ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Ryan Gosling is gonna play Neil Armstrong...

I feel sad for the family.

from Rick Armstrong and Mark Armstrong (sons) and James Hansen (First Man author):

"In short, we do not feel this movie is anti-American in the slightest. Quite the opposite. But don’t take our word for it. We’d encourage everyone to go see this remarkable film and see for themselves."


http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/09/01/neil-armstrongs-sons-defend-first-man-film-from-claims-that-its-anti-american.html
https://pagesix.com/2018/09/01/neil-armstrongs-sons-defend-absence-of-flag-planting-in-first-man/
I do wish people would "think" instead of "feel" more often than not since too many confuse the two "almost all the time".. That said the decision to not show the planting of the flag could be sincere...nobody knows why with the infinite things that could be shown why some things are shown and others not to keep the time in check.

The taxpayers paid a hell of a lot of money to send him there adn reasonable people can debate whether the "flag" of the taxpayers that was not left behind, but PLANTED there was an important moment for so many that contributed to the sucess of that incredible feat. I have no idea how old you are, but can tell you where I was when the fuzzy screen showed it and where I was when the USA beat Russia in that "magic moment" on the ice...as well as where I was when John F. Kennedy was shot.

The second flag raising on Iwo Jima was also an iconic moment for the USA....and was crucial to the bond movement needed to raise money for the war. Ira Hayes really didn't want the attention to make such a big deal of that flag planting, but the war movement did...and needed the USA to rally behind it. I have no idea the root cause why the flag planting will not be shown, but I do think it is a mistake whether anti-American or not...
 
Won't be paying money to watch Ryan Quizling's movie.

Quizling said it was a world event, not an American event. Did he bother to read the speech?

https://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/ricetalk.htm


In part,

"I am delighted that this university [Rice University] is playing a part in putting a man on the moon as part of a great national effort of the United States of America."​
 
  • Like
Reactions: ahhculdee
I will withhold judgement until I see the movie but I am skeptical of the producer’s intentions. It may not be important but Damien Chazelle is listed as a French American in Wiki:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damien_Chazelle

The timing is interesting since we currently have a lot of dissension in our country and honoring the flag is one of them. Gozling’s comments ticked me off because as a Canadien his words sounded like he was trying to diminish the US by his emphasis. His reference to Neil as humble person is certainly accurate but in no way demonstrates that Neil didn’t identify with the National pride related to the accomplish. Remember he fought in the Korean War, was a test pilot, and was an astronaut, etc would make me think he was very patriotic. Herre is Gozlin’s quote:

“I think this was widely regarded in the end as a human achievement [and] that's how we chose to view it,” he explained. “I also think Neil was extremely humble, as were many of these astronauts, and time and time again he deferred the focus from himself to the 400,000 people who made the mission possible.”

“So I don't think that Neil viewed himself as an American hero,” he continued. “From my interviews with his family and people that knew him, it was quite the opposite. And we wanted the film to reflect Neil.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cthreepo
The quote reads, “one giant leap for mankind”.
I think that says it all right there and seeking to politicize this based on national pride is silly.

So what the movie doesn’t show the American flag? That’s doesn’t mean the producers are against America. To infer it does or that it’s a disservice to anyone is an attempt to make a mountain out of a molehill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LLaswell
“So I don't think that Neil viewed himself as an American hero,” he continued. “From my interviews with his family and people that knew him, it was quite the opposite. And we wanted the film to reflect Neil.”
This is a straw man argument. Most true heroes when interviewed don't view their actions as heroic. The filmmakers should present the facts and let the audience decide whether he was a hero. Gozlin's statement implies that they made a conscious effort to diminish his accomplishments because it is what Armstrong would want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tjreese
I will withhold judgement until I see the movie but I am skeptical of the producer’s intentions. It may not be important but Damien Chazelle is listed as a French American in Wiki:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damien_Chazelle

The timing is interesting since we currently have a lot of dissension in our country and honoring the flag is one of them. Gozling’s comments ticked me off because as a Canadien his words sounded like he was trying to diminish the US by his emphasis. His reference to Neil as humble person is certainly accurate but in no way demonstrates that Neil didn’t identify with the National pride related to the accomplish. Remember he fought in the Korean War, was a test pilot, and was an astronaut, etc would make me think he was very patriotic. Herre is Gozlin’s quote:

“I think this was widely regarded in the end as a human achievement [and] that's how we chose to view it,” he explained. “I also think Neil was extremely humble, as were many of these astronauts, and time and time again he deferred the focus from himself to the 400,000 people who made the mission possible.”

“So I don't think that Neil viewed himself as an American hero,” he continued. “From my interviews with his family and people that knew him, it was quite the opposite. And we wanted the film to reflect Neil.”
Again, we don't know the intentions. However as I stated the EVENT was an ICONIC moment for MANY that contributed directly as well as financially to that event. The second man has some thoughts as well that I recently learned...

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...n-moon-with-proud-to-be-american-hashtag.html
 
This is a straw man argument. Most true heroes when interviewed don't view their actions as heroic. The filmmakers should present the facts and let the audience decide whether he was a hero. Gozlin's statement implies that they made a conscious effort to diminish his accomplishments because it is what Armstrong would want.
Buzz still alive has a different view that eliminates some guessing... ;)
 
Buzz still alive has a different view that eliminates some guessing... ;)
Yet, once again, Neil thought about what his first statement would be and decided to say what he said. If you really think about it, he had left the planet that is home to all people and felt that was reason to include all people.
This doesn’t mean he wasn’t proud to be an American or that he didn’t feel the achievement was one that the US accomplished first.
It seems some folks want to have history remember it solely as an American accomplishment instead of a moment in history that brought the entire planet together, if even for a brief period.

