 7/10 · 9 December 2021]

The daily routines, boredom, fixing the issues as he goes along.. it's all a very good projection of what one would go through on a trip that far in space. One initially might think it an exciting journey and while it would be, it's the daily monotony, repeating itself and enduring that which would be the major challenge .. assuming the ship has allvthe tech and science it needs to get one there. I found it interesting. Good watch.

Absolutely AWFUL!!!

[ozzybux · 1/10 · 4 June 2016]

I am big fan of GOOD Sci-Fi movies, but unfortunately, this was not one of them. I really cannot understand what the point of this movie was. Absolute DRIVEL in terms of screenplay, plot, acting and production quality or value. I thought this would have some plot along the lines of Gravity or Interstellar, or even 2001 A Space Odyssey. But alas, nothing. The entire movie is about the main character sitting alone in a space craft. Thats it. He achieves nothing, does nothing, has no likability. Then some awful psychedelic outer space scene later we find this dude looking like a hobo in the space craft, where the hell he got that hat from is mind boggling. Did he somehow find a hobo stowed away on his ship, kill him, then steal his hat? I don't know how studios can pass off crap like this. Shameful!

A brilliant reflection on human nature. Not for everyone...

[hoffmanntho · 8/10 · 21 June 2016]

After seeing this movie, I was really thrilled and thought I had seen something worth seeing. Yet I can also understand why many other don't feel that way. This movie doesn't aim to please all audiences, it really targets a specific group of viewers you may or may not be part of.

As other reviewers already stated: if you're looking for an action-packed sci-fi or anticipation movie, move along because this one is not for you. If you're looking for an uplifting, Hollywood-style feel good movie... move along. If you're after great landscapes of Mars and big spaceships roaming about, you should also probably look for other movies. Yet this movie has a lot going for it, as long as you realize what you're in for:

This is a story about a character who is willing to leave everything behind for the greater good, for science and for the slim chance of becoming the first human on Mars. The whole movie is basically a "huis clos", a closed stage in a cramped vessel, where you follow a single individual during his journey of 270 days in space, alone. He has to fight boredom, madness and growing technical issues he is partly responsible for due to his overconfidence and his belief that he can solve everything on his own. He also has to cope with the burden of the entire humanity back on Earth cheering for him and placing the highest expectations on his shoulders. Yet he's just a man. Hopes, successes, failures... They are all part of the journey, and the lead character confronts each in a very believable way.

Acting is spot on (bravo Mark Strong), and the reactions never feel alien or unrealistic. FX are good enough, but this movie doesn't rely on them heavily at all.

There is one very big leap of faith the audience is supposed to make: I find it highly dubious for various reasons that humanity would send a single person on such a long journey without backup: way too dangerous. Yet if you're willing to go with it, you'll find this movie to picture a very believable analysis of human nature when confronted to loneliness, various pressures and challenging situations.

All in all, this movie is more of a psychological approach of long journeys in isolation and adversity, rather than a sci-fi/anticipation movie on colonizing Mars.

I would definitely recommend this movie to those among you who like slow-paced, "psychological" movies such as (with some similarities): - Solaris (2002) - 2001 Space odyssey - Silent running - Das Boot (in some ways) - 127 hours (in some ways) - The survivalist (in some ways)

Did he ever leave the desert? A descent into madness...

[crimsonmirrors · 6/10 · 26 July 2016]

Many have complained of the obvious blunders made in this movie. Instantaneous communication. A one man crew followed by another. An overall feeling of depression and failure. An untested and un-perfected device. One man's desire to give up everything for one moment of wonder.

I didn't think this movie was terrible. In fact, if we were looking at a man's hallucination as he died in the desert, it was just this side of brilliant. This is how I'm going to approach it. The closest movie like it might be "Love." You have an untested invention on a one man ship piloted by a man who, as far as I know, isn't an astronaut. He has the training, but it seems that since he makes many mistakes and doesn't seem to have the "stay on mission" attitude, then he's the invention creator who just happens to want to be the first living creature on Mars and ends up on a one man ship bound for his destination. He's being followed by a woman astronaut who is also in a one person crew ship. This just doesn't make sense unless you're dying in the desert and making it up as you go along.

