Conference bookie::movies

You beat me to it.... I planned on entering a big 
THUMBS UP review this morning for this movie. Saw it
last night and thought it was fantastic. I felt like
I was up in space with the guys. There is a good
note with background info on this flight in the
Soapbox conference - Note 52.947

    
    Saw a documentary after seeing this film.
    The character that Ed Harris played was wearing his vest and he looked
    a lot like Ed Harris. They did a lot to make this film very realistic.
    
    Good film, worth the money to see. 
    
    

Really great blastoff scene.  Feels like you're in the ship with the crew.

David

        > Even though the outcome is known in advance (for those who
    remember :-)
        > there's plenty of suspense and action.
    
    Some of us remember the incident, but not the details (I was 10 at the
    time). Am really looking forward to this!
    
    > The weightless environment is wonderfully done, indeed the entire movie
    > is exceptionally well detailed.
    
    Ron Howard was on Letterman a few days ago. He said the scenes were
    done in the NASA aircraft which creates a free-fall environment by 
    literally falling free. Its flight path describes a parabola up from
    the earth, then down again, which gives about 20 - 25 seconds of free
    fall. RH said that they did over 100 parabolas (parabolae?) to get all
    the scenes shot, and that everyone lost their lunch at some point.
                                    Jim
                                            

> Ron Howard was on Letterman a few days ago. He said the scenes were
> done in the NASA aircraft which creates a free-fall environment by 
> literally falling free.

	Tom Hanks was also on Letterman promoting the movie.  They both
	refered to NASA's term for the aircraft as being "The Vomit Comet".

> RH said that they did over 100 parabolas .....

	I thought one of them (Hanks or Howard) said over 400?

	I wonder if it's worse than the "Turkish Twist" at Canobie Lake Park??

	there's nothing worse than the Turkish Twist!!!!

    entertainment tonight (tv show that deals with info/gossip on almost
    anything in the entertainment industry) has been showing interviews
    with various cast members and production people involved in Apollo 13.
    
    Last night they had clips with Ron Howard, talking about using the NASA
    "vomit comit" plane. Besides everyone losing lunch, once the zero
    gravity stops, you fall from wherever you are at the time. Apparently
    it happened quite a bit and everyone, actors and crew, had quite a few
    falls. Howard also made the comment that there were real NASA
    experiments also going on during these flights and one of his falls 
    landed him right in the middle of one of the experiments. 
    
    During the ET interview with Gary Sinise, they were sitting in the
    "Houston command center" (didn't catch if it was the mockup or the real
    place). Most of the conversation was about whether he "hurled" while in
    the plane (real high IQ stuff here) .. but what caught my attention was
    the computer screen behind him that had the Digital MOTIF login screen!
    
    Also - this month's edition of the Smithsonian's Air & Space magazine
    has an article about the movie, titled  "Houston, we have a movie". It
    goes into some detail about how the film was done and how they used
    members of the real crew as technical advisers. A lot of time was spent
    making sure the mockups were correct and that the actors were actually
    pressing buttons/levers in the correct order and such.And, to make sure
    the wording is as close to accurate as possible. Though the time frame
    for the movie condenses the actual time line, all the technical
    advisers (apollo 13 crew and ground support) are very happy with the
    movie.  (more details from the air&space article can be posted if
    others are interested).
    

> Last night they had clips with Ron Howard, talking about using the NASA
> "vomit comit" plane. Besides everyone losing lunch, once the zero
> gravity stops, you fall from wherever you are at the time.

	Nit.  It's not actually zero gravity, it just appears that way.
	What is really happening is basically you are skydiving (falling
	to earth due to gravity) but the plane is also falling just as
	fast (and since you are inside the plane you don't feel the
	drag of the atmosphere either).

	This is why when you fly you should wear safety belts so if the
	plane drops suddenly (due to turbulence) you can end up on the
	ceiling.

	Note that the Space Shuttle never experiences zero gravity either.
	Otherwise it wouldn't be able to stay in orbit ....

    re: .6
    
    On the PBS Charlie Rose show, he had a 40+ minute interview. In that he
    said they did well over 600 parabolas to get the footage.
    
    Saw another interview where they were talking about Annie Lieberman
    (?), the photographer doing some work in the plane. He said she had
    her camera in one hand and a barf bag in the other and she would be
    twisting her head to photograph, barf, photograph, barf...