Personally, I feel some folks are trying to find something to be offended by and this is a silly discussion.
 
Yet, once again, Neil thought about what his first statement would be and decided to say what he said. If you really think about it, he had left the planet that is home to all people and felt that was reason to include all people.
This doesn’t mean he wasn’t proud to be an American or that he didn’t feel the achievement was one that the US accomplished first.
It seems some folks want to have history remember it solely as an American accomplishment instead of a moment in history that brought the entire planet together, if even for a brief period.

Personally, I feel some folks are trying to find something to be offended by and this is a silly discussion.
It's fair game to guess what Neil thought..we shall never know for certain. You may be right...you may be wrong? Your guess is as good as the others that don't know, and that includes me.

However, that second man on the moon eliminates guessing for him and so we do know something about that event, at least for the one still alive. The real point as I stated many times is that we don't know for certain if it was an intentional slight in "these times", but was a mistake to not plant the flag for so many...if but nothing else...financially.

It was a subtle, quiet war...that race that JFK started with Russia...not Neil's war when JFK made it, but the USA...
 
The quote reads, “one giant leap for mankind”.
I think that says it all right there and seeking to politicize this based on national pride is silly.

So what the movie doesn’t show the American flag? That’s doesn’t mean the producers are against America. To infer it does or that it’s a disservice to anyone is an attempt to make a mountain out of a molehill.

So a bunch of people who haven't even seen the movie are complaining about a scene being left out and somehow it is "unpatriotic".

This is somewhat false—during the moon landing sequence, the scene dwells more on Armstrong looking back at Earth and considering the accomplishment he just made in the name of mankind. But the flag is in the scene and is visible in multiple shots, according to those that have actually seen the movie.

You have to be dense to think some movie that covers one of the most well-known modern day Americans and the achievement he made being the first man on the moon is not inherently patriotic. It's like accusing an American president of being unpatriotic if he doesn't wear an American flag lapel pin one day. Gosling did interviews with his entire family to get to know him and portray him in an accurate sense. If he didn't word something in the perfect way, it certainly wasn't meant to be offensive. He's a Canadian who wasn't born when this happened. Our current President thinks Andrew Jackson was angry about the Civil War, after all.




 
It's fair game to guess what Neil thought..we shall never know for certain. You may be right...you may be wrong? Your guess is as good as the others that don't know, and that includes me.

However, that second man on the moon eliminates guessing for him and so we do know something about that event, at least for the one still alive. The real point as I stated many times is that we don't know for certain if it was an intentional slight in "these times", but was a mistake to not plant the flag for so many...if but nothing else...financially.

It was a subtle, quiet war...that race that JFK started with Russia...not Neil's war when JFK made it, but the USA...
I should also add that the space race between Russia and the USA many believe was a spike in math and science interest in the government schools and higher achievement in those courses.
 
It's fair game to guess what Neil thought..we shall never know for certain. You may be right...you may be wrong? Your guess is as good as the others that don't know, and that includes me.

However, that second man on the moon eliminates guessing for him and so we do know something about that event, at least for the one still alive. The real point as I stated many times is that we don't know for certain if it was an intentional slight in "these times", but was a mistake to not plant the flag for so many...if but nothing else...financially.

Personally, IMO that is, I think the director "omitted" the flag planting because of the current state of affairs surrounding the NFL, etc. and was afraid of any backlash. However, backlash found him anyway. Once again, IMO, I don't understand the omission.....it happened.....and it certainly could be viewed "American" as well as "universal" simultaneously. It was a race....and America won.....
 
So a bunch of people who haven't even seen the movie are complaining about a scene being left out and somehow it is "unpatriotic".

This is somewhat false—during the moon landing sequence, the scene dwells more on Armstrong looking back at Earth and considering the accomplishment he just made in the name of mankind. But the flag is in the scene and is visible in multiple shots, according to those that have actually seen the movie.

You have to be dense to think some movie that covers one of the most well-known modern day Americans and the achievement he made being the first man on the moon is not inherently patriotic. It's like accusing an American president of being unpatriotic if he doesn't wear an American flag lapel pin one day. Gosling did interviews with his entire family to get to know him and portray him in an accurate sense. If he didn't word something in the perfect way, it certainly wasn't meant to be offensive. He's a Canadian who wasn't born when this happened. Our current President thinks Andrew Jackson was angry about the Civil War, after all.
A point of reflection might reveal that seeing the movie has nothing to do with those that lived the ICONIC moment and what it meant to those that lived it, although obscure to those that didn't. My guess is that those finding no mistake are pretty young, absent the historical understanding since the history of the race is never mentioned...never living through the Cuban crisis and the real threat of nuclear destruction. It is true that nobody knows for certain the intentions when making the movie...very fair.

A Canadian, not an adult during the event, no doubt might struggle capturing the moment and trying to be as accurate as possible with the inherent ignorance may be commendable. I know my children don 't know all my thoughts...nuanced in a way that accurately portrays my thoughts.

There may be no deliberate slight at the USA in desiring to attribute this accomplishment of all of mankind. Like all, I don't know the intentions of one that can't speak even vaguely about the situation. I just think it is a mistake and I do not have to see the movie to put facts together. The mere fact that Buzz still alive considers it a mistake tells me that many more think it is a mistake...whatever the omission roots were. That is pretty clear. Having a different view of an event is still allowed in this country and it is impossible to be dense without mass...

