FlyMeToTheMoon Tagged Articles at Cinematical

Sitting next to my father in a crowded station wagon on the evening of July 20, 1969, I listened to the radio as we drove and stared up into the heavens. Man had landed on the moon, and soon we would all be exploring the universe, just like they did on Forbidden Planet and Star Trek. Things haven't quite worked out that way, so, instead, I've turned to the movies to fulfill my deep space fantasies.

George Melies made the very first sci-fi flick in 1902, A Trip to the Moon, which lasted all of 14 minutes. Interest picked up in the post WWII-era with George Pal's production of Destination Moon; the 1950s were a golden age for science fiction films. Stanley Kubrick's classic 2001: A Space Odyssey put the moon in a whole new light. After Neil Armstrong set his foot down 40 years ago, real life footage replaced all the fictional creations. (Of course, some folks believe the Moon landing itself was faked, leading to a fake Mars mission in Peter Hyams' Capricorn One.) Things were quiet until Ron Howard's Apollo 13, in which the astronauts never even got to touch down. Bringing us up to date, Duncan Jones' highly-acclaimed Moon is now playing in selected engagements.

To celebrate the 40th anniversary of the moon landing, please take our poll and tell us: What are your favorite movies about the moon? We've listed ten, but you're free to vote for "Other" and state your case in the comments section.

Trailers are taking to the air this week as we discuss five previews that make me think of flying.

Up
This is a real quick little teaser but it makes me smile every time I watch it, and I'm pretty certain that's Ed Asner voicing the single word used. I suspect this brief bit of film will not even end up in the final flick, but it's already sold me through its ability to be charming as hell. This is Pixar's tenth animated feature, though not having seen Wall-E yet I'm starting to fall behind. In addition to Asner the voice cast includes Christopher Plummer and Pixar mainstay John Ratzenberger, and is described as "a 'coming of old age' story," in which "a seventysomething hero, alongside his clueless wilderness ranger sidekick, travels the globe, fighting beasts and villains, and eating dinner at 3:30 in the afternoon."

Fireflies in the Garden
If Willem Defoe were my father and he was half as crazed as he looks here I'd be pretty screwed up too. This is a semi-autobiographical feature from director Dennis Lee and deals with a family trying to deal with an unexpected tragedy. Defoe plays the father and presumably the source of much of the dysfunction and Ryan Reynolds is the son publishing his memoirs and stirring up the muck. Julia Roberts is there too, along with Carrie-Anne Moss and Hayden Panetierre. The trailer comes off as fascinating but grim, so if you're looking for the feel good movie of the year you should probably look elsewhere. Here's what Eugene thought.

As an opinionated cinephile, Roger Ebert has every right to dislike 3-D movies. And recently, on his blog, Roger Ebert's Journal, he wrote about such disfavor. Basically, in response to accidentally missing the press screening for the new animated 3-D flick Fly Me to the Moon, he admits that, because of a certain prejudice against the format, he likely wouldn't have enjoyed the movie anyway.

My issue here is not to attack Ebert's opinion or his belief that after half a century of dissatisfaction with the format he's never going to change his mind about it. He's free to express both. And while I disagree and am disappointed, I would never claim that Ebert doesn't know what he's talking about. He's certainly smarter about film than I'll ever be, and his opinions are far more respected than my own.

However, Ebert is also one of the most widely read film critics in the world, and therefore he is a pretty influential person when it comes to the subject of movies. And I would hate for moviegoers to dismiss the new wave of 3-D movies simply because of Ebert's stance on the format. So, I merely intend to respond to his opinion with an opinion of my own, as apparently one of the wider read gushers on the topic of digital 3-D.

In a weekend glutted with new releases battling the aftershocks of The Dark Knight earthquake, Tropic Thunder debuted below expectations -- but well enough to steal the top spot from The Dark Knight in that film's 5th weekend. The R-rated comedy's $26 million weekend and $37 million 5-day was roughly on par with Pineapple Express' performance the previous weekend, but I think Tropic Thunder was predicted to have broader appeal. In retrospect, the advertising may have emphasized the film's inside-baseball aspects a bit too much.

Star Wars: The Clone Wars did okay in third place with $15 million -- weak for a purported Star Wars film, but not bad for a Saturday morning cartoon. The woeful Mirrors took in a relatively paltry $11 million, a wuss-out signaled by the 11th hour press screening cancellation. Contrast The Strangers, the summer's other major R-rated, non-Shyamalan horror film, which debuted to almost twice as much despite not having as nifty a high-concept.

The Dark Knight, meanwhile, continues to edge toward $500 million. Its 5-weekend total stands at $471 million, enough to top Star Wars' unadjusted numbers. Titanic still looks out of reach, even setting aside the apples-and-oranges aspect of comparing a 1997 release to a 2008 one.

Pineapple Express fell 57% in its second weekend, putting $100 million out of reach. On the other hand, Mamma Mia! continues to be popular, suffering drops of around 20% each week thanks to good word-of-mouth and likely repeat viewings.

Woody Allen's Vicky Cristina Barcelona came in at #10, with $3.7 million on 700 screens, Woody's second-best opening ever. Two spots below that, the poorly-reviewed 3-D spectacle Fly Me to the Moon made $2 million on 450 screens.

The full estimates after the jump.

With Toy Story (1995), a studio called Pixar blew the lid off of animated movies as we knew them. Thirteen years later, the other studios have yet to even approach that early level of excellence, let alone match the advancements Pixar has made since. Oddly similar to the most recent clunker Space Chimps, the new Fly Me to the Moon looked infinitely more promising in that it was based on an actual idea: the 1969 Apollo 11 mission as seen through the eyes of three stowaway flies -- in 3D! But sadly it proves itself as technically dull and as creatively stifled as Space Chimps as well as nearly every other non-Pixar movie.

After a totally useless, noisy black-and-white prologue, we get a very cool establishing shot. The camera flows smoothly through the back lots behind Cape Canaveral in Florida. It swoops into a patch of dirt and a tangle of weeds, through some bits of discarded junk, to the world where our little flies live (like humans, in little dollhouses). During this and other traveling sequences, the 3D works beautifully, engulfing us comfortably in this tiny world. But as soon as we meet the characters, the movie starts to sputter. In real life, houseflies can zip across the kitchen pretty darn fast relative to their size, but these flies drift lethargically from place to place, and the movie bogs down in their lackadaisical pace.