back to article Finally in the UK: Apollo 11 lands... in a cinema near you

The Register took a spin down memory lane to have a look at the just-released-in-the-UK Apollo 11 film and to ask the question: is it any good? We are pleased to report back on our findings. Squeaking in just before the 50th anniversary of the first crewed Moon landings, the documentary pieces together recently uncovered 65mm …

  1. Pascal Monett Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    I look forward to seeing it, then

    As a big fan of space exploration and of the Universe in general, I greatly appreciated Apollo 13, which I watch about once a year. Your report makes me confident that I will have a new item to add to my list of yearly walks down memory lane.

    1. Miss Config
      Thumb Up

      Re: I look forward to seeing it, then

      in which case you might particularly appreciate seeing Gene Kranz, which, with the benefit of hindsight is haunting in its own way.

    2. NeilPost Bronze badge

      Re: I look forward to seeing it, then

      If you are into this sort of thing, hunt down the BBc’s Fabulous 13 Minutes to the Moon . It’s simple stunningly.

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w13xttx2

    3. HelpfulJohn

      Re: I look forward to seeing it, then

      Something that astonished me about the DVD of "Apollo 13", but which, on sober reflection, should have been damned obvious, was its classification as .........

      ..... "Historical Drama".

      I watched it happen.

      I'm ever so very old.

  2. Zog_but_not_the_first Silver badge
    Unhappy

    Amazing...

    That there are still so many people who think the moon landings were faked (See Mitchell and Webb's sketch for a thorough riposte).

    Then I look at the newspapers, the TV, listen to the radio....

    {sigh}

    1. _LC_ Bronze badge
      Devil

      Re: Amazing...

      Amazing that there's still people thinking on their own, forbidden thoughts even.

      http://www.bilder-hochladen.net/files/big/m0nt-7-9260.gif

      https://i.ibb.co/0m5X17r/Apollo11-wooden-rock.jpg

      The best was their car though, hopping around in the sand. *lol*

      There are tons of pictures of it, where it's all full of footprints on the ground, but the car left no tracks.

      In addition, their lift-off is hilarious. They couldn't fire anything like boosters in a studio, so they just pulled it up and sped up the film. Nobody would've survived those Gs. Plain out sidesplitting!

      1. Patrician

        Re: Amazing...

        Ignoring the rest of your post for the moment, this part ... "In addition, their lift-off is hilarious. They couldn't fire anything like boosters in a studio, so they just pulled it up and sped up the film. Nobody would've survived those Gs. Plain out sidesplitting!" ...Is side splitting.

        You've calculated the rate of assent from the film presumably? You would have to, to be able to state that they couldn't "survive those G's". So what G's have you calculated they would have been subject to?

        1. Just Enough

          Re: Amazing...

          Of course he hasn't calculated the Gs. Or even attempted to research what they might be. Conspiracy theorist don't do any actual work. They prefer "figuring it out for themselves", undaunted by a total lack of any understanding or expertise. Just go with your gut feelings and common sense!

          As for the images linked;

          - gif of flag moving after it has been placed by astronaut. Residual vibrations from aluminium pole in low gravity and a vacuum.

          - A rock that most likely has been mis-catalogued and accidentally switched. Or are we to believe this was NASA's best attempt at fooling people. A moon rock that any amateur geologist could tell you wasn't from the moon?

          The misunderstanding about the lunar lift off is common place from people who are more used to Earth-bound flight. Also not understanding that the fuel the landers used produces almost no visible flame or exhaust when burned.

          Examination of the lunar rover's tracks needs to first understand that the moon is covered in *dust*, not "sand". And it left compacted tracks all over the place.

          1. DougS Silver badge

            "Accidentally switched?"

            Moon rocks are rare and valuable, it was deliberately switched and ended up in the possession of a former employee...

          2. 2+2=5 Silver badge
            Alien

            Re: Amazing...

            > Of course he hasn't calculated the Gs. Or even attempted to research what they might be. Conspiracy theorist don't do any actual work. They prefer "figuring it out for themselves", undaunted by a total lack of any understanding or expertise. Just go with your gut feelings and common sense!

            The reason that conspiracy theorists have an inate 'gut feeling' for what is a conspiracy is because they've all previously been secretly taken up into an alien spacecraft and had experimental alien bacteria injected into their guts [1] and then returned to earth, unbeknownst to them. This secret alien bacteria causes slight 'tummy turbulence' resulting in a weak, but noticeable, momentary fear of evacuating themselves whenever they encounter a conspiracy.

            [1] Those where the initial mind-probing revealed a propensity for another sort of probing were obliged, with the secret bacteria sent up rather than down.

            As the lead scientist - yes I'm an alien - in charge of this experiment I can inform you that it is being conducted in a rigorously scientific way. There is a control group on Earth's counter-planet (which is exactly opposite the Earth in its orbit).

            1. RobThBay

              Re: Amazing...

              "...There is a control group on Earth's counter-planet (which is exactly opposite the Earth in its orbit)..."

              :)

              I wonder how many people remember that Gerry & Sylvia Anderson movie??

              For those that don't know what we're talking about, have a look at "Journey To The Far Side Of The Sun".

      2. Naich

        Re: Amazing...

        Found one!

      3. _LC_ Bronze badge
        Mushroom

        Re: Amazing...

        That was to be expected. In less than 20 minutes the "watchmen" are already there, biting the defector's calf.

        1. Wellyboot Silver badge

          Re: Amazing...

          +1 for Patrician & Lee

          Tracks here > https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/40th/images/apollo_image_17.0

          If I could be bothered I'm sure I could find a picture of a jeep in the desert with no visible tyre tracks.

          Lunar lift-off boosters > It's on the Moon! you don't need much to overcome the 1.62m/s2 Lunar gravity and the burn time was several minutes to reach the command module orbit & velocity.

          Lunar lift-off G force > About 0.5g, similar to any contemporary sports car getting off the start line. The TV camera wasn't very far away (maybe 20metres) from the lander so the launch only 'looks' neck snapping.

          I assume you think the Russian, Indian & Chinese space agencies are also actively involved in an ongoing half century cover-up and when they all eventually put boots on the moon it'll also be faked?

          1. phuzz Silver badge
            Thumb Up

            Re: Amazing...

            Don't forget, in the LM ascent stage, the astronauts were stood upright (they didn't even have seats), which does somewhat limit the G-force they could cope with. From reading around, the initial acceleration was only about 0.2G, increasing to half a G near the end of the burn as they burnt al the fuel up, which is well within the limits of a human body.

            No, the really bad G forces were on landing, Apollo 12 smacked into the water de-accelerating at 12G. Of course, the astronauts were lying down in crash couches for that part, so it was a lot easier than it would have been in the LM.

        2. _LC_ Bronze badge
          Thumb Down

          Re: Amazing...