Just for the humor, sometimes we understand 2+2 is four for so long, until that epiphany takes place and we change our view...enjoy as it does have something to do with math... ;)

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Zh3Yz3PiXZw
 
Personally, IMO that is, I think the director "omitted" the flag planting because of the current state of affairs surrounding the NFL, etc. and was afraid of any backlash. However, backlash found him anyway. Once again, IMO, I don't understand the omission.....it happened.....and it certainly could be viewed "American" as well as "universal" simultaneously. It was a race....and America won.....
we are old enough to know the race was between Russia and the USA
 
A point of reflection might reveal that seeing the movie has nothing to do with those that lived the ICONIC moment and what it meant to those that lived it, although obscure to those that didn't. My guess is that those finding no mistake are pretty young, absent the historical understanding since the history of the race is never mentioned...never living through the Cuban crisis and the real threat of nuclear destruction. It is true that nobody knows for certain the intentions when making the movie...very fair.

A Canadian, not an adult during the event, no doubt might struggle capturing the moment and trying to be as accurate as possible with the inherent ignorance may be commendable. I know my children don 't know all my thoughts...nuanced in a way that accurately portrays my thoughts.

There may be no deliberate slight at the USA in desiring to attribute this accomplishment of all of mankind. Like all, I don't know the intentions of one that can't speak even vaguely about the situation. I just think it is a mistake and I do not have to see the movie to put facts together. The mere fact that Buzz still alive considers it a mistake tells me that many more think it is a mistake...whatever the omission roots were. That is pretty clear. Having a different view of an event is still allowed in this country and it is impossible to be dense without mass...

Just for the humor, sometimes we understand 2+2 is four for so long, until that epiphany takes place and we change our view...enjoy as it does have something to do with math... ;)

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Zh3Yz3PiXZw

I think it is manufactured outrage.

If you read reviews of the movie....again, by people who've actually seen it.....they will tell you that the film is literally through the eyes of those who experience what is happening, not broad landscapes of scenery showing what's happening around them. It's a unique approach that is taken with this scene, but also utilized throughout the movie. Multiple people who've seen the movie have stated this. They've also stated that the flag is shown multiple times.

So if you'd like to listen to people who haven't seen the movie take it out of context, go ahead. Buzz "tweet" is just that, a tweet. Has he seen the movie? Not to my knowledge. You also blatantly omit that Neil Armstrong's own family, who have actually seen the movie and worked with the producers and actors to portray things accurately, have endorsed it and are perfectly ok with it. But I guess Marco Rubio has more credibility. It's really something stupid to get worked up over. The movie is about one of the most famous Americans and covers an inherently patriotic event. Calling into question patriotism is just stirring shit up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BoilerBulldog
How would anyone under 50 have an understanding of what did or didn't happen with the fervor for rewriting or conveniently forgetting American history the past several years. Yes, the space race was a great stimulus for a push for excellence in math and science education nationally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tjreese
I think it is manufactured outrage.

If you read reviews of the movie....again, by people who've actually seen it.....they will tell you that the film is literally through the eyes of those who experience what is happening, not broad landscapes of scenery showing what's happening around them. It's a unique approach that is taken with this scene, but also utilized throughout the movie. Multiple people who've seen the movie have stated this. They've also stated that the flag is shown multiple times.

So if you'd like to listen to people who haven't seen the movie take it out of context, go ahead. Buzz is basing his opinion on the outrage from people who haven't seen the movie. You also blatantly omit that Neil Armstrong's own family, who have actually seen the movie and worked with the producers and actors to portray things accurately, have endorsed it and are perfectly ok with it. But I guess Marco Rubio has more credibility. It's really something stupid to get worked up over.
you either don't understand what I said or chose to ignore it. I'll try again...much more concise. I have no idea the intent and really haven't seen the outrage. I actually commended him for talking to the family and went on to explain that my children couldn't nuance accurately my stance on many things as well. It is there if you read it again.

I tried to draw a distinction between a movie and a real event and for those old enough to have lived the event...many find fault with the omission. They don't have to get the emotional "feelings" of a movie having already for several decades held an understanding...decades before the movie. If you think the omission was the right thing to do..."WHATEVER THE REASON" to do so...we just disagree and that is fine. I think it was a mistake..you don't and that is fine.
 
you either don't understand what I said or chose to ignore it. I'll try again...much more concise. I have no idea the intent and really haven't seen the outrage. I actually commended him for talking to the family and went on to explain that my children couldn't nuance accurately my stance on many things as well. It is there if you read it again.

I tried to draw a distinction between a movie and a real event and for those old enough to have lived the event...many find fault with the omission. They don't have to get the emotional "feelings" of a movie having already for several decades held an understanding...decades before the movie. If you think the omission was the right thing to do..."WHATEVER THE REASON" to do so...we just disagree and that is fine. I think it was a mistake..you don't and that is fine.

I can make it even simpler for you......

I haven't seen the movie, neither have you. I don't see a logical reason that a movie completely about an American hero is secretly anti-American. I have also read from people who have seen the movie that it didn't come across as an "ommission" to them and they state that it's not a coincidence that the controversy is coming solely from people who haven't seen the movie. I also know that Neil Armstrong's family approves of the movie and the producers and actors spent time making sure it was portrayed accurately (something many movies do not do).

So with that, I am willing to give it the benefit of the doubt until I see for myself.

You've already made up your mind, and you haven't seen the movie. I look forward to Fox and Friends reviewing more movies though!
 
