This is incredible and wonderful news, huge congratulations! As someone who works at the intersection of design and engineering, the detail about delivering "starless versions" so the credit typography doesn't compete with the bright stars is exactly the kind of invisible technical problem-solving I love reading about on here.
On a personal note, I find it very refreshing to hear that a major studio opted for real captured photography. Love that they specifically wanted the authenticity of real narrowband data and that speaks to the production team's vision. Enjoy the premiere night, feel incredibly proud. I was already planning on watching the movie this weekend (it releases here on the 26th) and now I'm doubly excited because I know this neat little tidbit.
I'm pretty sure this "Dad did something crazy" moment is going to be a core memory for your kids. Congrats!
I'm curious how the starless versions are created. From the steps at the end, I couldn't see a 'this is how stars are removed' step. Maybe it's part of stacking (but most stars would remain present?) or the calibration process treating stars as noise?
I feel like the stars are probably pretty easy to mask out since they’re very bright relative to the rest of the image. Once you have the mask, each one is small enough that you could probably fill it with the values from adjacent pixels. Kinda like sensor mapping to hide dead pixels. That’s just a guess though, I’m sure there’s more to it than that.
Bright stars are so bright they literally mask areas of the sky. You'll probably need deconvolution algorithms (CLEAN being the standard some time ago, don't know whether some AI/deep-inv approach works nowadays...) to remove them.
Somewhat related, nature photographer/youtuber Danni Connor had her recording of a red squirrel used in the movie Dune (Part 1) for the sound of the desert mouse (muad'dib). Her interviewing with (Oscar-winning) sound designer Mark Mangini on it:
Incredible work, OP. What a proud feeling you must have. Congrats!!
My wife and I saw the movie this weekend, we thought it was great. I adored the book, yet I recognize a book can’t be perfectly translated to the screen.
I thought the directors did a good enough job at translating the sci-fi into something the masses would enjoy.
Both are wonderful. I thought the movie was an excellent adaptation of the book.
But I am glad I read the book first, I got much more out of it - it goes a lot more in depth into the science and engineering challenges that occur throughout. Which I appreciated. I'm not sure I would have read the book in the same way if I had seen the movie first.
As a general rule, always read the book first. In this case, that holds true - there was too much in the book to cover completely in the movie. It's a pretty quick read as well - you could probably bang it out in a long afternoon, if you were inclined.
That said, I never read Harry Potter and can't imagine going back and reading it now. So, YMMV.
I don’t think it does here. This has been one of the times where I enjoyed the movie more than the book. I liked the character in the book, in the movie I couldn’t take my eyes off them.
Not the parent, but I've seen the movie and read the book. I think there are a few gaps in the movie that's explained by the book, but there are some artistic freedom as well between the book and the film.
I would recommend reading the book first at least.
I found that I would have enjoyed the movie a bit more if I hadn't read the book, but it was still a solid 8/10. I'm really glad that a movie like this did well in opening weekend.
Amazing! Kudos to Hollywood, for going to this length to license the work, credit the author, involve him in the project. To respect realism as a goal for its own, even though "no one will notice" and a similar image might be "just a prompt away." I know how common is the latter these days.
About to see the movie in two days, read the book ages ago and remember I wasn't too fond of the book ending either, so now I got a bit more excited :)
As an amateur astrophotographer, I am both so envious and so happy for you. What a wonderful recognition of your talent and dedication to the craft. Kudos!
Those shots are stunning. Too bad I rarely pay attention to the credits. I always assumed a lot of effort goes into them though, and this post seems to confirm it.
Dont waste your money. Terrible movie. Demeanor oscillates between unfunny jokes at adolescent or bro style like in Deadpool level...or even worst, child level Disney interactions. Directors dont understand SciFi and clearly dont like Scifi.
Ryan Gosling is no actor capable of carrying a movie by himself, and visually there is nothing worth of IMAX. You will get more wonders in a regular made for TV Andor or Star Trek episode.
Despite 12 posts here in the last few days, (nice try Amazon), one thing continues to be true: Almost anything from Amazon Studios is shite. It is amazing the level of reviews they managed to pull off on IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes.
