
Neil Armstrong Remembered - smacktoward
https://ceas.uc.edu/about/neil-armstrong-remembered.html
======
Animats
For most of the early astronauts, later life was one big letdown.

For most of the later astronauts, later life was one big layoff. NASA had
about 140 astronauts at the peak of the Shuttle program. They now have about
40, and no manned space capability. Maybe next year, when Space-X launches.

------
ambicapter
I was a bit disappointed recently watching First Man. I get that Neil was a
private person, but it was a little too over-dramatic (towards his personal
life, not the space program) in my opinion. It seemed like an extrovert's wild
speculation as to what's going on in an introvert's head. I think he was just
a stoic, analytical type, which doesn't mean you need to be completely
incapable of communicating emotionally with your kids or SO.

~~~
slg
It seems like Armstrong just isn't that interesting of a movie character.
There is nothing wrong with that and isn't meant to take anything away from
his accomplishments. No one lives their life with a goal that their biopic
will be interesting. It just makes me wonder why this movie needed to exist in
the first place. There are plenty of better stories to tell about the space
program if you are determined to make a movie about that.

~~~
quickthrower2
Didn't he punch someone who said the moon landing was fake? Or is that
something I dreamed up?

~~~
ChristianGeek
It was Buzz Aldrin...you can find it on YouTube. The guy deserved it!

~~~
tabtab
Buzz taking on the Troll Posse, now _there 's_ a movie!

------
th3o6a1d
This site mis-quotes him. It's "one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for
mankind."

~~~
dagw
Isn't the story that the script he was given was to say "one small step for a
man", but on the day he flubbed his line and actually did say "one small step
for man"

~~~
justin66
He wrote those words himself, and he's always claimed that he actually said
"a" and the mic didn't pick it up.

It's been the subject of some technical analysis over the years:
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8081817.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8081817.stm)

NASA trusted those guys enough to give them carte blanche with stuff like
that, which is why Pete Conrad said "Whoopie! Man, that may have been a small
one for Neil, but that's a long one for me" in order to win a bet (and because
it was funny).

------
ChristianGeek
Thanks for posting this; the comments/memories at the end of the article are
pure gold!

------
the_reformation
This has turned into a discussion about First Man rather than the article, so
I may as well contribute:

I think Damien Chazelle intended to frame the movie as a war movie, even
toeing towards a parallel between the Apollo missions and the Vietnam War. The
idea that we actively gambled with these men's lives, somehow collectively
desensitized ourselves to human loss, that we are all boys pretending to have
protocol- obvious parallels to war, in that a bureaucratic borg overlooks
human lives in a competition the borg itself created.

But the thing is- its pretty hard to not lean into the inherent heroism of
landing on the moon, especially since the studio clearly gave Chazelle a blank
check to recreate the moon landing as immaculately as possible.

So its a little hard to parse the final message. The movie is the inverse of
Apollo 13, pessimistic where 13 is optimistic, even though First Man is about
the successful one. To some extent, Mission Control are the villains in this
movie.

It isn't not going be a loved movie, like his last two (Whiplash and La La
Land.) The characters are constantly aware of their mortal peril, which in
turn makes them coarse and hard to like. But its such an interesting take on
the Moon missions.