          You gotta love this. The president behind this “journey to the moon” has been murdered. So was his brother and a few others. Their murders were covered up with lies. The ones behind the murder could take part and deflect the investigations EVERY FUGGING TIME. There is tons of evidence about it, to no effect.

          Almost every war the US engaged in was preceded and accompanied by LIES. This is well documented – to no avail. The last time the US (and England + other dog) fired missiles at Syria in a big show, it was based on a lie. This has been proven already, once more. Consequences: 0.

          Nobody believes you anything anymore. The “moon landings” had so many “bugs” that they are almost comical. Almost, because “a few” people were murdered, of course, to get this show running.

          The “revival” of those “moon landings” (including “revamped” material) is due to the Chinese moon landing. They showed us a different moon. One that looks surprisingly like you'd expect it to look, when bazillions of tiny meteoroids sift the ground.

          I can still recall hi-res (black & white) photographs in the magazines. Well, that was the West Coast apparently – nothing like the moon.

          Another reason for the repetition is “Goebbel's mantra”: For a lie to become the truth, you have to keep repeating it over and over...

          1. Patrician

            Re: Amazing...

            Wow! Want to bring in Atlantis, Flat Earth, Hollow Earth and The Bermuda Triangle into this too?

            1. _LC_ Bronze badge

              Re: Amazing...

              https://projectunspeakable.com/conspiracy-theory-invention-of-cia/

              ... “the concept of ‘conspiracy theorist’ was engendered and infused into our political lexicon and became what it is today: a term to smear, denounce, ridicule, and defame anyone who dares to speak about any crime committed by the state, military or intelligence services. ...

              Standard tactics.

              1. Patrician

                Re: Amazing...

                "A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and powerful actors, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable. The term has a pejorative connotation, implying that the appeal to a conspiracy is based on prejudice or insufficient evidence. Conspiracy theories resist falsification and are reinforced by circular reasoning: both evidence against the conspiracy and an absence of evidence for it, are re-interpreted as evidence of its truth, and the conspiracy becomes a matter of faith rather than proof.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory

                1. _LC_ Bronze badge
                  FAIL

                  Re: Amazing...

                  Wikipedia is a bad source. It's run by government agencies. They've already uncovered numerous agents to prove this. In England the most popular story is about Philip Cross:

                  https://gosint.wordpress.com/2018/05/22/wikipedia-the-spooks-the-remake-the-philip-cross-affair/

                  1. Patrician
                    FAIL

                    Re: Amazing...

                    Typical conspiracy theorist; counter with another conspiracy theory .....

                    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

                      Re: Amazing...

                      >Typical conspiracy theorist; counter with another conspiracy theory .....

                      That's just what they want you to think

                      And since nobody has posted it, nasa-fakes-moon-landing

                      1. DiViDeD Silver badge

                        Re: Amazing...

                        Upvoted for the clanger pics alone. I remember at the time it first appeared being highly amused by the very serious analysis of the shadow angles which failed to take into account the little pink knitted creatures and the dustbin lids.

                        A joyous trip down memory lane.

                        Well done that man!

                    2. Wexford

                      Re: Amazing...

                      It's conspiracy theories all the way down. The cognitive dissonance is so painful, they'll always come up with something that seems rational (to them) when they have no understanding of what they're looking at.

                      You'll never convince them with reason or logic; they simply can't process rationally. All you can do is mock or pity them. The former is more amusing.

          2. phuzz Silver badge

            Re: Amazing...

            "For a lie to become the truth, you have to keep repeating it over and over"

            You're certainly giving it a go aren't you mate?

        3. Bitbeisser
          Thumb Down

          Re: Amazing...

          Well, _LC_, try to seek some professional help, maybe there is still hope...

          1. Timmy B Silver badge

            Re: Amazing...

            "Well, _LC_, try to seek some professional help, maybe there is still hope...!"

            I really, really hope that _LC_ is trolling us all. Everyone on the line and him just having a mighty belly laugh. Please say it's so _LC_

            1. _LC_ Bronze badge

              Re: Amazing...

              Last time I checked, the MAJORITY of US citizens (yes, those heavily indoctrinated) didn't believe in the moon landing tale. Those majorities are even far bigger in other countries.

              In other words: You're even using the word 'everyone' as a lie, which was to be expected.

              1. Timmy B Silver badge

                Re: Amazing...

                "Last time I checked, the MAJORITY of US citizens (yes, those heavily indoctrinated) didn't believe in the moon landing tale. Those majorities are even far bigger in other countries.

                In other words: You're even using the word 'everyone' as a lie, which was to be expected."

                Good grief!

                1. Citation needed.

                2. Just because lots of people believe it, doesn't make it true.

                3. Everyone on the line means that they have been caught like fish. Everyone who has been caught in this way would be a valid use of the term everyone. It is not a lie.

                I hope even more now that you are trolling as you just caught me dagnabbit!

      4. Lee D Silver badge

        Re: Amazing...

        "Being different" doesn't mean you're right. It's a common misconception, borne of the belief that all those people who were "different" and "successful" means that the two are somehow related. Correlation rather than causation, and all that.

        Unfortunately, more often than not, it means you're wrong and/or just don't understand enough to discuss it on any sensible level.

        Every single moon-landing conspiracy nut I've ever spoken to (and there are a few of you, I'm afraid) has a poor grasp of physics, a terrible reliance on "implying things from video footage", and a sheer lack of understanding that they could be wrong too... the usual problem is that I get halfway through explaining why one thing they believe is utter horsecrud, only to be presented with a "Aha! BUT..." mid-sentence about something completely else.

        It takes a million times more effort to debunk a nonsense theory than it does to make one up. I hereby claim that gravity is a new magnetism that applies to all objects including light, not curvature in space-time. Prove me wrong. It took Einstein most of his life to do so, and if *you* can't, then I'm assuming I must be right all along, because you're obviously not smart enough to debunk it, right?

        And... though I know it's just going to end in Aha! BUT!....

        The "moon rock" isn't, wasn't, never was, it didn't come from the moon, the one that *did* couldn't have weighed as much as that (they brought back 1oz samples, that was 3oz). The stuff is literally explained on the Wikipedia page, with citations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands_lunar_sample_displays

        Some guy who has nothing to do with the Apollo program gave them a thing, told them it was Moon rock, they "phoned NASA" years ago who said it was "possible" but have never examined it, they thought that was good enough and put it on display. Human error/fraud, nothing to do with NASA/Apollo/Buzz/Neil whatsoever, at all, in any way, shape or form. It doesn't prove that "there is no such thing as Moon rock on Earth because we've never been to the Moon", it only hints - at best - that museum curators are idiots, or that sometimes people nick stuff that's valuable and replace it with junk because nobody ever bothers to check, or that old people get confused. It's also a tiny *speck* of rock, but well done for blowing it out of all proportion.