Just download the torrent and you will see there is nothing here...and you will thank me for the time and money saved.
OP, who seem like an accomplished astrophotographer is sharing a proud moment involving his work. All you can say is how bad the movie is? You can share this in on a post about the movie itself.
Btw beautiful photographs OP.
I don't see any reason to suggest the HN submitter is the same as the article author, especially considering the high volume of submitted articles by the submitter.
Its seems the post is part of a coordinated pump on the movie here by Amazon Studios. As you can see, if you look at the amount of related post coordinated with the release. And never seen for any other movie...
People have been talking about the book on here since it came out; I see no reason to believe people aren't genuinely interested in it. I loved it, personally.
I do not deny that people enjoy it. I am saying that the film humor, dialogue, and emotional treatment strike me as pitched at a comparatively childish level.... ;-)
Why are some people so narrow minded? Different style, get over it. Not everything SciFi must be "true scifi like Star Trek". This rant reminds me of Big Bang theory.
Star Trek is true scifi? I always considered it to be soft scifi due to it being more about social issues in space rather than the more hard scifi about the fictional science. At least the book of Project Hail Mary is closer to hard scifi than Star Trek as they spend a lot of time describing the science. The movie rightfully skips most of this tedium in favor of a beautiful spectacle.
This is the first time I've heard of the idea of "true" scifi though.
> Consider the possibility that your opinions are not universal.
Critic and audience reactions are generally positive:
> On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, 94% of 326 critics' reviews are positive. The website's consensus reads: "A visually dazzling space odyssey that's carried along effortlessly by the gravitational pull of Ryan Gosling at his most winning, Project Hail Mary is a near-miraculous fusion of smarts and heart."[47] Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned the film a score of 77 out of 100, based on 55 critics, indicating "generally favorable" reviews.[48] Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "A" on an A+ to F scale.[49]
Did you watch the movie? Those reviews are manipulated...
Do you believe in the concept of objectivity? Meaning some movies are Objectively better than others, some Reviews are Objectively better than other?
If I bring a bunch of kids and teens to the movie, and at the end they all cant stop talking about how much they loved the rock, should I give an Oscar to Ryan Gosling?
> Do you believe in the concept of objectivity? Meaning some movies are Objectively better than others, some Reviews are Objectively better than other?
In this context? Absolutely not. One person's favorite movie is another's least.
> If I bring a bunch of kids and teens to the movie, and at the end they all cant stop talking about how much they loved the rock, should I give an Oscar to Ryan Gosling?
sort by worst review and you will see the comments and reviews make a lot of sense...If you believe like some of commentators this is a 10/10 movie, you also probably believe these reviews are not manipulated...
>> This is about the worst methodology you could possibly use here.
By the contrary. It is the absolutely best methodology. I am surprised you cant see why.
You should do the same for hotel reviews or amazon products. Its about the CONTENT and nature of the bad review. The best way to judge a movie, hotel, or product is often to read the negative reviews first, because negative reviews reveal the failure modes. A positive review just usually tells you what worked for someone. A negative review tells you what can go wrong, and whether that problem matters to you.
You should always start with the worst reviews because they reveal the real weaknesses. Then you judge whether the criticism comes from an unreasonable person or from somebody thoughtful and fair. If the negative reviewer is intelligent, specific, and or balanced, that review is often more valuable than ten positive ones, because it shows the actual risks and not just the hype.
Use it for movies, books, hotels and amazon products...
I don’t even know what to say here -- you’re entitled to your opinion obviously, and I disagree with it deeply, and the spirit of HN is to avoid personal attacks and reply with curiosity, but you kinda laid it out very plainly above. Where’s your imagination gone? Your connection to child-like wonder? Empathy for your fellow man?
Project Hail Mary isn’t Arrival, it’s ET mixed with Castaway. It’s about friendship and loneliness and the fragility of the human experience and the triumph of the human spirit!
Normally I’d just say “you didn’t get it, it wasn’t for you” but given the insufferable and total dismissal above, I’d wager it actually IS for you LOL but you chose not to receive the message.