How would anyone under 50 have an understanding of what did or didn't happen with the fervor for rewriting or conveniently forgetting American history the past several years. Yes, the space race was a great stimulus for a push for excellence in math and science education nationally.
ya know..I try to remember my youth and how my understandings have grown over the years....but you are right. History in elementary was replaced with "social studies"... ;) I was opening the door into my sister's house to catch it on that fuzzy screen. Few in this thread actually lived it and remember the race...and those that do are probably a little heavily leaned to finding the omission wrong...no matter the reason.
 
I can make it even simpler for you......

I haven't seen the movie, neither have you. I don't see a logical reason that a movie completely about an American hero is secretly anti-American. I have also read from people who have seen the movie that it didn't come across as an "ommission" to them and they state that it's not a coincidence that the controversy is coming solely from people who haven't seen the movie. I also know that Neil Armstrong's family approves of the movie and the producers and actors spent time making sure it was portrayed accurately (something many movies do not do).

So with that, I am willing to give it the benefit of the doubt until I see for myself.

You've already made up your mind, and you haven't seen the movie. I look forward to Fox and Friends reviewing more movies though!
actually I think i expressed my view before fox and friends..not that it matters. The emotional aspects of the movie on an event almost 50 years ago doesn't change the view of those that actually saw, remember and know what it meant to them. AS I said...you can see it different...perhaps it will be your first understanding? If not, we just disagree. I already addressed Neil's family, provided the thoughts of Buzz on that flight...declared the race started long before that flight with JFK and it was between Russia and the USA...the other countries were insignificant and mentioned the emphasis in science and math in teh early 60's. I know what the event was and knew it long before some Canadian decided to make a movie. You choose to believe what you want and I will too. It is okay, for two people to disagree.
 
ya know..I try to remember my youth and how my understandings have grown over the years....but you are right. History in elementary was replaced with "social studies"... ;) I was opening the door into my sister's house to catch it on that fuzzy screen. Few in this thread actually lived it and remember the race...and those that do are probably a little heavily leaned to finding the omission wrong...no matter the reason.
The space race, and ultimately the USA's moon landing, was so important to me that summer of 1969 that I took a big portion of my earnings from my first real summer job using my fledgling Purdue I.E. skills and bought one of these:
220px-Porta-Color.png

A 10" PORTACOLOR TV so I could bring it into work and our entire engineering department could watch the landing coverage LIVE AND IN LIVING COLOR. Of course, while the broadcasters were in color, the NASA video was grainy B&W. The iconic color flag-planting shots we see today were still photos. For the video, try this link:



So, TJR is correct...many (most?) of us who lived through the space race clearly identify this as a singularly American accomplishment, but like so much the USA has developed over the decades, it meant a giant leap for mankind.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tjreese
we are old enough to know the race was between Russia and the USA
Do you also remember that numerous nazi scientists were crucial in making the mission a success? Without vin Braun, Dahm, etc, it very likely would have never happened. Should we be upset the movie doesn’t mention the Nazi contribution to space exploration?
You keep saying those not alive at the time aren’t aware of the significance of the event. You can’t really be serious about that, right? The entire world knows the U.S. put the first man on the moon.
 
Here's a 10 minute NASA (??) produced video about the actual landing, as well as the 6 hour later lunar walk...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tjreese
Before the end of the decade or ten years as I remember it.
Since you asked...
Oct. 4, 1957: A modified R-7 two-stage ICBM launches the satellite Sputnik 1 from Tyuratam. The Space Race between the Soviet Union and the United States begins.

Nov. 3, 1957: The Soviet Union launches Sputnik 2 with the first living passenger, the dog Laika, aboard.

Dec. 6, 1957: A Vanguard TV-3 carrying a grapefruit-sized satellite explodes at launch; a failed response to the Sputnik launch by the United States.

Jan. 31, 1958: Explorer 1, the first satellite with an onboard telemetry system, is launched by the United States into orbit aboard a Juno rocket and returns data from space.

Oct. 7, 1958: NASA Administrator T. Keith Glennan publicly announces NASA's manned spaceflight program along with the formation of the Space Task Group, a panel of scientist and engineers from space-policy organizations absorbed by NASA. The announcement came just six days after NASA was founded.

Jan. 2, 1959: The U.S.S.R. launches Luna 1, which misses the moon but becomes the first artificial object to leave Earth orbit.

Jan. 12, 1959: NASA awards McDonnell Corp. the contract to manufacture the Mercury capsules.

Feb. 28, 1959: NASA launches Discover 1, the U.S. first spy satellite, but it is not until the Aug. 11, 1960, launch of Discover 13 that film is recovered successfully.

May 28, 1959: The United States launches the first primates in space, Able and Baker, on a suborbital flight.

Aug. 7, 1959: NASA's Explorer 6 launches and provides the first photographs of the Earth from space.

Sept. 12, 1959: The Soviet Union's Luna 2 is launched and two days later is intentionally crashed into the Moon.

Sept. 17, 1959: NASA's X-15 hypersonic research plane, capable of speeds to Mach 6.7, makes its first powered flight.

Oct. 24, 1960: To rush the launch of a Mars probe before the Nov. 7 anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution, Field Marshall Mitrofan Nedelin ignored several safety protocols and 126 people are killed when the R-16 ICBM explodes at the Baikonur Cosmodrome during launch preparations.

Feb. 12, 1961: The Soviet Union launches Venera to Venus, but the probe stops responding after a week.

April 12, 1961: Yuri Gagarin becomes the first man in space with a 108-minute flight on Vostok 1 in which he completed one orbit.

May 5, 1961: Mercury Freedom 7 launches on a Redstone rocket for a 15-minute suborbital flight, making Alan Shepard the first American in space.

May 25, 1961: In a speech before Congress, President John Kennedyannounces that an American will land on the moon and be returned safely to Earth before the end of the decade.