        Anything about flags moving is just so Meh by now, surely. The easiest debunk for those (which again takes a million times more effort than to keep making up nonsense), is that it's actually quite hard to make movement in even an atmosphere that will move a flag from that distance just by walking/jumping past it.

        As a lot of debunking of this stuff shows; Try it. Put a flag out in a sealed room on a still day. Measure a whole raft of lines on the floor. Jump past it like the astronaut does. See how close you have to be to make it move. You can literally debunk 95% of all the conspiracy nonsense by just trying it yourself... all the sun-angle bull, flags moving, taking photos, etc. etc.

        And, let me tell you, if you throw a thousand theories and *ONE* is plausible, your reputation is destroyed so badly already that nobody will listen. If you posit one theory, take it to its conclusion, test, prove, debunk yourself, recreate independently, etc. then people will beat a path to your door. Bandwagon-jumping on things that are obvious nonsense without even the simple precept of "just try it yourself" just makes you look a fool. Tell me... which way does water drain down a plughole? All the nonsense in the world is solved in ten seconds by *trying* it, using the simple equipment of your daily ablutions and some *basic* science (i.e. hypothesise beforehand, set up, experiment, test, repeat, confirm, determine contributory factors, repeat, test, isolate, confirm, publish).

        The problem, of course, is that estimating *any* distance from a single, flat 2D video is almost impossible. It's the "UFO sighting" problem all over again. Don't even get me started on the number of people not using original footage, inferring detail from JPEG/MPEG artifacts, measuring distances by counting pixels and then jumping to conclusions, etc. It's the "sun angle is all wrong" nonsense all over again.

        No. No no no. You're wrong. Copying in more people who agree with you doesn't make you right. Even a Dr agreeing with you doesn't make you right (they're usually Dr in very dubious fields and of dubious professional reputation like the ECat guys). You have an answer for everything that just doesn't add up.

        If it wouldn't add up in a court of law, you're honestly just wasting your life away looking for things that aren't there. You can find *all* kinds of things that aren't there if you look hard enough and long enough and are convinced enough.

        What you can't do is, in any way, prove that the Moon landings are fake or didn't happen.

        Think of it like this:

        - You score minus one point for every nonsense theory you've ever backed that turns out to be nonsense. Every minor incident like this.

        - You score zero points for any theory that's unproven or subjective.

        - You score one point for every one that remains is confirmed true by reliable sources (note: YouTube, Wikipedia etc. are *not* reliable sources, though they might be convenient for troll-bashing).

        If your lifetime score is zero or negative, you're not someone to listen to.

        If your lifetime score is positive, then maybe you can be listened to.

        In my experience, the reason every conspiracy theorist has *so many* theories is not that they are reinforcing their case in one area, but because when "okay, maybe I was wrong but... " happens, then they are shielded by a thousand others that "may be right". It's the shotgun method.

        That's not how reputation works.

        Reputation works because, for countless scientists over decades, their work has proven to be true even when it looked like nonsense and was incredibly difficult to understand and predicted radical flaws in the entirety of science that prompted revelations, testing, and investigation and were found to be true. Every nonsense that they got categorically wrong, they lose reputation for. Those people in negative reputation are not famous, not listened to, and continue to spout nonsense (David Icke, the ECat people, etc.) no matter what their qualification. Those people who get even into positive scores are heeded and respected. It's an extremely hard thing to do, to provide something new that nobody has ever seen before and which is proven correct... that's why PhD's take so long and are so hard to earn, and can be revoked in a trice.

        I also know someone with multiple PhDs and several degrees who believes some absolute nonsense. He might know what he's doing in certain areas, but in all others he would be laughed at for asserting an incorrect notion.

        Guess what? NASA is, was, and still will be full of PhDs. What you have is not "conspiracy theory"-itis. It's "anti-meritocracy". You want to be better than a room-ful of PhDs because you've probably not got one (nor do I, by the way, I've just worked among those people long enough to know that I can't grasp the kinds of things they learn for enjoyment as a side-track to their actual main work).

        Unfortunately, your reputation, being associated with the nonsense you present, is already in the negative. It's just that bad. To realise how bad it is, you have to have some sense of these things. It's hard to know you're being stupid if you are starting from the base of "I'm stupid".

        People like you will always exist. But at no point is anyone ever going to go "Oh, look, the Moon landings WERE fake..." and get that as an accepted theory. It just isn't going to happen. The weight of evidence is *so* far the other way that you can't even understand how much nonsense it would be to claim otherwise.

        If you want to be taken seriously, work on making the score positive. Not parroting bad and debunked arguments about blurry photos, tiny scraps of unoriginal footage, and completely poor understanding of simple physics.

        1. Alister Silver badge
          Thumb Up

          Re: Amazing...

          Well ranted Lee, now go and have a lie down... :)

          1. Wellyboot Silver badge

            Re: Amazing...

            and a nice cup of tea.

            1. phuzz Silver badge
              Pint

              Re: Amazing...

              Or a pint if you prefer.

          2. Ugotta B. Kiddingme Silver badge

            Re: Amazing...

            and a good stiff single malt, neat.

        2. Patrician
          Thumb Up

          Re: Amazing...

          Nicely put Lee.

        3. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge

          Re: Amazing...

          Watched an interesting documentary recently about the Lunar rocks themselves, and what made them different from Earth rocks.

          Apparently they are the same apart from one key difference - moon rocks exhibit no signs of wear and tear from the presence of water.

          It got me to wondering if a moon rock could be faked if you took some molten rock and cooled it in a sealed, de-humidified, room. Does anyone know the answer?

          1. Patrician

            Re: Amazing...

            There are quite a few other differences that would make this unlikely to be successful, however, geology isn't my subject so I could be wrong.

            "While most of the minerals in Moon rocks are found on Earth, they were formed in very different environments. Moon rock shows evidence of formation in an extremely dry setting, with low gravitational influence and very little surrounding oxygen.

            This is completely opposed to the Earth’s environment at the time of formation, approximately between three and four and a half billion years ago. Lunar rocks also contain trapped gases from the solar wind passing them at the time of formation.

            The solar wind is a continuous stream of charged, highly energetic particles originating at the Sun and moving out in all directions. The gases found in lunar samples match the isotope ratios expected for gas from this source, and are significantly different to isotope ratios found on Earth.

            Overall there are many differences between Moon rock and Earth rock; some were expected but others were great discoveries made by investigating the samples brought back from the Apollo missions."

            From https://www.spaceanswers.com/q-and-a/how-different-is-moon-rock-and-earth-rock/

          2. _LC_ Bronze badge

            Re: Amazing...