Anyways, everybody’s a critic these days, I get that. I’d just encourage people to soften a bit and appreciate things for what they are (not what we want them to be)
>> It’s about friendship and loneliness and the fragility of the human experience and the triumph of the human spirit!
So is every Disney movie and that is what this but with the crappy Amazon Studios take on it.
>> Anyways, everybody’s a critic these days,
Do you believe a movie can objectively be considered good or bad? If you do you then believe some are better critics than others, the same some way some are better Coders than others or better Basketball players than others?
You're asking the wrong person lol. I can give you a list of "objectively bad" movies that I think are incredible for a variety of defensible reasons.
Just off the top of my head as I briefly scan shit sitting on the shelves of my office:
- Joe Dirt
- Death Wish 3
- Thrashin
- Hackers
- Mortal Kombat
- Uncle Buck
- The Incredible Burt Wonderstone
- Tapeheads
- Prayer of the Rollerboys
- Weekend at Bernie's
Not exactly Fellini, and some are barely even Andy Sidaris if we're being honest, but every movie in that list is amazing for different reasons. An objective critique of any of them (especially in context with "film", as a shapeless, vague concept) misses the point and the spirit of each and every one. But I am an uncultured heathen, so ...
If you have some proof of astroturfing you should write a blog and then share on hn, it might make for a very good post here. otherwise it feels wildly inappropriate (not to mention incredibly unlikely that they would spend marketing money on astroturfing here of all places). Andy Weir has written some books that are incredibly successful in the tech industry circles with Hail Mary being the current most popular if not slightly under The Martian, chances are there's just going to be a lot of talk about it. But even if there is astroturfing, telling people to not watch the movie in a thread where someone is showing off their space photography is inappropriate and misplaced.
The author of the great Astrophotography is not the OP of the HN post.
And that is already one starting and possible isolated indicator of astroturfing, ....when the movie related posts got no traction, they went looking for related subjects...
Under the assumption that amazon has decided to astroturf on this niche tech news site, that is still okay and allowed to do as long as the article provided is interesting. There are countless posts here which are just blogs from various companies, sometimes posted here by the companies themselves. Meta, Apple, small startups, movie companies, whatever. It's all allowed here as long as the content posted has substance and is interesting, thats all. What's important is that the comments are productive and interesting and not being used as a soapbox, which is likely why your parent comment is negatively voted. There are countless platforms for you to suggest others not see a movie, but a hn post about astrophotography is not that.
Those handful of 1-star reviews seem the same as the 1-star reviews on all movies, including all of the good movies you probably liked: “boring”, “overhyped”, “doesn’t live up to the book”, etc.. Are they manipulated? Go ahead and name a movie you like without looking at the reviews first, if you dare, and then let’s check the reviews.
I liked the movie and loved the book. Did you read the book? You seeing to be ignoring opinions from real people in this thread. What if the good reviews are as genuine as the bad ones? All I can conclude from bad reviews is that some people have different taste than me, and occasionally some people are in a bad mood when they watch something and it spoils the experience.
What is an example of actual SciFi? What do you mean about there not being any?
My problem with the movie is not that it is humorous or accessible. Scifi does not have to be solemn like 2001 or mythic like Dune. The probleme is that reduces a huge premise to a childish emotional register...
The premise is an interstellar mission, species level extinction risk, first contact, scientific problem solving. The film frames this through cute banter, soft sentiment, and quips that shrinks the movie scale.
So it treats a genuinely huge science fiction premise in a disney type emotional level. The humor feels adolescent and tonally deflates the stakes. Instead of using first contact, isolation, and extinction level danger to create awe or intellectual depth, it turns them into a cute, reassuring buddy experience.
Bust fit Deadpool level jokes, with the first Alien humanity ever encountered? Really?
Plus the direction is bad, the pace is bad and Ryan Gosling I am sorry is no great actor who can talk to a rock for 2 hours and carry on a movie....Also it is not just a bad movie it is also bad Scifi, because it wastes the genre central strength meaning using speculative ideas to confront us with something bigger, stranger or more unsettling than ourselves.