Oct. 27, 1961: Saturn 1, the rocket for the initial Apollo missions, is tested for the first time.

Feb. 20, 1962: John Glenn makes the first U.S. manned orbital flight aboard Mercury 6. (seems like yesterday)

June 7, 1962: Wernher von Braun backs the idea of a Lunar Orbit Rendezvous mission.

July 10, 1962: The United States launches Telstar 1, which enables the trans-Atlantic transmission of television signals.

June 14, 1962: Agreements are signed establishing the European Space Research Organisation and the European Launcher Development Organisation. Both eventually were dissolved.

July 28, 1962: The U.S.S.R launches its first successful spy satellite, designated Cosmos 7.

Aug. 27, 1962: Mariner 2 launches and eventually performs the first successful interplanetary flyby when it passes by Venus.

Sept. 29, 1962: Canada's Alouette 1 launches aboard a NASA Thor-Agena B rocket, becoming the first satellite from a country other than the United States or Soviet Union.

June 16, 1963: Valentina Tereshkova becomes the first woman to fly into space.

July 28, 1964: Ranger 7 launches and is the Ranger series' first success, taking photographs of the moon until it crashes into its surface four days later.

April 8, 1964: Gemini 1, a two-seat spacecraft system, launches in an unmanned flight.

Aug. 19, 1964: NASA's Syncom 3 launches aboard a Thor-Delta rocket, becoming the first geostationary telecommunications satellite.

Oct. 12, 1964: The Soviet Union launches Voskhod 1, a modified Vostok orbiter with a three-person crew.

March 18, 1965: Soviet cosmonaut Alexei Leonov makes the first spacewalk from the Voskhod 2 orbiter.

March 23, 1965: Gemini 3, the first of the manned Gemini missions, launches with a two-person crew on a Titan 2 rocket, making astronaut Gus Grissom the first man to travel in space twice.

June 3, 1965: Ed White, during the Gemini 4 mission, becomes the first American to walk in space.

July 14, 1965: Mariner 4 executes the first successful Mars flyby.

Aug. 21, 1965: Gemini 5 launches on an eight-day mission.

Dec. 15, 1965: Gemini 6 launches and performs a rendezvous with Gemini 7.

Jan. 14, 1966: The Soviet Union's chief designer, Sergei Korolev, dies from complications stemming from routine surgery, leaving the Soviet space program without its most influential leader of the preceding 20 years.

Feb. 3, 1966: The unmanned Soviet spacecraft Luna 9 makes the first soft landing on the Moon.

March 1, 1966: The Soviet Union's Venera 3 probe becomes the first spacecraft to land on the planetVenus, but its communications system failed before data could be returned.

March 16, 1966: Gemini 8 launches on a Titan 2 rocket and later docks with a previously launched Agena rocket — the first docking between two orbiting spacecraft.

April 3, 1966: The Soviet Luna 10 space probe enters lunar orbit, becoming the first spacecraft to orbit the Moon.

June 2, 1966: Surveyor 1, a lunar lander, performs the first successful U.S. soft landing on the Moon.

Jan. 27, 1967: All three astronauts for NASA's Apollo 1 mission suffocate from smoke inhalationin a cabin fire during a launch pad test. (remember this putting a lot of things in question)

April 5, 1967: A review board delivers a damning report to NASA Administrator James Webb about problem areas in the Apollo spacecraft. The recommended modifications are completed by Oct. 9, 1968.

April 23, 1967: Soyuz 1 launches but myriad problems surface. The solar panels do not unfold, there are stability problems and the parachute fails to open on descent causing the death of Soviet cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov.

Oct. 11, 1968: Apollo 7, the first manned Apollo mission, launches on a Saturn 1 for an 11-day mission in Earth orbit. The mission also featured the first live TV broadcast of humans in space.

Dec. 21, 1968: Apollo 8 launches on a Saturn V and becomes the first manned mission to orbit the moon.

Jan. 16, 1969: Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5 rendezvous and dock and perform the first in-orbit crew transfer.

March 3, 1969: Apollo 9 launches. During the mission, tests of the lunar module are conducted in Earth orbit.

May 22, 1969: Apollo 10's Lunar Module Snoopy comes within 8.6 miles (14 kilometers) of the moon's surface.

July 20, 1969: Six years after U.S. President John F. Kennedy's assassination, the Apollo 11 crew lands on the Moon, fulfilling his promise to put an American there by the end of the decade and return him safely to Earth.

Heller, for over a decade I rented a condo to engineers working in the space center...and there were some strange birds there. They might work for a few days in a crammed setting hours and hours and then take a few days off. Amazing some of the things that we have been fortunate to have witnessed...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heller
Do you also remember that numerous nazi scientists were crucial in making the mission a success? Without vin Braun, Dahm, etc, it very likely would have never happened. Should we be upset the movie doesn’t mention the Nazi contribution to space exploration?

I certainly wouldn't call German scientists like Wernher von Braun Nazi scientists !


Last Years in Germany

Moving to a new facility in the early 1940s in Peenemünde, a village in northeastern Germany, von Braun worked with Dornberger and the rest of his crew to again successfully launch rockets, as well as develop the supersonic anti-aircraft missile Wasserfall and the ballistic missile A-4. The A-4 became known as the "V-2," meaning "Vengeance Weapon 2." Adolf Hitler soon became interested in using the V-2 for military purposes (Germany had started World War II in 1939 by invading Poland), and when von Braun refused to cooperate with Gestapo Chief Heinrich Himmler's attempted takeover of the V-2 project, he was imprisoned on espionage charges. Not long after, however, Hitler personally released von Braun. Despite never receiving approval from von Braun, German forces deployed the V-2 flying bomb against Britain in 1944.