            This is not necessary as they can be found here on earth:

            https://phys.org/news/2012-01-lunar-mineral-tranquillityite-western.html

            “Third lunar mineral - Tranquillityite found in Western Australia

            Back in the heyday of the Apollo moon program, hundreds of pounds of rock samples were carted back to Earth by visiting astronauts. Those samples were then pored over more thoroughly by geologists than perhaps any other rocks in human history, and after all that study, three minerals were found that were unique to the moon: armalcolite, pyroxferroite and tranquillityite. The first two were subsequently found over the next ten years on the surface of the Earth as well, but the third, named after Tranquility Base, site of the first moon landing, had never been found here on this planet, at least not naturally, tranquillityite has been found in meteorite samples. But now that’s changed.

            ...”

            This is in German:

            https://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/wissenschaft/Zwischen-Mond-und-Erde-stimmt-die-Chemie-id19387626.html

            “Researchers have made an interesting discovery that cast doubt on the previous assumption of the formation of the moon.

            The moon and the earth have much more in common than was previously thought. A team of researchers consisting of Americans and Swiss have analyzed rocks of the moon. They found out that the moon is a geochemical twin of the earth. The moon consists to a large extent of earth material.

            ...”

            1. Patrician

              Re: Amazing...

              This part of my post, opposes your post:-

              "The solar wind is a continuous stream of charged, highly energetic particles originating at the Sun and moving out in all directions. The gases found in lunar samples match the isotope ratios expected for gas from this source, and are significantly different to isotope ratios found on Earth."

              1. _LC_ Bronze badge

                Re: Amazing...

                *lol*

                I don't think you understand it. The "solar wind" is no gas. It's radiation (particles). When "confronted" with (gamma) radiation, materials change. This is what you are posting. Radiation has no "sender's inscription", though.

                1. Patrician

                  Re: Amazing...

                  Oh dear, just who doesn't understand?

                  It's the *isotope ratios* in the gases found in Luna rocks that is different from isotope ratios found in gases in rocks found on Earth that demonstrate the Luna rocks exposure to the Solar Wind; not the gases themselves, but the *isotope ratios found in those gases*.

                  1. _LC_ Bronze badge

                    Re: Amazing...

                    That's just what a said. The ratio, however, can only be seen as "proof", if you assume that nobody tampered with them. Otherwise, radiation has no "sender's inscription". ;-)

                    1. Patrician

                      Re: Amazing...

                      Why are you so ready to accept what is written on conspiracy websites and YouTube videos but not to accept scientific sites? Is it that you simply don't understand the science, and so reject it for something "else"?

                      1. _LC_ Bronze badge
                        Happy

                        Re: Amazing...

                        https://jobs.theguardian.com/job/6933386/covert-online-operators/

                        I just found out how little you folks get and had a laugh. What a bunch of dogs. *lol*

                        1. Carneades

                          Re: Amazing...

                          D'you think you need stronger...tablets?

                          1. _LC_ Bronze badge

                            Re: Amazing...

                            Nah, those from Huawei work just fine. ;-)

          3. 2+2=5 Silver badge

            Re: Amazing...

            > It got me to wondering if a moon rock could be faked if you took some molten rock and cooled it in a sealed, de-humidified, room. Does anyone know the answer?

            Aside from zillions of other issues, you would struggle to re-create shock metamorphism in your faked sample. This is where shock-waves from asteroid impacts over millions of years causes damage to the rock's internal structure.

        4. dobbin99

          Re: Amazing...

          That has got to be one of the best retorts of the whole conspiracy theory nut issue, and I follow quite a few debunking channels. One of the main issues I have is there are legitimate conspiracies going on in the world. Corporation, governments, and anybody with some degree of power are trying to get one over on other people and groups. I am thinking arms industry, big oil, big pharma, blah, blah, But that would actually take some effort on these people to do some original research and investigation, and not just sit at there computer trawling youtube all day for videos which just reinforce their beliefs.

          I am not in the scientific world, but from what I have seen, fellow scientists are all too happy to expose failings of other published work, and get just as much joy and reputation for doing so. So the idea that scientists come to a consensus without considerable proof is absurd,

          I also find it extremely ignorant and US centrist that it is assumed he US and NASA have control of all scientific information released.

      5. This post has been deleted by its author

      6. AIBailey Silver badge
        WTF?

        Re: Amazing...

        At first I simply though you'd missed the joke icon.

        Then I realised you were serious.

      7. Grant Mitchell

        Re: Amazing...

        And the lunar ranging retro-reflectors happened to get there how exactly?

        1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge
          Coat

          Re: Amazing...

          They're Clanger dustbin-lids, everyone knows that!

        2. TVU

          Re: Amazing...

          "And the lunar ranging retro-reflectors happened to get there how exactly?"

          Indeed, and any university or research institute in any country can use those laser reflectors to independently and accurately measure the Earth-Moon distance. Not only that, other lunar orbiters have subsequently been able to photograph the lunar module base units that still reside on the Moon.

      8. The_H
        Facepalm

        Re: Amazing...

        There is absolutely no point in reasoning with people like this because they simply do not have the common sense to understand the concepts involved.

        Coming on here though - where the average IQ is stratospherically higher than your usual Youtube commenter's - and trying to persuade rational, intelligent people with dribbingly crackpot theories; it's doomed to failure and ridicule.

        Best remember the old saying: better to keep your mouth shut and let everyone think you're stupid, than to open it and leave no doubt.

        1. _LC_ Bronze badge

          Re: Amazing...

          Similar was said about the "witches", before they were drowned and/or subsequently burned.

          1. Daniel Bower

            Re: Amazing...

            The detail the conspiracy theorists overlook is that the whole point of the Apollo missions was basically to prove to the Russians that America was the more mighty country.

            No one on Earth would, particularly at that time, have more interest in proving the landings to be fake than what was then the USSR. And if they were fake the Soviets would have been singing from the tree tops. To be fair I’d imagine Putin (who most theorists seem to hold dear to their hearts) would take great pleasure in proving it all to be made up. Yet strangely the Soviets accepted the landings to have happened.

            You also have the detail that no one would make up if it were fake. The surfers who were brought on board to help apply the insulation to the fuel tanks, the seamstresses who stitched the suits with such precision, the hard wiring of the ‘memory’ of the LM etc.

            If it were all to be faked they simply wouldn’t have needed to go as deep into things as they did.

            As regards to the g force of the LM. Gs are, funnily enough, relative to the gravitational force of the body you’re on. The moon has a fraction of the gravity of earth hence the Gs on take off of the LM would have been equivalently lower.

            Not that this common sense, logical explanation will make any difference to their beliefs but hey.

          2. Timmy B Silver badge

            Re: Amazing...

            "Similar was said about the "witches", before they were drowned and/or subsequently burned."

            Hanging, of course, being the most common way. Your history knowledge is up there with your science knowledge.