You had everything....extinction of the stars of the universe, first contact, humanity in danger, a regular human trust into the most important project... but instead we ignore the scientific challenges, and logical problem solving who are by the way are a major part of the book.
And this is what I mean by Good Scifi vs Bad Scifi...
They even managed to squeeze some kind of half baked love relationship almost unrelated to the core plot for Ryan Gosling, that is so badly delivered and is so ambiguous... you almost wonder who is partner was, and what any of that had to do with the movie delivery...
They managed to turn an alien into a lovable emotional device. No wonder kids love it...
The bust joke is natural for me when 2 total different species encounter at a more friendly interaction level (after their first interactions).
The humor in this is no way Deadpool level. I'm saying this as a hater of Deadpool because of its depraved jokes. And I just feel lighthearted with the humor in this movie.
This fits exactly your example of seeing the worst reviews and seeing that the review is unreasonable and exaggerated.
> The premise is an interstellar mission, species level extinction risk, first contact, scientific problem solving. The film frames this through cute banter, soft sentiment, and quips that shrinks the movie scale.
God forbid showing the humane side of both tragedies and big stakes missions in an aesthetically pleasing and humorous way.
> So it treats a genuinely huge science fiction premise in a disney type emotional level. The humor feels adolescent and tonally deflates the stakes. Instead of using first contact, isolation, and extinction level danger to create awe or intellectual depth, it turns them into a cute, reassuring buddy experience.
I'd say that's exactly what makes the movie charming for the "masses" and it's OK if you are not into that, but don't make it sound like it is an absolutely terrible movie just because it does not comply to your definition of a good scifi movie.
Is your problem with the movie or the book? It sounds like you didn’t read the book…? It is a buddy story and the author Andy Weir has stated he wanted the story to be different from the typical scary first encounter and send a positive hopeful message.
Again, name any movie you like and go look at the 1-star reviews. You will see the very same rants you’re making here. You can trash any SciFi movie this way because it’s fiction.
So when you said “no actual SciFi” you just meant you thought it was bad sci-fi? The book spends a lot more time on the scientific challenges, so if that’s what you want, maybe you should read it before commenting on this story any further. I can see why they chose to skip that stuff for the movie.
You’re entitled to your opinion. I, and others here and online, disagree with it, and we’re not being paid by Amazon. I don’t know why you keep saying Disney and Deadpool over and over again, especially since those two are very different and this film is very different from either, but some people actually like the film, and it appears to be more people like than dislike. Is that why you’re coming on so strong, because you expected pushback?
On a personal note, I find it very refreshing to hear that a major studio opted for real captured photography. Love that they specifically wanted the authenticity of real narrowband data and that speaks to the production team's vision. Enjoy the premiere night, feel incredibly proud. I was already planning on watching the movie this weekend (it releases here on the 26th) and now I'm doubly excited because I know this neat little tidbit.
I'm pretty sure this "Dad did something crazy" moment is going to be a core memory for your kids. Congrats!
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtfzjehDg74
* transcript: https://otter.ai/u/PA9dbWFA7BgPgLZN9CSo1WFAjXk
* https://www.iflscience.com/wildlife-photographers-viral-squi...
* https://markmangini.com/Mark_Mangini/Blog/Entries/2021/11/7_...
Story of her 'adopting' the squirrels:
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tDlh62AVPo
The name of the squirrel is "Baby Pear"; her viral tweet:
* https://twitter.com/DaniConnorWild/status/127534941750838476...
My wife and I saw the movie this weekend, we thought it was great. I adored the book, yet I recognize a book can’t be perfectly translated to the screen.
I thought the directors did a good enough job at translating the sci-fi into something the masses would enjoy.
Kudos to you
But I am glad I read the book first, I got much more out of it - it goes a lot more in depth into the science and engineering challenges that occur throughout. Which I appreciated. I'm not sure I would have read the book in the same way if I had seen the movie first.
That said, I never read Harry Potter and can't imagine going back and reading it now. So, YMMV.
I would recommend reading the book first at least.