Working in the United States

In 1945, von Braun—as well as his brother, Magnus, and von Braun's entire rocketry team—surrendered willingly to American troops. Signing a one-year contract with the U.S. Army, von Braun was flown to America, where he eventually became technical director of the U.S. Army Ordnance Guided Missile Project in Alabama in 1952. There, working alongside Dr. William H. Pickering, former director of JPL, and Dr. James A. van Allen, he was an integral part of the team that successfully launched the first American artificial earth satellite, Explorer I on January 31, 1958. Leading the Army's Redstone Arsenal team, von Braun was responsible for the first stage Redstone Juno-I rocket that launched Explorer I. In addition, under his direction, the Jupiter Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM), and the Pershing missile were developed. During this period, Von Braun also become a legal U.S. citizen in 1955.
 
Yet, once again, Neil thought about what his first statement would be and decided to say what he said. If you really think about it, he had left the planet that is home to all people and felt that was reason to include all people.
This doesn’t mean he wasn’t proud to be an American or that he didn’t feel the achievement was one that the US accomplished first.
It seems some folks want to have history remember it solely as an American accomplishment instead of a moment in history that brought the entire planet together, if even for a brief period.

Personally, I feel some folks are trying to find something to be offended by and this is a silly discussion.
So just include his quote along with the actions he performed. You seem to want to interpret his intentions after all these years, and you think that makes it OK to omit what he actually did on camera for all the world to see?
 
I certainly wouldn't call German scientists like Wernher von Braun Nazi scientists !


Last Years in Germany

Moving to a new facility in the early 1940s in Peenemünde, a village in northeastern Germany, von Braun worked with Dornberger and the rest of his crew to again successfully launch rockets, as well as develop the supersonic anti-aircraft missile Wasserfall and the ballistic missile A-4. The A-4 became known as the "V-2," meaning "Vengeance Weapon 2." Adolf Hitler soon became interested in using the V-2 for military purposes (Germany had started World War II in 1939 by invading Poland), and when von Braun refused to cooperate with Gestapo Chief Heinrich Himmler's attempted takeover of the V-2 project, he was imprisoned on espionage charges. Not long after, however, Hitler personally released von Braun. Despite never receiving approval from von Braun, German forces deployed the V-2 flying bomb against Britain in 1944.

Working in the United States

In 1945, von Braun—as well as his brother, Magnus, and von Braun's entire rocketry team—surrendered willingly to American troops. Signing a one-year contract with the U.S. Army, von Braun was flown to America, where he eventually became technical director of the U.S. Army Ordnance Guided Missile Project in Alabama in 1952. There, working alongside Dr. William H. Pickering, former director of JPL, and Dr. James A. van Allen, he was an integral part of the team that successfully launched the first American artificial earth satellite, Explorer I on January 31, 1958. Leading the Army's Redstone Arsenal team, von Braun was responsible for the first stage Redstone Juno-I rocket that launched Explorer I. In addition, under his direction, the Jupiter Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM), and the Pershing missile were developed. During this period, Von Braun also become a legal U.S. citizen in 1955.
I let the Nazi part go...already put too much time into this trying to explain things... ;)
 
I certainly wouldn't call German scientists like Wernher von Braun Nazi scientists !

“Von Braun was a member of the Nazi Party and an SS officer, yet was also arrested by the Gestapo in 1944 for careless remarks he made about the war and the rocket. His responsibility for the crimes connected to rocket production is controversial.”

Last Years in Germany

Moving to a new facility in the early 1940s in Peenemünde, a village in northeastern Germany, von Braun worked with Dornberger and the rest of his crew to again successfully launch rockets, as well as develop the supersonic anti-aircraft missile Wasserfall and the ballistic missile A-4. The A-4 became known as the "V-2," meaning "Vengeance Weapon 2." Adolf Hitler soon became interested in using the V-2 for military purposes (Germany had started World War II in 1939 by invading Poland), and when von Braun refused to cooperate with Gestapo Chief Heinrich Himmler's attempted takeover of the V-2 project, he was imprisoned on espionage charges. Not long after, however, Hitler personally released von Braun. Despite never receiving approval from von Braun, German forces deployed the V-2 flying bomb against Britain in 1944.

Working in the United States

In 1945, von Braun—as well as his brother, Magnus, and von Braun's entire rocketry team—surrendered willingly to American troops. Signing a one-year contract with the U.S. Army, von Braun was flown to America, where he eventually became technical director of the U.S. Army Ordnance Guided Missile Project in Alabama in 1952. There, working alongside Dr. William H. Pickering, former director of JPL, and Dr. James A. van Allen, he was an integral part of the team that successfully launched the first American artificial earth satellite, Explorer I on January 31, 1958. Leading the Army's Redstone Arsenal team, von Braun was responsible for the first stage Redstone Juno-I rocket that launched Explorer I. In addition, under his direction, the Jupiter Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM), and the Pershing missile were developed. During this period, Von Braun also become a legal U.S. citizen in 1955.
I let the Nazi part go...already put too much time into this trying to explain things... ;)
According to NASA, he was a Nazi and member of the SS. I guess you were probably there ana know better, huh?

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/history/vonbraun/bio.html
 
According to NASA, he was a Nazi and member of the SS. I guess you were probably there ana know better, huh?

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/history/vonbraun/bio.html
don't stop there...many popes were nazi too ;) https://abcnews.go.com/Internationa...hievements-jewish-relations/story?id=18469350 Look at all the people today acclaimed to be a nazi as well. Use the net and you will find lots of nazi's everywhere...probably mostly in the USA...