      9. DougS Silver badge

        What will moron "Moon deniers" like you do

        When China or India or a commercial enterprise like Blue Origin is preparing to visit the Moon and puts a satellite into low orbit with high resolution cameras to pick the best landing spot. And incidentally takes high resolution pictures of the landing site, complete with lander base, flag and rover - with tracks and footprints still visible if the resolution is high enough since there is no erosion. Well maybe a little from solar wind but not enough to wear away the footprints in only 50 years.

        1. MacroRodent Silver badge

          Re: What will moron "Moon deniers" like you do

          The deniers will go on denying, because obviously the Chinese, Indians, Blue Origin etc are in the same conspiracy, and any shots of the landing site are faked. That is the biggest problem with conspiracy theorists: any attempt to debunk them makes you part of the conspiracy, or at least a duped stooge.

          1. _LC_ Bronze badge

            Re: What will moron "Moon deniers" like you do

            Actually, the pictures from the Chinese show a Moon looking very different from the US West Coast. ;-)

            1. MacroRodent Silver badge

              Re: What will moron "Moon deniers" like you do

              Not sure why you mention US West Coast, but naturally the terrain in the Chang'e pictures looks a bit different from the Apollo pictures, because it landed in an entirely different place.

      10. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

        Re: Amazing...

        Looking at all of your comments, I can't work out whether this is some kind of performance piece.

        1. _LC_ Bronze badge
          Thumb Up

          Re: Amazing...

          See my comment redirecting to:

          https://jobs.theguardian.com/job/6933386/covert-online-operators/

          :-)

      11. vaporland

        Re: Amazing...

        that there are people working in IT that are this deluded...

    2. MonkeyBob
      Joke

      Re: Amazing...

      It was all definatley faked, I've tried doing it with Kerbals loads of time and it's impossible.

      1. 0laf Silver badge
        Alien

        Re: Amazing...

        And the rover tracks on the moon seen just the otehr year albeit from a NASA orbiter but from a camera controlled by German academics.

        Faked. Really? I've worked in and with Government for years, there is fuck all chance a government could managed a cover up that size.

        Cover ups need skill, dedication and loyalty. Fuck all chance of that.

        1. DougS Silver badge

          Re: Amazing...

          Yep. Conspiracies like "who shot JFK" can have their secrets kept if only a handful of people were involved. Conspiracies like "we didn't go to the Moon" are impossible because thousands of people can't keep a secret. I doubt you could get them to keep it secret for a year, let alone 50.

          Not to mention that if Russia even suspected the slightest chance it was faked, they would have made sure to fly something over the site in the early 1970s and take pictures exposing the lie. The mileage the Soviet propaganda machine could have got out of that would be worth almost any expense.

      2. Ken Hagan Gold badge

        Re: Amazing...

        "I've tried doing it with Kerbals loads of time and it's impossible."

        Well, if I can be serious for a moment, I saw the film last weekend and that was one of the most memorable features of it. Every step of the voyage is taken slowly enough for you to appreciate that they did it "in one take" without the planners dropping so much as a minus sign at any point.

        My particular favourite is (spoiler alert!) the bit where they have to launch back off the surface of the moon and somehow rendezvous with a command module that is hurling overhead at several thousand feet per second. (Er, yes, I'm afraid there are a lot of non-El-Reg units in this film.) If they miss then they die. No pressure...

        1. Graham Cobb

          Re: Amazing...

          @Ken - you are right. And as a self-confessed space geek, who remembers the Apollo program, at least from Apollo 8 onwards, as a child, I was amazed to find out just a few weeks ago about the tests and the problems found by Apollo 10 in exactly the areas you mention.

          In fact, I think I heard, during the film, the instruction to Buzz just before ascent stage take-off to "make sure the XXX breakers are out" -- which I think was a reference to the problems Apollo 10 found of the command module acquisition computer confusing the initial take-off navigation of the LEM.

    3. NicolasJon

      Re: Amazing...

      The Cold War was in full force. Russia had already orbited the Moon, and had advanced plans to land. Russia was undoubtedly watching every American move, had they not landed on the Moon the Russians would have been shouting it from the roof tops.

      1. _LC_ Bronze badge

        Re: Amazing...

        They did and still do. You're just pretending they don't, which is just another lie of your. ;-)

  3. Anonymous South African Coward Silver badge
    Pint

    I was born in 1969, so this year holds a special half-century anniversary for me.

    I'm eagerly waiting for the day the 'nauts lifted off 50 years ago.

    Of course I believe that we made it to the moon and back.

    =====> one for all of us who was born in 1969. Here's to the next 50!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      2/5/1969 for me, so just before the moon landings. Unfortunately a bit too young to remember any of it.

  4. GlenP Silver badge

    It's the first major event that I can recall (partly because we were allowed the TV* on before school).

    *Black and White of course!

  5. Spoonsinger

    So???? not dwelling on the societal ills of the time, is a niggle?

    There are probably a zillion late sixties docu/films which have all the "societal ills" stuff in them and I suspect 99.9% of them don't have any technical moon landing stuff in them for "balance". I for one like a film which actually keeps to the point.

    1. gbru2606

      Re: So???? not dwelling on the societal ills of the time, is a niggle?

      As if the mission, and science took place in a vacuum... ; D

    2. Kubla Cant Silver badge
      WTF?

      Re: So???? not dwelling on the societal ills of the time, is a niggle?

      I boggled a bit at "Of course, the documentary does not dwell on the societal ills of the time". Were the societal ills of the late sixties especially noteworthy? As far as I can remember, it was pretty much like any other time; some things good, some things bad.

      Please let us know what societal ills I should have been aware of, and what makes them worse than anything that's happened since.

  6. OssianScotland Bronze badge
    Pint

    Memory Lane...

    The whole primary school taken into the hall, with one of those large (for the time) B/W TVs in a box with wooden doors. We were told to "watch this, you'll never see anything like it again" and saw Neil come down the steps and onto the moon.

    Hindsight, plus a nerdy interest, has told me it must have been a repeat, since the timeline doesn't fit with the UK school day, but the teachers were quite right, that moment has stuck with me for nearly 50 years now.

    (obvious icon, raised to all those who made it happen)

    1. ridley

      Re: Memory Lane...

      My dad got me out if bed at silly o clock (4am?) to watch it live on the new telly bought for that moment.

      I was 5.

      Thanks dad.

      1. Bob Dunlop

        Re: Memory Lane...

        Slightly older (just 9) but I remember the landing as late night and then the first boot on the moon as silly o'clock in the morning. One of the first if not the first time I was allowed to stay up all night on my own, mum went to bed around midnight. My dad couldn't be there as he was working on the BBC program in the Shepard's Bush studios.

        Having pulled an all nighter i went to school and watched the repeat on the assembly hall telly. Amazing the resiliance of a nine year old looking back.