The book is more of a true sci-fi novel, with the relationship stuff keeping it interesting.
I liked both a lot, and think both could be enjoyed fully with or without the other, in either order.
Amazing movie and the end credit visuals WERE incredible!
Ryan Gosling is no actor capable of carrying a movie by himself, and visually there is nothing worth of IMAX. You will get more wonders in a regular made for TV Andor or Star Trek episode.
Despite 12 posts here in the last few days, (nice try Amazon), one thing continues to be true: Almost anything from Amazon Studios is shite. It is amazing the level of reviews they managed to pull off on IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes.
Just download the torrent and you will see there is nothing here...and you will thank me for the time and money saved.
Is there any evidence for this?
It was a buddy film, and an American one, so had that culture in its humour, sure. But it was light-hearted and quite fun.
This is the first time I've heard of the idea of "true" scifi though.
Consider the possibility that your opinions are not universal.
Critic and audience reactions are generally positive:
> On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, 94% of 326 critics' reviews are positive. The website's consensus reads: "A visually dazzling space odyssey that's carried along effortlessly by the gravitational pull of Ryan Gosling at his most winning, Project Hail Mary is a near-miraculous fusion of smarts and heart."[47] Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned the film a score of 77 out of 100, based on 55 critics, indicating "generally favorable" reviews.[48] Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "A" on an A+ to F scale.[49]
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Hail_Mary_(film)#Criti...
Do you believe in the concept of objectivity? Meaning some movies are Objectively better than others, some Reviews are Objectively better than other?
If I bring a bunch of kids and teens to the movie, and at the end they all cant stop talking about how much they loved the rock, should I give an Oscar to Ryan Gosling?
In this context? Absolutely not. One person's favorite movie is another's least.
> If I bring a bunch of kids and teens to the movie, and at the end they all cant stop talking about how much they loved the rock, should I give an Oscar to Ryan Gosling?
It's OK for a movie to not be an Oscar contender.
I am happy we can agree those metrics mean nothing...
Now go to IMDB:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12042730/reviews/?rating=1&ref_...
sort by worst review and you will see the comments and reviews make a lot of sense...If you believe like some of commentators this is a 10/10 movie, you also probably believe these reviews are not manipulated...
This is about the worst methodology you could possibly use here.
> If you believe like some of commentators this is a 10/10 movie, you also probably believe these reviews are not manipulated…
100% of online reviews should be treated as manipulated.
By the contrary. It is the absolutely best methodology. I am surprised you cant see why.
You should do the same for hotel reviews or amazon products. Its about the CONTENT and nature of the bad review. The best way to judge a movie, hotel, or product is often to read the negative reviews first, because negative reviews reveal the failure modes. A positive review just usually tells you what worked for someone. A negative review tells you what can go wrong, and whether that problem matters to you.
You should always start with the worst reviews because they reveal the real weaknesses. Then you judge whether the criticism comes from an unreasonable person or from somebody thoughtful and fair. If the negative reviewer is intelligent, specific, and or balanced, that review is often more valuable than ten positive ones, because it shows the actual risks and not just the hype.
Use it for movies, books, hotels and amazon products...
Now go to IMDb again:
* https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12042730/ratings/?ref_=tt_ov_ra...
and look at the score distribution.
Project Hail Mary isn’t Arrival, it’s ET mixed with Castaway. It’s about friendship and loneliness and the fragility of the human experience and the triumph of the human spirit!
Normally I’d just say “you didn’t get it, it wasn’t for you” but given the insufferable and total dismissal above, I’d wager it actually IS for you LOL but you chose not to receive the message.
Anyways, everybody’s a critic these days, I get that. I’d just encourage people to soften a bit and appreciate things for what they are (not what we want them to be)
So is every Disney movie and that is what this but with the crappy Amazon Studios take on it.
>> Anyways, everybody’s a critic these days,
Do you believe a movie can objectively be considered good or bad? If you do you then believe some are better critics than others, the same some way some are better Coders than others or better Basketball players than others?
Just off the top of my head as I briefly scan shit sitting on the shelves of my office:
- Joe Dirt
- Death Wish 3
- Thrashin
- Hackers
- Mortal Kombat
- Uncle Buck
- The Incredible Burt Wonderstone
- Tapeheads
- Prayer of the Rollerboys
- Weekend at Bernie's
Not exactly Fellini, and some are barely even Andy Sidaris if we're being honest, but every movie in that list is amazing for different reasons. An objective critique of any of them (especially in context with "film", as a shapeless, vague concept) misses the point and the spirit of each and every one. But I am an uncultured heathen, so ...
You have been warned: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12042730/reviews/?rating=1&ref_...
Its a kids movie with Deadpool level jokes on it...
And that is already one starting and possible isolated indicator of astroturfing, ....when the movie related posts got no traction, they went looking for related subjects...
HN runs on user-submitted posts. People submit things they find interesting, and things they believe others will find interesting.
Its about the timing.
I liked the movie and loved the book. Did you read the book? You seeing to be ignoring opinions from real people in this thread. What if the good reviews are as genuine as the bad ones? All I can conclude from bad reviews is that some people have different taste than me, and occasionally some people are in a bad mood when they watch something and it spoils the experience.
What is an example of actual SciFi? What do you mean about there not being any?
The premise is an interstellar mission, species level extinction risk, first contact, scientific problem solving. The film frames this through cute banter, soft sentiment, and quips that shrinks the movie scale.
So it treats a genuinely huge science fiction premise in a disney type emotional level. The humor feels adolescent and tonally deflates the stakes. Instead of using first contact, isolation, and extinction level danger to create awe or intellectual depth, it turns them into a cute, reassuring buddy experience.
Bust fit Deadpool level jokes, with the first Alien humanity ever encountered? Really?
Plus the direction is bad, the pace is bad and Ryan Gosling I am sorry is no great actor who can talk to a rock for 2 hours and carry on a movie....Also it is not just a bad movie it is also bad Scifi, because it wastes the genre central strength meaning using speculative ideas to confront us with something bigger, stranger or more unsettling than ourselves.
You had everything....extinction of the stars of the universe, first contact, humanity in danger, a regular human trust into the most important project... but instead we ignore the scientific challenges, and logical problem solving who are by the way are a major part of the book.
And this is what I mean by Good Scifi vs Bad Scifi...
They even managed to squeeze some kind of half baked love relationship almost unrelated to the core plot for Ryan Gosling, that is so badly delivered and is so ambiguous... you almost wonder who is partner was, and what any of that had to do with the movie delivery...
They managed to turn an alien into a lovable emotional device. No wonder kids love it...
The humor in this is no way Deadpool level. I'm saying this as a hater of Deadpool because of its depraved jokes. And I just feel lighthearted with the humor in this movie.
This fits exactly your example of seeing the worst reviews and seeing that the review is unreasonable and exaggerated.
God forbid showing the humane side of both tragedies and big stakes missions in an aesthetically pleasing and humorous way.
> So it treats a genuinely huge science fiction premise in a disney type emotional level. The humor feels adolescent and tonally deflates the stakes. Instead of using first contact, isolation, and extinction level danger to create awe or intellectual depth, it turns them into a cute, reassuring buddy experience.
I'd say that's exactly what makes the movie charming for the "masses" and it's OK if you are not into that, but don't make it sound like it is an absolutely terrible movie just because it does not comply to your definition of a good scifi movie.
Again, name any movie you like and go look at the 1-star reviews. You will see the very same rants you’re making here. You can trash any SciFi movie this way because it’s fiction.
So when you said “no actual SciFi” you just meant you thought it was bad sci-fi? The book spends a lot more time on the scientific challenges, so if that’s what you want, maybe you should read it before commenting on this story any further. I can see why they chose to skip that stuff for the movie.
You’re entitled to your opinion. I, and others here and online, disagree with it, and we’re not being paid by Amazon. I don’t know why you keep saying Disney and Deadpool over and over again, especially since those two are very different and this film is very different from either, but some people actually like the film, and it appears to be more people like than dislike. Is that why you’re coming on so strong, because you expected pushback?