The second ship's gyroscopes stop working so she has to turn around. The man at the space station tells him to give up. He's not going to give up though, not until he reaches Mars. It's interesting that his contact at "Mission Control" is the friend who was waiting for him to come back from the desert.

The strange nebula and cloud sequences reminded me of the cloud sequences in the "Flash Gordon" movie. Definitely not something you'd encounter in our solar system. In fact, as he edged closer to madness and death, none of it made sense. Then he finally reached Mars and seemed to come to his senses. Is this some final push to envision what the planet would look like? It was a relatively simple landing after such a journey fraught with mistakes.

I choose to regard the movie in this light because I don't believe the writer would make such obvious blunders in a story that was well acted and filmed. And so I give it a strong 6 stars.

Strangely beautiful but technologically catastrophic

[fkemble-96216 · 5/10 · 7 October 2016]

I actually loved this film, the great sense of emptiness and solitude and of the austerity of the inside of the space craft. The photography was beautifully done and really captured the mood; That sense of total isolation really came through. The allure of outer space, like any expedition, is the means to counter the technological conundrums presented and a space film presents the possibility of infinite fascination with a world we don't know and the ability to utilise technology to perform a successful expedition. This film fails miserably in an area where it was most important not to and even an 'F' student in a high school would have spotted the anomalies. You can't derive oxygen and hydrogen from dirt, it;s a silicate. Even if you could then the resultant re-combining of oxygen and hydrogen presents the same kind of instability as a weapons grade bomb. Where was all the dirt stored? Why not store more water? Secondly, in a complex space craft, surely someone remembered to install breakers or even fuses! The gyroscope was almost as incongruous as a wind up gramaphone; computers do all the guidance. Whywas the battery which was only intermittently shorted, bleeding redstuff into the water? Why did the rocket lose four boosters between theground and earths upper atmosphere- they just weren't there any more?Why was Stanaforth sent into the desert with untested equipment. Whywas he called Stanaforth, its a stupid and unconvincing name. Why wasmark strong compelled to speak with that generic mid-western Americanaccent, he was useless at it and I like him as an actor. It's all toobad as the film was visually stunning but letdown by appalling scienceand plain bad screen writing. I hate it when something so potentially brilliant is ruined by slapdash research and poor writing; this film was truly worth more than that and should be remade with the problem areas addressed. Lastly; the title is lame.

Do not waste your time - seriously!

[georgedunc · 2/10 · 3 June 2016]

Contains Spoilers!

I was keen to watch this movie. I like Mark Strong, but boy oh boy this was a true waste of my time. I can only imagine the budget was in the order of a few hundred thousand dollars.

This was not a tale about greatness or rising to an unimaginable challenge, it was a tale of failure and allowing yourself to be beat. An entire mission is dependent on a machine to work that has been designed and built from scratch by our hero. Sent off into the cosmos on his own, with someone following close behind - on their own, most of the movie takes place in a 4x5m area of the space ship. Some shots of the area of space he was travelling through on the way to Mars were through various nebulae and other amazing star cluster formations, but needless to say non of that exists within at least 10- 20 light years of Earth and certainly not in our solar system between Earth and Mars.

When the machine stops working the man who has thought it up, designed it, built it the Hero cannot get it working again and resigns himself to a depressing bout of failure, which he never gets out of. Despite all the promises of what might be the two minutes at the end of the landing and walking on Mars appear to have been thrown in as a last minute after thought.

I do not have time to write many reviews but this was so bad I was compelled to put fingers to keyboard. Save your time and money watch 'The Martian' instead.

LIke SeinFeld on Mars ; A Movie About Nothing - On Mars

[Diane-736766 · 2/10 · 4 June 2016]

I had to stop watching 40 minutes in. It was THAT bad. Imagine if someone made a movie just like "The Martian" but with no talented actors, no actual plot, a poor screenplay and no cinematography. What a swell idea - Let's do it ! There is no plot. It's as if the faceless assassin from "A Game of Thrones" decides to make a movie,"A man goes to Mars. A man arrives on Mars". The End.

