Apollo 13 Movie

[ddom2006]

I finally got around to buying and watching the Apollo 13 movie a few weeks back, I thought it was rather excellently done myself and was a touch puzzled why some criticize it. How realistic was the Apollo 13 movie? I presume they cut alot of the actual mission out and just covered the main events in typical movie dramatic fashion, but as for the technical detail...?

 

[Izack]

It's pretty much the most realistic space film you'll ever see. :thumbup:
AFAIK the only major physics error was the wind ambiance in the space scenes, but that was done for dramatic effect and not out of misunderstanding.

 

[Kevon Daye]

Also, apparently there were a few scenes that didn't actually happen (such as the argument between Lovell and Swigert over Swigert stirring the O2 tanks), that were added for dramatic effect.

 

[Izack]

Also, apparently there were a few scenes that didn't actually happen (such as the argument between Lovell and Swigert over Swigert stirring the O2 tanks), that were added for dramatic effect.

Yes, there were historical inaccuracies. For instance, Ms. Lovell did not lose her ring when she dropped it in the shower, and the guy who thought up the impromptu filter did so in his car on the drive over, which is less epic than what happened in the film. These are just things I remember offhand. I'm sure there are other things, too.

 

[Salun]

GET OUT OF MY BRAIN! >:O(Was watching it while riding the forums!)

 

[Alexw95]

All the scenes in space were filmed on the vomet comet also

 

[Izack]

All the scenes in space were filmed on the vomet comet also

Yes. They pulled out all the stops for this one.

 

[ddom2006]

All the scenes in space were filmed on the vomet comet also

Did they have a set for the Apollo Command Module + Re-entry module or was the filming done for that on the vomit comit as well? I Feel a little sorry for the actors having to spend so much time in the vomit comet :lol:

 

[Andy44]

Well, of course there were some inaccuracies, some more glaring than others.

The only one that really bugs me is the course correction burn scene, when the external shot of the vehicle shows in the wrong attitude.

Aside from that, there's not much to dislike, except maybe that Ron Howard sold out on sound in vacuum.

---------- Post added at 12:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:08 AM ----------

Did they have a set for the Apollo Command Module + Re-entry module or was the filming done for that on the vomit comit as well? I Feel a little sorry for the actors having to spend so much time in the vomit comet :lol:

They had an interior set on board the aircraft for those scenes, AFAIK. Must have been Puke City.

 

[Urwumpe]

Yes, there were historical inaccuracies. For instance, Ms. Lovell did not lose her ring when she dropped it in the shower, and the guy who thought up the impromptu filter did so in his car on the drive over, which is less epic than what happened in the film. These are just things I remember offhand. I'm sure there are other things, too.

More important, Ken Mattingly is teetotaler and was not the only one working on the rescue plan, and Jack Swigert was not the clueless rookie that the movie made him, in reality he was THE NASA astronaut expert for emergency situations, and higher qualified than Mattingly.

 

[Xyon]

Damn spooky, I just watched this film again today...

 

[garyw]

The only one that really bugs me is the course correction burn scene, when the external shot of the vehicle shows in the wrong attitude.

That didn't bother me. There were several bits that got me:

The scene where Swigert is about to dock to CSM to the LM and someone says "If he can't park this we don't have a mission". Both Lovell and Haise could dock the CSM if Swigert had problems. It would not be an end of mission.

Using Mattingly in the Sim to work out the power up sequence was fine but there were many others involved, it wasn't just Mattingly and John Aarron.

Finally, in the real world Swigert was the perfect CMP for Apollo 13 because he knew more about the backup systems than most other CMP's. It was one of his specialisms so he was far from the Rookie that the movie painted him as.

 

[golden_eye]

Yes, there were historical inaccuracies. For instance, Ms. Lovell did not lose her ring when she dropped it in the shower, and the guy who thought up the impromptu filter did so in his car on the drive over, which is less epic than what happened in the film. These are just things I remember offhand. I'm sure there are other things, too.

Last time I watched the special features, I remember Mrs. Lovell herself saying that she actually did lose her ring in the shower and that it wasn't some cheesy Hollywood scene they made up. Overall I thought the movie was well-done though and really cool that they were able to use the vomit comet for filming.

 

[Izack]

Last time I watched the special features, I remember Mrs. Lovell herself saying that she actually did lose her ring in the shower and that it wasn't some cheesy Hollywood scene they made up.

She did drop the ring, but it was too big to slip through the filter in the drain, AFAIK.

Thanks Gary and Urwumpe for pointing out Swigert's qualifications. I had no idea. :blink:

 

[Moach]

the vomit comet is a hands-out WIN in my opinion...


they could just as easily hookup some fake stuff with strings and CGI... but no, they chose AWESOME!

and if you watch the credits to the end, there's mention of a KC-135 crew, (is that not a tanker?) which i guess is the proverbial "comet"

 

[Kyle]

Yes, there were historical inaccuracies. For instance, Ms. Lovell did not lose her ring when she dropped it in the shower

Actually no, the real Jim Lovell and her stated in the DVD I believe that she did loose her wedding ring down the drain, but she was able to get it back.

 

[garyw]

KC-135 crew, (is that not a tanker?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KC-135_Stratotanker

 

[AirSimming]

It is also interesting to watch the entire movie with audio commentary from Jim Lovell and his wife! He tells all along what was done quite correctly and what was different in reality. As the Apollo instrument panel guru, one thing I especially noticed: in at least one shot they put the left hand side panels within the Crew Module together wrongly. And one thing I guess almost everybody here noticed without to hear or to read it: Jim Lovell plays the captain of the Ship in the final scene, when he welcomes the crew onboard after recovery. I guess I've seen the movie about 30 times since 1995, which includes at least 5 times with audio commentary from Lovell and his wife. But these days I love "In the Shadow of the Moon" and "When we left Earth" much more (also seen countless times meanwhile).

As for the vomet comet: no need fo feel sorry, at leat not for the actors. Especially Kevin Bacon really loved to float around. In interviews back then he was just as excited as a kid talking about rollercoaster rides. Also Tom Hanks and Bill Paxton loved it. But as far as I know, some of the film crew members indeed didn't like it in the beginning. It was reported that the cameraman lost his stomach contents once :lol: I have a nice making-of somewhere on an old VHS cassette.

By the way, it was a nice idea to invite Jim Lovell to Tom Hanks life achievement award:

 

[Loru]

"Gentelmen. It was a privilage flying with you."
"Failure is not an option"

2 best lines in entire movie IMHO.

ps I love this movie.

 

[Columbia42]

"Gentelmen. It was a privilage flying with you."
"Failure is not an option"

2 best lines in entire movie.

What about "Houston, we have a problem?"

As for the realism of Apollo 13, it is my opinion that you won't find a more realistic space movie anywhere except for From the Earth to the Moon. Interestingly, both of these movies had David Scott (Pilot Gemini 8, CMP Apollo 9, and CDR Apollo 15) as their technical adviser. This was largely because Tom Hanks and David Scott were good friends and both of these movies were done by Tom Hanks.

P.S. Apollo 13 is probably my favorite movie ever!