The free will to choose to be a nazi ran strong back then...
 
No matter what you believe about these men being Nazis, one can not deny that the moon landing wouldn’t have happened without these German men.
 
100% a
No matter what you believe about these men being Nazis, one can not deny that the moon landing wouldn’t have happened without these German men.
100% agreement with that! AS my dad used to say "WE" got the best scientists from Germany...not Russia. Even today many people that have achieved higher science standards in the USA are people that "chose" to come to the USA. However, had the movie been made for China...the worldly accomplishment view would be appropriate for China. The movie being produced for the USA missed the mark IMO. Make no mistake, the polytech approach from Germany was a huge help in science advancement in spite of the Frankfurt Schools being blamed for social issues...
 
They are just trying to stir the pot, and create controversy, so all the whiny college liberals will go watch. Won't get any money from me.
 
They are just trying to stir the pot, and create controversy, so all the whiny college liberals will go watch. Won't get any money from me.
Honestly the only media talking about this is the "right wing" media, so I'm confused why their motive would be to get more liberals to go see the movie.

I'm with lbodel on this. None of us have seen the movie. We've only heard a bunch of controversy raised based on one quote by an actor on a promotional tour and then subsequent quotes from Neil's family and actual reviewers who've said the movie is very patriotic, the flag is seen repeatedly, and it glorifies the accomplishments of all NASA employees, even the former SS officer. JFK pledged to put a man on the moon and bring him safely back by 1969 (I've seen zero quotes where JFK mentioned the culmination of that goal would be planting a flag). That pledge is shown being fulfilled in this movie. I'm looking forward to it because I'm proud of my country and my fellow Boiler.
 
  • Like
Reactions: proudopete
100% a

100% agreement with that! AS my dad used to say "WE" got the best scientists from Germany...not Russia. Even today many people that have achieved higher science standards in the USA are people that "chose" to come to the USA. However, had the movie been made for China...the worldly accomplishment view would be appropriate for China. The movie being produced for the USA missed the mark IMO. Make no mistake, the polytech approach from Germany was a huge help in science advancement in spite of the Frankfurt Schools being blamed for social issues...
Glad we could come to an agreement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tjreese
Honestly the only media talking about this is the "right wing" media, so I'm confused why their motive would be to get more liberals to go see the movie.

I'm with lbodel on this. None of us have seen the movie. We've only heard a bunch of controversy raised based on one quote by an actor on a promotional tour and then subsequent quotes from Neil's family and actual reviewers who've said the movie is very patriotic, the flag is seen repeatedly, and it glorifies the accomplishments of all NASA employees, even the former SS officer. JFK pledged to put a man on the moon and bring him safely back by 1969 (I've seen zero quotes where JFK mentioned the culmination of that goal would be planting a flag). That pledge is shown being fulfilled in this movie. I'm looking forward to it because I'm proud of my country and my fellow Boiler.
I don't find it hard to understand that this movie for some is viewed patriotic and unpatriotic for others. What does baffle me is why seeing the movie in your eyes and a couple of others is necessary to form a judgement on the planting of the flag? My conclusion, perhaps in error...is that you never actually lived the experience and therefore don't share the same understandings as the others obviously old enough to have lived it first hand. Age doesn't make you wrong, but it might answer what appears to be a line of demarcation. Does that seem reasonable or did you really watch it live as well as the lead up to it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BoilerAndy
I'm old enough to remember the landing and lunar walk and don't think that I will be offended by the absence of a view of the flag plant. I really don't see it as a major issue. Would I have put it in, probably so, but I don't think it is imperative in telling the story of the man.
I certainly would need to at least see the movie before I would condemn it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BoilerBulldog
I'm old enough to remember the landing and lunar walk and don't think that I will be offended by the absence of a view of the flag plant. I really don't see it as a major issue. Would I have put it in, probably so, but I don't think it is imperative in telling the story of the man.
I certainly would need to at least see the movie before I would condemn it.
Good. I'm glad you replied...seeing THAT 70boiler moniker. I can understand how people may not be offended. What it appeared was a divide between ages. I think it was a mistake to not show it and that doesn't mean that someone couldn't see the movie and have pride in what the USA did.

It seems to me that those not old enough to have acutally lived it would gather no understanding to see a movie that omits it in order to understand the importance of it being in it? To shorten Rummy's quote....It is the things we don't know that we don't know that many times comes back to bite us...paraphrased quite a bit... ;)

To move past this thing being offensive or not and only dwelling on this "thing" as to the "mother lode" of the event, consider the following historical events. Even as far back as the Civil War the flag carrier had a life expectancy of about a minute or so in battle and yet people chose to carry the flag knowing it was a death sentence for them. THAT person was a TARGET for all since the flag was the visual guide of what was going on for the commanders away from the lines of battle...not a huge understanding to this, but just another tie of humanity to each flag. What I do think is important are the comparisons to Iwo Jima which I already went into previously. Make no mistake...this battle was between USSR and the USA, a problem General Patton saw at teh end of WWII. This had nothing to do with Japan, China, Germany, France or any other countries. This was a battle between only those two countries.