    The movie wassimply spectacular film-making.  Totally enjoyable from
    beginning to end.  Excellent performances everywhere, from Hanks to
    Harris to Sinise to Kathleen Quinlan as Mrs. Lovell, to the elderly
    woman who played Lovell's mom.
    
    Ron Howard certainly deserves an Oscar for his direction, although I do
    have one major nit (after the FF):
    
    
    WHY DID HE HAVE TO PUT HIS BROTHER IN THE MOVIE?????  HE DRIVES ME
    NUTS!!!!!!!  There, I fell better now.
    
    NAZZ

    re: -1
    
    You hate Ron Howard's brother but you loved his mother - she played
    the elderly Mrs. Lovell.

    First off this is one great movie, as was said before see it on a big
    screen!  Fo all you science buffs I have a question for you after the
    form feed.
    
    
    
    Why did NASA ask them to mix the oxygen tanks??  Was is a liquid or gas
    and why do you have to mix??

    re .11's (spoiler) nit:  Who did he play?  The flight surgeon?
    
    Leslie

    re: question in .13
    
    
    
    >> Why did NASA ask them to mix the oxygen tanks??  Was is a liquid or gas
    >> and why do you have to mix??
    
    The tanks contained liquid oxygen; if left undisturbed, apparently
    the liquid oxygen in the tanks tends to "stratify" into layers
    with slightly different density and temperature.  To keep the
    liquid oxygen "homogenized", at certain points in the flight
    mission control would routinely ask the crew to turn on the
    mixing fans in the tanks, to "stir up the soup", as it were.
    
    Due to a ground testing accident that had gone undetected, the
    insulation on the wiring of the mixing fans had been burned away.
    When Swigert turned on the fans... boom!
    
    I wrote a long, tedious note in the movies topic of the SOAPBOX
    conference that you can read if you're interested in technical
    background on the accident.  It's an interesting sequence of
    failures, both technical and human.  Also check out the book
    "A Man on the Moon" by Andrew Chaikin, one of the best of many
    that I've read.
    
    Chris

    re: .13 and .14
    
    I just read the book (Lost Moon) this weekend, but I wasn't expecting a
    test today so I didn't memorize that part.  Anyway, this is what I
    think it said in the book (if I remember, I'll check it when I get home
    tonight):
    
    
    
    The oxygen was kept at a temperature that left it in a semi-liquid,
    semi-gaseous state; that is, sort of slushy.  If allowed to just sit
    like this, it would stratify and become difficult to use.  Therefore,
    it had to be stirred up from time to time.
    
    I don't know if they covered it in the movie, but the sequence of
    events that led to the thing blowing up are almost mind-boggling.  If
    they aren't in the movie and if anyone cares, I'll enter them in a
    subsequent reply.
    
    							John

  This was an incredible film! The best of the summer thrillers, for me anyway.
  The movie is 2.5 hours long and you never notice it (we saw a 10PM show and
  were shocked to find it was already past 12:30 when we walked out).  The film
  has excellent pacing.

  The story itself is quite dramatic and gripping, all on its own.  Now for me,
  I was on the edge of my seat even during the Nova 25th anniversary TV special
  on Apollo 13.  The story itself is remarkable.  Yet my SO, who usually
  doesn't like technology/space angles and who thought the same Nova program
  was "very boring," was also on the edge of the seat in the film as well. 

  Credit has to be given to Ron Howard for taking an excellent story and making
  it even better through his film-making techniques.  Even though everyone
  already knows the story and outcomes of Apollo 13, Howard paced the film so
  well and put some crucial added scenes in (the wife's nightmare for example)
  which allowed the film to keep the drama on high.  We were both on the edge
  of our seats.  Which is amazing if you think about it.  No "Die Hard" type
  mega-action scenes and all the 'action' takes place within in a cramped tin
  can, yet your adrenalin is pumping.

  I hated the choice of Hanks for Jim Lovell.  He doesn't look, act or sound
  anything like him at all.  However the story gets ahold of you and Hanks
  quickly becomes Lovell for you and you don't see the differences.
  Surprisingly, Kevin Bacon put in a very good and believable job as Swigert.
  His best performance in years I thought (I had a hard time finding him
  believable in many of his past roles).

  The weightlessness scenes flowed together so well that I stopped even noticing
  them.  You felt as if you were there in the capsule with them through the
  whole movie.  In this regard having a big screen and good sound system
  helped.  However I have to disagree with earlier comments about the lift-off
  scenes.  I thought those shots looked terribly fake and cheap, they would
  have been much better off using the real out-takes.  I was looking forward to
  a great blast-off scene and was disappointed with what they did instead.

  I would have shot the film differently, and would have started much earlier
  in the story myself.  The film would have started five years earlier with a
  scene showing the voltage bus change over and the fried thermostat welded
  open, and then started where Howard began.  Thus you would have had the
  memory of this potential problem in your head during the entire mission and
  first part of the movie.  But Howard accomplished the same thing with the
  wife's nightmare/child asking about the door scenes, as well as being aided
  by generic lift off fears in general.  It was a gripping re-telling of the
  tale.

  For me, the biggest fear was being there, in space, sitting in and relying on
  and being surrounded by... 1960's technology.  Whoa, now that was scary! :-)

  -Erik

    re: .16 and .17
    
    Notes collision.  (Hi Chris, how you doing?)
    
    I'll take a shot at laying out the "disaster" sequence from memory:
    
    
    
    For various reasons, it was decided to change the electrical elements
    in the tanks from 28 volt element to 65 volts.  Unfortunately, the
    heaters (and their circuit breakers) in this tank did not get changed. 
    Then, when the oxy tank module was being pulled by crane from the
    Apollo (9 or 10) Service Module, one of the four bolts holding it in
    place was not fully removed.  The crane lifted it up a bit, then
    dropped it, causing the drain tubing to be dislodged internally (this
    was not discovered at that time).
    
    Subsequently, this module/tank combo was used for Apollo 13.  During a
    dummy launch run made some weeks before the real launch, they found
    that they couldn't drain the oxygen from it afterwards.  They decided
    to heat it up and let the oxygen escape through the "normal" path. 
    This took hours, so the heaters were left on for much longer than
    normal.  Worse, the 28 volt circuit breakers fused and failed to shut
    off the heaters when the temperature climbed well above normal.  And
    the icing on the cake was that the external gauge pegged at the high
    end of the normal range, so they didn't notice what was going on.  The
    temps got so high it scorched the insulation from the wires.
    
    During the flight, the stirring had been done at least twice prior to
    the explosion.  I don't know if it was good luck or bad that it didn't
    blow either of those times.
    
    							John
    

    I can't remember when I saw a better movie!!!  Ron Howard has
    done a wonderful job.  It's exciting, suspenseful, awe-inspiring
    and had me, at several times, filled with such a sense of pride
    (over the things this country can do when the chips are down).
    
    You know it's a good film when the audience claps at the end and
    many were moved to tears!!
    
    4.5 out of 5 *s  (only because nobody's perfect :-))
    
    Sue
    
    ps Did you see the real Jim Lovell?  The cameo was great!!
    
    pps And I liked Mrs Howard and Clint Howard in their parts 

  It's amazing how Tom Hanks keeps showing up in the best movies of the year.
This one was outstanding, one of the best movies I've ever seen that was based
on a true story. In fact it was one of the best movies I've ever seen period. 

  Getting the astronaut's personality right is very difficult for Hollywood
which prefers the expressive types of people who wear their heart on their
sleeve but they did it really well. Hanks is great as Jim Lovell as are the
others. 

  There are times when people who don't understand the hardware will get a bit
confused as to what part of the ship was suppose to do what. Patty kept leaning
over and asking me things like "What's a lem?" and "Why are they worried about
restarting the broken part?". But if you understand those things then it's
about as good as a movie ever gets.

  One of the very few
  ***** out of 5,
  George

Saturday afternoon, we were all looking for someplace cool to wait out
the heat wave and we decided to view Apollo 13.  About two hours into
it, the power went out in the theatre (Woburn, MA).  At first, the whole
place was silent.  Then, when it didn't come back on right away, a few
people started chuckling.  Soon everybody was laughing at the irony. 

They never did get it restarted, and we got a coupon good for another
movie.    

re: .20

No, I didn't notice Jim Lovell's cameo, where was it?  And what part did
Clint Howard play?

-Ann

    Clint Howard was the short, balding fellow, with dark-framed
    glasses, sitting right in front of Ed Harris' character.  
    
    Wasn't he the star of that show with the bear..Gentle Ben..or
    something like that, in the mid/late sixties?
    
    As for the Lovell cameo....
    
     
    
    
    ..when the astronauts got out of the helicoptor, and the crew of the
    Iwo Jima was on the flight-deck to greet them, if you see an officer,
    with his hat on, shaking Tom Hanks' hand .... that is the real Jim
    Lovell.  How appro pos (sp?) that they have him on at the end of the
    film, congratulating Lovell/Hanks for a job well done :-)
    
    Sue

    COULD a 7-year old enjoy this ?

  Might be a little over his head. He'd probably get bored, restless and want to
leave. 

  I'd take him to the Disney movie instead.

  George

I took my daughter who is about to turn 6, and she liked it.  She 
didn't get bored, but parts were over her head.   We did have nice 
talks about space and rockets, working as a team and such afterward.
   Not really scary, more of an exciting move for kids IMHO

By the age of 6 kids are reaching the age of reason, I think they can 
handle it.

    Please reconsider taking your six year old to this. We sat in front of
    an ~eight year old who asked every few minutes what was happening and
    why. The parents would try to explain, but it was pretty futile.  She'd
    ask her questions when there was no action, and these were the times
    they were explaining the technical details. 

    Finally I asked them to stop talking. I felt bad - the girl was into
    the film and wanted to understand, but it was at her parents and our
    row's expense.

    Great flick! It felt real. Does anyone know how much this cost to make?

    Lisa

    
    Terrific film.  As Ron Howard observed in one interview:
    
    "An homage to guys like Dilbert."
    
    And it's very interesting to see how much our culture has changed in
    those twenty-five years.
    
    DFW

    After reading all reply's.. I still have to wait one month!
    
    I can hardly wait. We're about 2 1/2 moths behind all new great movies
    coming from the States. I went only yesterday to the movies for Batman
    forever! (premier!!!)
    
    Regarding the Apollo 13 movie... Last summer I was in Florida visiting
    the Space center.... It was/is very impressive! Whats the story about
    the rocket lying there? The told me that is was a backup... what a
    waste!
    
    Greetings,
    
    Ferdinand 
    (the Netherlands)

    re:-1
    
    I assume you refer to the Saturn lying on its side next to the Vehicle
    Assembly Building.  My recollection is that it was in fact built to
    send astronauts to the moon as part of the Apollo program but that
    Apollo funding dried up and, as a result, it was never used.  It's a
    great display piece, however; particularly when you compare it to the
    tallest rocket in the Visitor Center display area.
    
    I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that there's yet another
    Saturn at the Huntsville, Alabama NASA facility.

    If memory serves, I believe missions up to Apollo 20 were planned. 
    Apollo 20 was axed first, then 18 and 19.  The Saturn V boosters for 18
    and 19 were already built, so they were put on display.  The second one
    is in Houston, or at least it was back in the early 80s when I saw it
    there.  An impressive sight.
    
    								John

  They have complete lists of where the extra Saturn Hardware ended up in the
SPACE notes file and no doubt more people will check in with details but I
believe the Saturn V for the canceled Apollo 18 was used to launch Sky Lab. 

  The Saturn V for Apollo 19 and Apollo 20 are the ones on display.

  George

    According to "A Man On The Moon" by Andrew Chaikin, the Apollo 20
    booster was used for Skylab.  In fact, the need for a booster for
    Skylab was part of the reason for cancelling Apollo 20.  Subsequently
    18 and 19 were cancelled and their boosters ended up in Florida and
    Houston.
    
    							John

Another one of those great stories that doesn't need to be true to be good.

From: Amanda Hashfield
Subject: Funny story for the day...
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 95
To: june@hotwired.com

About 1966 or so, a NASA team doing work for the Apollo moon mission
took the astronauts near Tuba City where the terrain of the Navajo
Reservation looks very much like the Lunar surface. With all the
trucks and large vehicles were two large figures that were dressed in
full Lunar spacesuits.

Near by, a Navajo sheep herder and his son were watching the strange
creatures walk about occasionally being tended by personnel. The two
Navajo people were noticed and approached by the NASA personnel.
Since the man did not know English, his son asked for him what the
strange creatures were and the NASA people told them that they are
just men that are getting ready to go to the moon. The man became
very excited and asked if he could send a message to the moon with
the astronauts.

The NASA personnel thought this was a great idea so they rustled up a
tape recorder. After the man gave them his message they asked his son
to translate. His son would not.

Later, they tried a few more people on the reservation to translate
and every person they asked would chuckle and then refuse to
translate. Finally, with cash in hand someone translated the message,
"Watch out for these guys, they come to take your land."





Well, folks, just what you've been waiting for! Live! from the Johnson
Space Center, the top ten TECHNICAL ERRORS/ANACHRONISMS in the movie
"Apollo 13" - compiled by a bunch of genuine NASA dweebs who actually
noticed these things.

(Reading this list is guaranteed not to give the story away.
========================================================================

10. The NASA "worm" logo appears on a glass door. The logo was not
developed until 1976.

9. One engineer checks an astronaut's addition using a slide
rule. Slide rules are not used for addition.

8. Jim Lovell's license plate is new (1990s style).

7. The astronauts point out the Sea of Tranquility while on the dark
side of the moon. It is on the other side.

6. A technician at the Cape is wearing a Rockwell International logo
on his coveralls. The Apollo capsule was built by a North American,
and did not become Rockwell International until after the Apollo
program.

5. The gantry arms for the Saturn V are released in unison, not one at
a time.

4. During entry, the spacecraft is shown hurling directly at the
earth. At that angle, it would punch a brief but fiery hole through
the atmosphere. It should be aiming towards the horizon.

3. The paint pattern on the Saturn V is for the test configuration,
not the launch configuration.

2. The astronauts look at their intended landing site while on the
dark side of the moon. It is a good thing they didn't land - no
communications with Earth, it's dark and very cold.

AND THE NUMBER ONE TECHNICAL ERROR/ANACHRONISM in APOLLO 13 is: 1. In
space, from outside the capsule, propulsion jets do not make any
noise.

>7. The astronauts point out the Sea of Tranquility while on the dark
>side of the moon. It is on the other side.
    
    Uh -- depends on the time of the month.  The moon rotates of its axis
    once a month; therefore, once each month, Sea of Tranquility is on the
    dark side of the moon.

  Who ever wrote this (I doubt it really came from NASA) is making the common
mistake of misusing the phrase "dark side of the moon" when they mean "the
side of the moon that faces away from earth".

  Most likely people get this phrase from "Dark Side of the Moon" which was an
album by Pink Floyd. It was the #1 selling rock album of all time. In addition
to the title song it's the one with "Brick in the wall" (about the Berlin
wall), "Money", etc. 

  "When your band starts playing another tune I'll meet you on the dark side of
the moon" -PF 

  George 

    GREAT MOVIE, went to the cinema yesterday. This film is now
    released in the Netherlands and is getting great reviews. 
    I'm planning to see it again next week. I've seen this movie
    accompanied with digital sound...
    
    excellent!!! Best movie this year
                                                    
    Greetings,
    Ferdinand
    

    Saw this on video yesterday, was *NOT* impressed. What a load of
    absolute toss. Not only was Tom Hanks' performance nothing short of
    completely ordinary, but it dragged on and on and on and on and on and
    on. The 'family stuff' was awful and unbalanced the film, great, his
    elderly mother! what fascinating insight! Space bits, mmm, alright.
    This film didn't know what to be and ended up being arse.
    
    dickie.

I was more impressed by the PBS documentary. This one really didn't quite
measure up!

  Just curious, did you guys live through the real Apollo 13? That also dragged
on and on. Everyone on Earth held their breath for the better part of a week. 

  Also, are you familiar with the typical astronaut's "Right Stuff" type of
personality. They captured it perfectly knowing just when to add the dry humor
and when to zip it up and act casual in the face of death. That's really the
way those guys acted. 

  I'm just curious as to whether you didn't realize how closely the story
followed real life or if you knew all that but didn't think they did it very
well. 

  George 

    I visited the "Air and Space" Museum (part of the Smithsonian) in
    Washington last week.  There are a couple of the Apollo capsules on
    display and I was amazed by how small they were.  Talk about major
    claustrophobia!