        1. Fred Dibnah Silver badge
          Go

          Re: Memory Lane...

          Aged 10 at the time, and IIRC the landing was around 9pm BST. I wasn't allowed to stay up, but I couldn't sleep anyway and around 3am I sneaked downstairs & switched on the telly. The valves had warmed up in time for the first step at around 0345 BST. They kept repeating the highlights of the moonwalk all through the morning, so I'd seen it about five times before heading off to school.

          Those years from Apollo 8 to 17 were brilliant, and the BBC coverage was great, especially with James Burke & Patrick Moore on the presentation team. Got me interested in engineering, it did.

          What's even better is having all the film and photos are now available on the Internet for posterity, and the quality of the TV footage isn't ruined by the transatlantic link. I'm amazed how good some of the directly received footage is.

          Five stars from me for the Apollo 11 film, and the BBC podcast '13 Minutes to the Moon' is well worth a visit too.

          https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w13xttx2/episodes/downloads

          1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

            Re: Memory Lane...

            A vote for 13 Minutes to the Moon. It jumps around a bit, as all professional media people are now convinced that we have the attention span of gnats, so everything has to be repeated and individual technical sections can't be too long - but it is excellent.

            And one bit of repetition is brilliant. They keep repeating sections of the radio between Houston and the spacecraft, plus they've been using the internal tape from Eagle and the internal Mission Control "loops" - the separate circuits between individual controllers and their back-up teams and the flight controller's circuit. Each time they go off and explain some technical point or jargon, and often use interviews they've done or NASA archive ones with the people in question.

            So as the series builds up you're starting to recognise the voices, and understand more of what's going on in the conversations. So while I complain about some of the jumping around in the show, some of it is very deliberately done for a very good reason - and apparently a later episode is going to play you whole chunks of the transmissions that you will now be equipped to understand because you'll be able to recognise the voices through the static and know what they're talking about in more detail.

            I also have to comment on the Fred Dibnah username of our commentard above. Because that comment about the BBC coverage being inspiring about engineering and the username made me think of how different the Beeb's coverage of the Moon landings would have been with Fred Dibnah...

            My mental image has him climbing up the Saturn stack on the launchpad, in order to do an interview with the astronauts through the Apollo capsule hatch, and then the later flights would have had him talking about the steam engines they'd used for the lunar rovers...

            What would the astronauts have made of his accent?

            1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

              Re: Memory Lane...

              >What would the astronauts have made of his accent?

              Pitching the series to the BBC now: astronauts drift off course and re-enter "oop norf" and think they are on an alien planet.

              Can be filmed in BBC's new Salford HQ cos Manchester, Yorkshire and Geordie is all the same anyway

              1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
                Devil

                Re: Memory Lane...

                We'll call it: t'Dragon 1.

                First crewed SpaceX mission crashlands in t'Yorkshire Dales. Due to hostility of environment, inability to understand natives, strike action on railways and lack of radio reception the astronauts are forced to to repair their own craft in order to make it home. At one point the three of them are forced to descent a steep cobbled hill through a village in a bath on wheels in order to test their improvised launch system.

                I'm thinking of a possible love interest / sub-plot where one of the astronauts makes a connection with one of the natives - tentatively named Nora Batty - but is forced to choose between staying with her or leaving to return to his family.

                1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

                  Re: Memory Lane...

                  Work in a trouser-buster ferret scene and we are go

  7. still-me

    DVD/Bluray

    launches 5th November - just in time for my birthday - emailed link to my mum

  8. still-me

    Awesome video

    watched it last weekend and it was excellent - a couple of pics of wehrner von braun in passing and I'm sure I saw isaac asimov with his mutton chops in the vip crowd scenes but i could be wrong. Also a couple of good jokes I heard (no spoilers) that were new to me.

    I asked the staff what their policy was on science deniers and got the usual guff answer but thankfully the entire film was watched in silence apart from a few laughs at the aforementioned jokes.

    I found some of the captions hard to read - when will people learn small white writing in a pale-grey/moving background is hard to read. I understand them wanting to keep it from distracting the bigger picture (they were placed in the bottom left or bottom right of the main pic when needed) but it doesnt have to be rendered useless. Some of the captions were out of synch too - like countdowns starting/finishing separately (2-3s) from the event they are counting down.

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: Awesome video

      There were some interesting interviews on the subject of synchronising from the last documentary I watched at the Cinema. Peter Jackson's 'They Shall Not Grow Old'.

      Getting all that footage off hand cranked cameras to synch up is a bugger of a job. And they were using digital processing to create extra frames, between the existing film frames for ones where the cameraman had cranked too slowly. This was in order to avoid either having it look all jerky at normal speed, or having to run it too fast and make it look like a Keystone Kops film.

      The clever idea of lip-reading from the footage and then getting actors to dub in the dialogue also worked really well. I particularly liked the fact that nothing has seemingly changed. Troops passing a static camera behind the lines, turned and smiled/waved at it - and one did the old "hello Mum" gag - that people still do nowadays.

      And there were some funny shots with a group of recently captured German troops, where they were pissing around swapping hats and mugging for the cameras.

    2. Sharik

      Re: Awesome video

      Superb film. And I'm glad it wasn't just me imagining it was Asimov in the VIP shot.

  9. adam 40 Bronze badge

    Spoiler Alert?????

    Errr - el Reg?

    Where was the "Spoiler Alert" at the head of the article?

    Totally ruined it for me now - I was relying on my impending dementia to have erased my last memories of the event by the time I got to the iMax....

    1. goodjudge
      Joke

      Re: Spoiler Alert?????

      I think "the filmmakers still manage to insert drama into key parts of the tale (no spoilers)" is about the bit where they nearly let slip that it was being filmed on a sound stage in Utah. Possibly when that boom mic got into the frame. Good job no-one ever found out...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Spoiler Alert?????

        Nah. We all know it was faked...

        ... on the set on Mars!

    2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
      Happy

      Re: Spoiler Alert?????

      adam 40,

      You won't believe what's going to happen in a few months time when the Apollo 13 movie comes out. Tom Hanks is starring in it, and I hear it's going to be good. Can't wait to see how it ends...

      1. Ken Shabby Bronze badge

        Re: Spoiler Alert?????

        It happened again? When will they ever learn?

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    nasa balls up

    65mm 35mm 16mm . Very nice. Trouble is once you get to the bit thats actually the point of the mission its vtr 60 lines or less of fuzzy dross.

    You would think they could have taken some sort of handheld movie camera even if it had to be custom designed.

    Still trying to come across some competent footage from later missons. But all you get is close cropped clips. Some wide angle film cameras would have given it some impact and majesty

    Never mind navy flyboys , they should have had a cameraman as a crew member that did a few hrs training on how to fly the lunar module.

    Probably why everyone lost interest in the moon . The total ordinary nature of what was observed by joe public and those that hold the purse strings.

    If only the nazis had the best small camera makers as well as rocket experts.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: nasa balls up

      >You would think they could have taken some sort of handheld movie camera

      It's not the camera, it's the union crew.

      By the time you have the lighting cameraman, camera operator, focus puller, loader, key grip, dolly grip, man in down vest, best boy, pointless blonde girl with clipboard, catering etc etc you need a space ark.

  11. hooch
    Thumb Up

    Those who watched this might also like.....

    I saw Apollo 11 at BFI IMAX last weekend and was equally captivated for the full running time. See it on IMAX if you can, if only for the opening sequence.

    If, like me, you were space mad as a five year-old in 1969, you will probably also appreciate the BBC World Service podcast series 13 Minutes to the Moon. It has some fascinating detail on the whole programme.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w13xttx2

    1. still-me

      Re: Those who watched this might also like.....

      Yes, I like it too but hopefully it will be re-edited into a single episode without reminders every 5-10 minutes of what you are listening to and the ominous music piece.

      I understand its cut from the world service and that means it has 20-25 minutes of audio, then a break for news brief and then more stuff - and also repeated trailers for what program is being listened to.

      Could be down to an hour or 90 minutes quite easily and then might not repeat as much as it does in its old/current format.

    2. TchmilFan

      Re: Those who watched this might also like.....

      Agreed. If they do a repeat tour of IMAX cinemas go see it.

      That tracking shot in launch control... so good.

  12. 0laf Silver badge
    Childcatcher

    Not bloody fair

    They're only showing it in one cinema anywhere near me and I'll be on holiday the 3 days it's on!

    Shitfuckdammit

    1. Tom 7 Silver badge

      Re: Not bloody fair

      It doesnt appear to be on at my local alas! Another problem of living in the sticks.

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        Re: Not bloody fair

        I've got 2 local multiplexes. One with 6 screens and one with 12. Neither of the buggers are showing it! Last year's 'They Shall Not Grow Old' was on at the small one for one day only, November 11th. So I suppose I'll have to hope that one of the two decides to do something for 20th/21st July. It's either that, or go to that thar London.

  13. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

    despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

    Don't be so sure about that.

    I was reading something the other week, on the Beeb website I think. Not sure, because it wasn't all that important to me, just passing some time. But the takeaway from it was a comment about film reviewers going to see Apollo 13. The older reviewer mentioned that the young Radio One film critic mentioned that she was on the edge of her seat watching the film, wondering how it would turn out.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

      >One film critic mentioned that she was on the edge of her seat watching the film, wondering how it would turn out.

      Well it was a Holywood film. It was entirely possible that Bruce Willis would fly up in a WWII fighter and rescue them from evil Russians Iraqis Iranians libyans Democrats

    2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

      John Brown,

      I think I mentioned it on here a couple of weeks ago, but only because I'd heard it mentioned again on my favourite film program - Kermode & Mayo. It was Mark Kermode in his Radio 1 days. Where he went to the screening with Radio 1's other film critic - who was rather closer to their target demographic in age, and so hadn't heard about the original.

      But then I had a conversation on Monday with a colleague about the recent Pompeii movie with Kit Harrington. Where she was surprised by the ending and asked if it was based on real events. I thought everyone had heard of Pompeii's (plot spoiler!) destruction by volcano, but clearly not.

      1. Alister Silver badge

        Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

        To veer wildly off-topic, but kids these daystm just don't get the broad historical overview that we used to get, and are only taught very narrowly focused bits of history. My daughter's A level history curriculum was all about the French Revolution, and strangely the American Wild West.

        Thus, they may not know about Pompeii, Julius Caesar, Boadicea or indeed much of any of what we would consider "everybody knows" history.

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

          Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

          Alister,

          Firstly: Get off my lawn!

          Secondly, I'm not sure my (mostly 1980s) historical education was much broader. My A-Level syllabus was from the end of the Napoleonic Wars to 1945. Covering France, Germany, Italy and the UK. With a heavy emphasis on the Industrial Revolution, national politics and a good dollop of social history and diplomatic history.

          As I recall the stuff before that was saxons, Normans and mediaeval peasants, ending with enclosure and the end of the 3 field system. I got an A in GCSE history and don't even remember what the syllabus was... I think it must have been the enclosure thing, because for coursework we had to do a historical empathy excercise about enclosure. I was the village alcoholic, who sold his rights off to the evil landlord first, because I was too pissed to manage my plots properly, and we sort of role-played the whole thing then had to write an essay about how our characters felt about it all. And I wasn't allowed to get away with "hung-over".

          I believe GCSEs actually improved, but never recovered from the deservedly poor reputation they got in the first two years when I did them of having crappy excercises like that. I did the Summer and Winter French reading comprehension papers from the first year as test papers on the same day and got 20% in one and 80% in the other. That's how wildly varying the quality of the exam papers was.

          So my history was pretty narrow. But then I either learned about Pompeii from reading books, telly or latin lessons. OK, that last does make me sound old...

          The most memorable thing we did in pre-A Level history was the Black Death game. No clue whose morbid idea it was. But you had a map of Europe with a hex grid superimposed over it. And the aim was to kill the most people, by spreading the Black Death as fast as possible. So you could spread it from one hex to a neighbouring one or get it to a port and spread it faster by sea. Being 12 that was quite cooll, and actually quite a good way to get a mental picture of how epidemics/pandemics work.

          1. Alister Silver badge

            Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

            It's a great shame that most kids nowadays have no idea who Nigel Molesworth was, as I'm pretty sure I learnt about quite a bit of history from him... ;)

            1. Dave559

              Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

              Any fule kno who Molesworth is. Any who do not is utterly wet and a weed, chiz.

              Although somewhat dated now, I would hope that, in common with many classic children's books, copies would still be passed down from grandparent to parent to child and so on…

              (And "Skool Daze" owes a huge debt of honour to Molesworth, of course.

              I'm realising you have to be a certain age to even get that reference now! «shrugs»)

            2. hplasm Silver badge
              Happy

              Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

              Not to mention Hogwarts...

          2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

            "So my history was pretty narrow. But then I either learned about Pompeii from reading books, telly or latin lessons. OK, that last does make me sound old..."

            I learned about the Krakatoa eruption in Maths :-)

            The teacher was giving us a mnemonic for trigonometry, SOHCAHTOA, which sounds like Krakatoa but some/many of the class didn't get the reference, so Maths turned into history for about 15 minutes.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

              The mnemonic that I was taught for resistor colours (BBROYGBVGW) is problematic: it's (arguably, although it's a mnemonic and not an endorsement, but let's err on the side of caution) sexist, abusive, aggressive (and, depending on the first word, also racist (but does act as a helpful colour cue (the resistor colour)). Violet does sound like a fun lass to hang out with, though…

              Unfortunately, on the other hand, it is very memorable. I can still remember it now even though I haven't done anything with resistors since high school physics.