The acting is not believable. There is NO cinematography to speak of.The special effects are decidedly non-special. The plot is non-existent. There is almost literally nothing to see here. Why even make this stinker in the first place?? Don't waste your time - you've been warned.

wow, terrible

[digdog-785-717538 · 4/10 · 3 June 2016]

Spoilers!!!

Approaching The Unknown is a film where an astronaut, on his way to Mars, alone, sits in his 1-room space cell and fixes cables, operates distillers, sighs a lot, and eventually looks into space after 1 hour of said fixing, operating, and other daily duties which would be boring to perform, but are mind-numbingly dull to watch being performed. There is NOTHING ELSE happening in this film. After a solid hour of intense boredom, in which we have a 5-minute scene of the astronaut back on earth, testing the machine which gives him water, which he then subsequently operates several times while on the ship .. a brief conversation about nothing with earth control .. and a 2-minute Skype session with earth schoolchildren who ask about the machine... (please do not think that this machine is in any way interesting; it's a thing that gives him a drop of water.) we have a tiny bit of development where he grows a beard and looks frustrated.

That's it. THIS is the film.

I will give it a reasonable vote considering its limited scope and - i must imagine - nonexistent funds.

My vote: 4/10 - garbage.

One of a kind . . . A very beautiful movie

[minnu-forums · 4 July 2018]

First, this is menial budget movie . . . All the bad reviewers were more used to high budget fancy space genre movies. Ignore such reviews.

Second, the plot of the movie runs on the lines of meta-physical monologue of the protagonist., which is quintessentially the very fundamental element of this genre.

In most high-budget movies, to cater the broader audience, this element is generally faded out romance elements, human conflicts, moral paradoxes. Not in this. This strictly confined to meta-physical aspects of existentialism one faces when they are alone and divorced off the world.

I could have given 10, but I am disappointed by the ending. Wish, there is more philosophical monologue in the end. That's the only disappointment of this film.

In the beginning, the plot seems way too cliche. Please understand, its just setting stage for the character. If you could push through the part and involve meditative with the character, trust me, its a beautiful movie.

Give it a try with your heart . . . It won't disappoint.

Fascinating. Spock would've loved this :)

[jelstudio · 7/10 · 15 April 2020]

The story was interesting and the pacing was sublime.

It's not a movie without problems though, 2 of them in particular.

First: the actors are not 'big-budget' super-stars, so the level of 'familiarity' is obviously not the same as it is with 'big' moves.

This detracts slightly from the immersion-factor.

Couple that with the second problem; that the movie doesn't spend enough time character-building, and we are unavoidably faced with the feeling that these guys we go on a journey with are all still more or less strangers.

Especially the female astronaut. She wasn't introduced before the mission was underway, so that just didn't work as well as it might have.

The story itself, however, was great. The concept. What this movie was really about. That worked very well.

It's not really important if one agrees or not with how the events unfolded, since this would likely be different for different people anyway, but the pace of the build-up was just brilliant.

So a clever and thought-provoking movie.

Visually it had some spectacular moments as well, even though this never appeared to be a focus-point of the film. Personally I really liked how space kind of became more and more psychedelic as the mission progressed deeper and deeper. I thought that was a subtle stroke of genius that fit the story perfectly. It made everything feel all that more in sync.

The movie did not appear to portray a realistic space-mission, at least I hope not, but rather tried to make a play on some potential emotional aspects that are perhaps more fundamental to life on a broader scale and where using a space-mission as the 'container' for the story seemed to make good sense.

A fine movie. Not a perfect movie, but a movie that does make an impression in a good way.

It give it 7 stars and recommend it :)

Nothing To See Here...Move Along.

[AudioFileZ · 2/10 · 4 June 2016]

You should paint anything and pause to watch it dry. It will be more rewarding. If you chose to watch this then be prepared to hope it gets better only to realize you've wasted valuable time you could be painting. You see, when you paint something you're actually going to get a payback for your time spent, no such benefit here. This is suppose to be nailing the strangeness and solitude inherent in long space flight. What it does achieve, if you watch for the 30-minutes I suffered, is that if you cared about whatever you could have used your time for it is now wasted...totally.. This film is boring beyond belief. I'd say I gave the film 30-minute because I'm pretty stubborn and have an inherent belief there is always something of merit if you delve deeper. I'm definitely re-thinking this as the only thing besides wondering why I continued this long is that how did this film get made?

Went in hoping for some cool Sci Fi. Came out feeling... Hmmm... Sorta Okay'ish.

[angiris · 6/10 · 3 June 2016]

Well. It's not a bad movie. May as well say that to begin with.

I particularly enjoyed the whole setting and concepts thrown in there which fit the actual space launch to Mars in 2026. I had hoped we would see something like that in this.

When seeing Emily Maddox, another captain on her way there I felt like "Alright. Cool. He might make it up there, then meet up with her, they begin building stuff and such like in The Martian with Matt Damon"

Sad to say that didn't happen. Not even close haha. Things went completely sideways and he seemingly went obsessively off the grid. Traveling to Mars without a machine to keep him alive, landing in the middle of nowhere apparently and just enjoys the philosophical aspect of being the first one there to live, and die.

The End.

I understand what the director is going for. Because these missions are dangerous. And considering the risk it's definitely interesting to see what could happen if things didn't turn out like your traditional Hollywood crowd pleaser.

But I think it's kinda BS to hype up us like this, throw in some really interesting circumstances and lead us to believe we'll get to see Mars in a more realistic light for once but 50 % in the film just drops all the build up and Mark becomes this philosophic caveman, hellbent on completing his mission only to face certain death because....he was very lonely back on earth.

Again, I can understand that. I truly can see where the director is going and on a profound level of symbolic meaning. Looking deeper into what some believe our existence is about. How we are One with Space and more that Mark's character points out in his extensive pondering about life and the universe, is fascinating and makes for an interesting movie.

Im open minded and love thinking and feeling based on what I'm seeing and hearing in these kinds of films. I enjoy the calm immersion. But if you cannot do this, this kind of structure might really bore you.

If you understand what the director is going for, you might not mind much. You'll understand this shows another aspect of space travel. Another aspect of humanity that isn't Matt Damons survival. But instead a common to terms with our ultimate demise for the sake of just experiencing something truly beyond anything we could imagine.

And that is quite beautiful. It truly is. Contrary to Matt Damon as well as Val Kilmer in Red Planet that pretty much said "**** this planet" by the end of the film.

Mark's character however goes to fulfill a life-purpose of returning to his real home so to speak. A planet where he doesn't bring his own loneliness. His lack of something he doesn't fully elaborate on. It's just him there. And it's very profound.

My problem with this however is that by the end of the film after seeing Mark with a beard and looking half dead, he suddenly just appears all fresh and ready. He lands on Mars and walks around. We get no explanation or insight into how everything just changed, considering he was running out of water and looking like he was losing his mind.

He just lands and the movie ends. And whats more is the fact that Maddox's character just becomes irrelevant. She was heading to Mars too. Where is she now? Because the thing is based on what we saw, she was sent there ahead of Mark's character. And they were planning to meet.

All of this remains unexplained. And that's what I actually really hate because this film had the opportunity to offer us more than a science lacking and planetary colonization missing story, but ultimately ends up going 100 % Philosophy.

It has its place. It certainly does but it went full AHEAD by the end of the other half of the film. Pretty much ignoring everything else we had hoped to see.

I was hyped to see them land. I was hyped to see them meet up. I actually thought they would. THAT WOULD BE COOL! Maddox even said that!

And then nothing happens. "sigh"

Anyway. It's not a bad movie. But I feel it could have done a lot more. Especially with everything happening lately. And what will happen in 10 years. I really hope we get a movie that depicts something like that.

Our fascination with the Red Planet should result in a lot more than just Death and regret towards going there. Whatever happened to Mission to Mars? They met an alien there. It was awesome. Why is nobody doing that anymore? Haha.

Anyway. 6 out of 10 is my score. That equals a Good film. Its not amazing or fantastic. Its just good. Above average. I would have rated it 7 if we had seen more of Lathan (Maddox) and just explored more of Mars. Seen more interesting stuff than the final thoughts of an obsessive explorer that decided to complete his journey only to die.

I can understand what the director went for. But its not very satisfying. Especially not when you notice the movie began feeling sorta rushed or too short. If you like Sci Fi you might enjoy this. However, it's opening half will do a 180 on you and that might arguably suck. I wanted to see more than him just landing only to die. The movie lead up to that, and just decided not to do it anyway.

It could have been better and more fulfilling. This ultimately ends very "Hmmm" That's how I felt anyway. Plus the cowboy blues credits soundtrack didn't at all help. Seemed so ironic and comical.

A recruitment video for Space Force

[lilpips-03147 · 1/10 · 6 July 2019]

I like to think that this was a recruitment video for Space Force, and that after watching it, Trump would pump his fist and exclaim, "Nailed it!". Yes, the timing is all wrong for this joke, but it fits right in with the movie.

This is a Science Fiction movie, but with no Science, no Fiction, and no movie. I assume they lured Mark Strong into some form of "Hobo Containment Device" (Trademark, Copyright Reserved), by leaving some of those bags of dehydrated pasta in a pile with a stick in the center, holding up a tarp.

Imagine the pitch for this movie...Director: "What if NASA was one guy in a garage, the astronauts were all plant-hating psychopaths, and everything is so absurd the audience will be convinced this is a metaphor, but then at the end we'll make it all impossibly real!" Producer: "Whoa whoa! That's a little too science-y for me! Can we dumb this down a bit?" Director, cracking knuckles, "Hold my beer..."

If they had just leaned into the stupidity a bit more: like having Mark Strong attack the Magnetic Storm with his trusty Protractor, his red water, and a scowl; or having him fix the other ship's "gyro problems" by removing a panel, and then tying an untied shoelace behind said panel; or having the space station transform into a giant mouse to get revenge for the two mice killed by the station hillbillies/psychos, and then somehow eating the men still inside the transformed station; or having Luke Wilson "the one man at NASA" always be facing the wrong way when he is trying to communincate; then this movie would still be bad. Thanks for reading my ideas though!

What a gripping performance by Mark Strong

[mapika · 10/10 · 8 June 2016]

After all these bad reviews I practically expected nothing and was positively surprised.

Indeed it's not a Thriller. There's no action in common ways, and yet it is a challenging story about one man who at all costs wants to become the first to live on Mars, brilliantly portrayed by Mark Strong and his supporting actors.

I would never compare it to "The Martian". All they have in common: the red planet and survival. If you really need a comparison, take "Gravity" or "Moon", though here was obviously much less budget available. So in this case I really don't care about technical, astrophysical goofs.

It's a psycho-philosophical Sci-Fi-Drama; small, profound, serious and quite slow. Therefore it hopefully will achieve more acknowledgment in future.

Psychological Tour-de-Force

[matrix-74224 · 7/10 · 24 November 2016]

Fantastic sci-fi psychological thriller.

Many IMDb members panned this movie, but perhaps they did not realize how deep a study this movie was into the psychology behind isolation and of knowing ones own certain death.

The superb Mark Strong plays a straight-laced astronaut on a one-way long-range mission to colonize Mars for the human species. Along the way, he goes totally insane due to isolation and perhaps solar radiation.

The excellent visual effects mimic what a man going insane may visualize in his mind. The movie left me thinking what it would be like to go insane from isolation.

Well worth a look on a lonely rainy night, but not a movie to be enjoyed with others.

Tedious, error-strewn and cheap

[billtkd · 1/10 · 9 May 2018]

As others have said, very little happens in this. Even if you accept this as a psychological drama (with little that is dramatic), the audience's faith is destroyed early on by the many mistakes. At launch, Stanaforth is sitting upright, instead of reclining. The g-force would not be tolerable in that position. He is shown sharpening a pencil. Even with artificial gravity, the shavings would play havoc with the ventilation system. (The old story about NASA spending millions developing a pen for weightless conditions, while the Russians used a pencil, is a myth.) The lack of delay in the communications is perhaps the most obvious goof although the makers will probably claim that it was merely a dramatic device (again, with no drama). The EVA suit, with the big welder's gauntlets, looked like a cross between kid's fancy dress outfit and a shell suit.