Locked into this time line are the memories of Khrushchev along the lines of the perception of the USSR being ahead of the USA in the space race that only had dogs and monkeys to date. The nuclear arms race was about the USSR and the USA...not any other country...and the Cuban crisis was about those USSR missles 90 miles away aimed at the USA. Vietnam and the dominoe theory was teh concern of spreading communism and NATO was established to "protect" those countries from the USSR primarily. The USSR was the big bear that was the ONLY super power besides the USA and the battles on MANY fronts were with teh USSR. Even the Olympic battles...although more civil between countries, found the USSR and the USA comparing medal counts...as that was the battle for "superiority" on the world stage. There, and even today, we find the "flag" being hoisted with the music blaring symbolic of the "winner"...as was teh USA wiht the space race. Anyway, I always like to understand teh thought processes of others and appreciate you being older giving your take. I think omission of the flag planting is missing a HUGE moment frmo a historical perspective and have listed many reasons why I hold that view to provide substance behind that view. Obviously others unaware or just havingdiffering views exist..quite possibly more patriotic than me? Again, thank you for your opinion on the subject since you actually lived during the times I just mentioned. My thoughts through many examples are quite clear...I think the omission of this "crowning" misses a huge part of the meaning at the time, but always appreciate trying to understand why people hold views they do on what they do...again, thanks...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 70boiler
I don't find it hard to understand that this movie for some is viewed patriotic and unpatriotic for others. What does baffle me is why seeing the movie in your eyes and a couple of others is necessary to form a judgement on the planting of the flag? My conclusion, perhaps in error...is that you never actually lived the experience and therefore don't share the same understandings as the others obviously old enough to have lived it first hand. Age doesn't make you wrong, but it might answer what appears to be a line of demarcation. Does that seem reasonable or did you really watch it live as well as the lead up to it?
You're right, I didn't see it live. So maybe there's something I'm missing. I just can't reconcile how a movie full of American flags, including the one planted on the moon, suddenly becomes unpatriotic because we are left to infer how that flag got planted there. And I'm concerned how many people have suddenly formed strong opinions on this movie based on how various media have portrayed based on one quote from an actor on a promotional tour. This country just looks around every day to find things to be outraged over, always through the lens of their own political biases, and nearly always at the "expense" of those on the other side of the political aisle. When we start deeming others less patriotic than ourselves, we head down a path that continually vilifies anyone who doesn't vote like me. And I fail to see how that's beneficial to our society and to our future.
 
You're right, I didn't see it live. So maybe there's something I'm missing. I just can't reconcile how a movie full of American flags, including the one planted on the moon, suddenly becomes unpatriotic because we are left to infer how that flag got planted there. And I'm concerned how many people have suddenly formed strong opinions on this movie based on how various media have portrayed based on one quote from an actor on a promotional tour. This country just looks around every day to find things to be outraged over, always through the lens of their own political biases, and nearly always at the "expense" of those on the other side of the political aisle. When we start deeming others less patriotic than ourselves, we head down a path that continually vilifies anyone who doesn't vote like me. And I fail to see how that's beneficial to our society and to our future.
read on to my comments to 70Boiler...perhaps my view is clearer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BoilerBulldog
Good. I'm glad you replied...seeing THAT 70boiler moniker. I can understand how people may not be offended. What it appeared was a divide between ages. I think it was a mistake to not show it and that doesn't mean that someone couldn't see the movie and have pride in what the USA did.

It seems to me that those not old enough to have acutally lived it would gather no understanding to see a movie that omits it in order to understand the importance of it being in it? To shorten Rummy's quote....It is the things we don't know that we don't know that many times comes back to bite us...paraphrased quite a bit... ;)

To move past this thing being offensive or not and only dwelling on this "thing" as to the "mother lode" of the event, consider the following historical events. Even as far back as the Civil War the flag carrier had a life expectancy of about a minute or so in battle and yet people chose to carry the flag knowing it was a death sentence for them. THAT person was a TARGET for all since the flag was the visual guide of what was going on for the commanders away from the lines of battle...not a huge understanding to this, but just another tie of humanity to each flag. What I do think is important are the comparisons to Iwo Jima which I already went into previously. Make no mistake...this battle was between USSR and the USA, a problem General Patton saw at teh end of WWII. This had nothing to do with Japan, China, Germany, France or any other countries. This was a battle between only those two countries.

Locked into this time line are the memories of Khrushchev along the lines of the perception of the USSR being ahead of the USA in the space race that only had dogs and monkeys to date. The nuclear arms race was about the USSR and the USA...not any other country...and the Cuban crisis was about those USSR missles 90 miles away aimed at the USA. Vietnam and the dominoe theory was teh concern of spreading communism and NATO was established to "protect" those countries from the USSR primarily. The USSR was the big bear that was the ONLY super power besides the USA and the battles on MANY fronts were with teh USSR. Even the Olympic battles...although more civil between countries, found the USSR and the USA comparing medal counts...as that was the battle for "superiority" on the world stage. There, and even today, we find the "flag" being hoisted with the music blaring symbolic of the "winner"...as was teh USA wiht the space race. Anyway, I always like to understand teh thought processes of others and appreciate you being older giving your take. I think omission of the flag planting is missing a HUGE moment frmo a historical perspective and have listed many reasons why I hold that view to provide substance behind that view. Obviously others unaware or just havingdiffering views exist..quite possibly more patriotic than me? Again, thank you for your opinion on the subject since you actually lived during the times I just mentioned. My thoughts through many examples are quite clear...I think the omission of this "crowning" misses a huge part of the meaning at the time, but always appreciate trying to understand why people hold views they do on what they do...again, thanks...
I suspect part of my lack of concern, for want of better phraseology, is that the view of the flag planting is so iconic and widely publicized and available that it would surprise me that many, if any, viewers of the movie were unaware and had not seen it. Perhaps I am too believing, lol, particularly since I often lament the loss of historical perspective and awareness by Americans today.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT