First Man is an epic character portrait of the late Neil Armstrong, told maturely and patiently through Chazelle's now patented style of mixing rough and tumble cinema, meticulously choreographed set pieces and sombre moments of silence, coming together seamlessly to produce another great piece of work. To say I enjoyed Damien's last two films would be a huge understatement - Whiplash remains one of my favourite films of all time and perhaps my favourite of the decade, while La La Land offered something entirely different but just as engaging in its own way. First Man strikes a different tone once again, opting to tell the story of an American and world icon through a personal, yet oddly detached lens. Going into the film my expectations were understandably extremely high, and although I think this might be the weakest film of the three, it is still one of the best I have seen this year.Chazelle anchors the story of First Man to the formative years of Armstrong's career as an astronaut and married man in the very early 1960's. Personal tragedy strikes very early on, leaving a scar on the man that will be impossible to erase for the entirety of the movie. This event is the bedrock for the film and very much sets the melancholic tone of Armstrong's character. The rest of what happens, although larger than Armstrong himself, can be seen as a desperate quest for some kind of closure or release from the heavy burden of the past. From the very first scenes of First Man we can see that Neil is a difficult and often awkward character. He finds it difficult to express himself through words, not just with people in his profession but even those in his own family. He instead finds refuge in his talents for flying and commanding space missions, which he is undeniably great at.
The theme of social and emotional detachment surrounding Armstrong's character was a very intriguing one for me, although I do feel like the film could have explored it more deeply at times. Perhaps the fact we don't get to know Neil as well as many would like was the whole point. There certainly feels like there was some intentional distance put between him and the audience that never really gets closed as time progresses. Moments where Neil breaks character and launches into monologues are very scarce, rather he always seems to take a back seat and let others show the emotion. This is epitomised late on in the film where his wife Janet in a fit of rage all but forces him to sit his kids down and tell them he might not be coming home from the Apollo 11 mission. Ironically she speaks to him kind of like a child, which makes you realise how shut off and out of touch he has made himself. The resultant scene is one of the most telling of the whole film, as Neil struggles to get through the ordeal and answers the queries of his children with an almost business like persona.
The film is by no means limited to these more personal themes however. In fact, it mostly focuses on the sheer magnitude and difficulty of early space travel and just how dangerous it really was. Humanity really was making huge technological strides in a matter of just months and years, and inevitably there were going to be some disasters along the way. Chazelle puts us in the cockpit of many of these life-threatening early missions, from the very first scene where Neil nearly kills himself exploring the outer atmosphere, to testing a Lunar landing vehicle where he is forced to eject, to the terrifying missions of the Gemini projects, where at one point he is confronted with the task of controlling a spin out of the module where he is moments away from passing out. Chazelle frames these missions in a context that I am sure is very close to how they actually played out - both in their significance for the eventual moon landing and the inherent danger of moving at such a relentless pace in order to win the space race against the Soviets.
The film does a good job at showcasing the monumental efforts of everybody involved at NASA, and I suspect will satisfy any geeks who like the technical jargon, but I never felt like it was too much for layman's like me to follow along. It really feels like Chazelle wanted to get some level of accuracy in realistically portraying the professional lives of the astronauts and engineers involved, and the team atmosphere at Mission Control.
The real meat of First Man is in the reconciling of Neil's flaws in his personal life with the perception of him as an American hero and pioneer of space exploration. Essentially I see the film in the same way I see Whiplash - the sacrifices and type of person that one is forced to become in order to achieve greatness. In Whiplash that theme was more upfront and concentrated in the characters of Andrew and Fletcher, who occupied almost archetypal representations of this dichotomy. In First Man, the trade offs are more subtle, despite the sacrifice and goals being more profound and some might say, honourable. There is also more going on in the character and chronology of Neil. The early pain that I mentioned is something very difficult to explore in the kind of overt manner that Whiplash tackles it's subject. The longer timeline of this film also likely dictated the decision to pace it in a slower, more calculated way. All in all I liked the pacing and tone of the movie, but people going in expecting something as rhythmically entertaining as either Whiplash or La La Land may come away sorely disappointed.
The screenplay of First Man fits well with the approach to Neil's character in that it puts as much emphasis on the quiet moments as the spoken moments. Indeed the silent parts were probably my favourite in terms of emotional impact. At times I felt like the personal sections could have been better written, as I didn't feel myself fully engaged through every scene. There were times when I was actively rooting for some chemistry between Neil and whoever he was interacting with, be it his wife, kids, friends or colleagues, yet the script never quite scratched that itch for me. There are touching moments for sure, but nothing that really drew me closer to the inner mind of the character. Again, I think part of this was intentional, but I would be lying if I said the dialogue was all it could have been. The moments where it shines through the most are when Neil is fully engaged in what he loves doing, or the moments of solemn reflection that are powerful enough without the need for speech or music. On the subject of music, Chazelle went with Justin Hurwitz once again to produce the soundtrack, but in general he is very sparing in his use of it, which personally I liked. The final climactic scenes on the moon itself were by far the most affecting to me personally, and aside from the obligatory lines that everybody knows, the scene is almost entirely silent, with just the desolation and peace of the moon occupying the frame. This is the moment equivalent to the final drumming performance in Whiplash, where you feel Armstrong is where he is meant to be and has finally realised his destiny.
The performances in First Man are top notch. Ryan Gosling does what Ryan Gosling has done so well before in an ever growing list of great films. There is something in that man's eyes that was designed for playing roles like this, always enigmatic and mysterious, adding a layer of vulnerability to every scene. I've seen him give better performances, but I still think he did a fantastic job with what he was given in what was a very challenging role. Claire Foy as Janet does an amiable job also, although I would have liked to have seen a bit more from her relationship with Neil and the struggles she was going through when he was away. I also enjoyed Jason Clarke as first American to walk in space Ed White. There were no mind-blowing performances, but none that disappointed either. If the screenplay was a little more polished then I believe there was potential here for Gosling and Foy to do some of their very best work, but as it turned out there were times where I felt the writing kept them in their comfort zones.
The film is as much a visual delight as any I have seen about space travel, but not for the typical reasons. Of course there are the expected shots of the Earth from space, the blackness of the unknown and the luminating glow of the Lunar surface, but of more interest to me was the tangible feel of the spaceships and pods, where every switch, nut, bolt and screw felt vitally important to the success of any given mission. Chazelle puts you literally in the faces of the astronauts as they operate these vessels, some of which are no bigger than the inside of a car. It is enough to induce any lingering claustrophobia the viewer may have, especially when you consider the lunacy of strapping yourself into one of these things with thousands of tonnes of explosives sitting directly under you. If the risk and danger of these situations is what Chazelle wanted to capture, he did a damn good job. So much so that when Armstrong steps onto the moon and into uncharted territory, it feels positively safe and serine compared to where he had been before. This is enhanced by the only real use of wide angled or long shots in the entire film, releasing the audience from the stifling grip of close ups and shaky handheld scenes that Chazelle indulges in for most of First Man, and I think also symbolises a quiet moment of clarity for Neil as he finally completes the mission of a lifetime. Overall First Man is a very immersive experience, throwing and tossing the audience around as if we were in Neil's shoes. This immersion contrasts well with the emotionally severed approach the film takes to Neil's personal relationships, only letting us get up close to the man when he is hurling through space at a thousand miles an hour.
As far as any political controversy this film has caused, I quite frankly get bored even thinking about it. It is a sad truth of our age that such a timeless and unifying event in humanity's history can not escape the web of lies, deception and political correctness of people who would rather focus on trivialities and playing the blame game than honestly engaging with a piece of art through apolitical eyes. All I will say is I applaud Chazelle for handling the telling of this great story with class and integrity. Anybody who would rather focus on what the film doesn't say than what it does I honestly feel sorry for. After all, what we need more than ever right now are stories of people who broke the mould, thought differently and chased impossible dreams against the odds.
First Man is a film I recommend for a variety of reasons. It is an important story for people to know about and understand. Damien Chazelle has said that his goal was to show aspects of the moon landing that have gone unseen and unrecognised for too long. I think he achieves this in that I came out knowing much more than when I went in, and beyond that, I empathised with the motivations and sacrifices made by all those involved. The script leaves a little to be desired, but does do an adequate job in documenting the prime years of a special and unique man, for all his faults. How much of First Man is accurate in relation to the real Neil Armstrong I do not know, but part of cinema is taking grains of truth and making them dramatically engaging, something Chazelle seems to be very good at doing. It is exciting to have a director working in Hollywood who is unafraid to tell stories of uncompromising characters who will stop at nothing in the service of something bigger than themselves. These are the tales that sustain us and inspire future generations to go beyond what is expected. Tied in with these themes in First Man is a look, admittedly from a distance, at the human condition and how people come to terms with loss. An eternal and well explored theme, but one the film gives some welcome clarity to.
Acting: 80
Narrative: 80
Cinematography: 90
Music: 80
Overall: 83/100
No comments:
Post a Comment