              I suspect that there are probably quite a few Reg readers who also know which expansion I mean without having to look it up, although I hope we all nevertheless feel a bit guilty about it.

              I am pleased to see that there are a good number of more polite alternatives, but unfortunately the one you were taught is the one that sticks with you. (If I was using resistors nowadays, I would make sure to try to learn and memorise one of the other mnemonics, and I would assume that it is one of the others that is taught in schools now.)

              1. Electronics'R'Us
                Holmes

                Colour codes

                In these days of tiny surface mount devices, colour codes are not used as much as they were when I first started in electronics.

                They still exist on some parts (through hole and MELF devices for instance) but in the usual surface mount packages they just have a numeric code; unfortunately the manufacturers do not have a standard way of putting those numbers on them.

                The easiest follows the original (digit 1, digit 2, multiplier and sometimes with a digit 3) but others have their own way of doing it, which can be a royal pain when trying to find if an incorrect part was loaded.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          History lessons

          History teaching at school is/was a strange thing.

          Yes, I learned all about Pompeii, and Boudicca (yes, she was Boadicea in my day as well, but obviously you can't be sufficiently "woke" if you don't reinvent things every so often (in this case, probably justified, based on more detailed knowledge, however)) somehow fitted in somewhere (but I literally can't remember any other details other than "fought the Romans"). Julius Caesar I was "aware of" but learned nothing about at school, unless you count extra-curricular study of Asterix books…

          And then history went: dinosaurs, Romans, battling "they bluidy English" (this was Scotland, after all), Vikings, a bit of plague, Henry VIII and many wives, Renaissance, Columbus, Conquistadors and Aztecs, Union of the Crowns, and Act of Union, and, umm, Anderson Shelters (and £SD and vulgar fractions, but oddly virtually nothing else about World War II at all (actually a very sad and important omission: I'm assuming that the intention was that you were supposed to ask your grandparents (and that it wasn't long enough ago in the eyes of those setting the curriculum to actually be "history" (wrong)), but what if your grandparents lived too far away (mine), or had sadly been killed in the war itself?)).

          And then, at that point, you had to choose whether you wanted to continue to study history at O-Grade or not.

          Unfortunately, a lot of what had been covered up to that point wasn't exceptionally interesting, and that it's actually everything that happened from that point onwards that has really shaped the world, is something you did not yet know about as an innocent 13/14 year old growing up in exurbia (so you choose geography instead).

          I can't help but think that history teaching would have been better done like physics: simple (but misleading) explanations/equations, which get superseded by more accuracy as you get deeper. A whistle-stop tour of all of history until the present day for starters would give you better background knowledge and a better feeling as to whether you might want to study it in more depth.

          1. Alister Silver badge
            Thumb Up

            Re: History lessons

            I can't help but think that history teaching would have been better done like physics: simple (but misleading) explanations/equations, which get superseded by more accuracy as you get deeper. A whistle-stop tour of all of history until the present day for starters would give you better background knowledge and a better feeling as to whether you might want to study it in more depth.

            This, a thousand times.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: History lessons

            > I can't help but think that history teaching would have been better done like physics: simple (but misleading) explanations/equations, which get superseded by more accuracy as you get deeper.

            My wife is a primary teacher and the most fuckwittedly moronic thing the current Government did was to change the National Curriculum to require them to teach history in chronological order!

            So in key stage two (years 3 to 6) it is: the Stone Age; followed by Ancient Romans; then Anglo Saxons and Scots; then the Vikings; then a local history unit; and finally a period of history later than 1066 (e.g. World War 2, Victorians, Tudors, the 1960s).

            The main effect of this was that every single history text book had to be thrown away and new ones bought because they no longer matched the children's age groups (they would have been either too simple or too hard). A complete and utter waste of money.

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

        "I think I mentioned it on here a couple of weeks ago,"

        In that case, it's entirely possible that your post is what I was remembering. In which case I was reposting hearsay as fact and possibly spreading fake news since there's only your recollection of hearing the story as proof! But I do often delve into the more obscure parts of the Beeb news site and may well have come across the story there too.

        Anyway, whatever, I read it on The Internet, so it must be true :-)

    3. awavey

      Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

      you say that, but actually the one thing this movie/documentary does bring home in spades is the tension of the moment those people were in at the time it was happening, those people you are seeing on the film didnt know how it would turn out, they were living the moment not acting it, knowing the risks, knowing the enormity of the fact no-one had done this before, so you do feel their emotion and the tenseness of the key moments and the relief when it works, they knew how big a risk they were taking, which I think in the post Apollo11 era, hey everything worked a charm why were worried, we forget how crazy an idea it was to strap people to a Saturn V rocket and send them off to the moon and do this stuff. You literally see how rudimentary & flimsy the lunar module was, it visibly flexes just under reaction control thrusts, its made of baco foil, and we sent people to the moon in it.

      I was sitting there at the end through the re-entry part,which is incredibly moving, and thinking my god I know they made it, unless Ive slided into some weird alternate universe, but this is actually worse than watching Apollo 13 in realtime, because again the footage you are watching, no one can predict the future of whats happening, they are reacting to events.

      I dont believe the next lunar mission will ever launch with only a 50/50 chance of success which are the best odds they had at launch of coming home for Apollo 11

      see it in IMAX, get immersed in it, it wont be the same on the small screen

      1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

        Re: despite every audience member knowing how things will play out,

        awayvey,

        Gene Kranz said something very interesting in the mostly excellent 13 Minutes to the Moon podcast. Well, to be fair, I think he said it in one of the NASA history project interviews that they used, but anyway.

        Apollo Program rules were going to be set that no lunar landing could be attempted without full communications with the spacecraft. Because if the thing crashed, and they got no telemetry from it, they might have no idea what went wrong, and quite possibly no way to find out.

        Chris Kraft and him apparently lobbied management to delegate that decision to the fligh controller.

        As he said, when they started the landing communications were awful. They had to do several reorientations of Eagle, just to try and get the high-gain antenna to talk to them. He actually did the go/no-go decision on data from a minute before, because they'd got one snapshot of data, on a brief connection, and then lost it again. The go decision was actually communicated verbally via Michael Collins, because they didn't even have comms with Eagle at the time, let alone telemetry.

        I think he said they had one more planned orbit, and therefore one more chance to go - so he basically had just that one wave-off and decided not to use it.

        After the decision was made, they re-established communications and everything was hunky-dory after that. Which is just as well, because with the program alarms on the computer Aldrin wasn't able to check that their altitude was being maintained within the perameters of the program - and mission control had to do it for him.

        Some documentaries really benefit from the cinema. I think They Shall Not Grow Old was fine on the small screen. But Senna really benefits from seeing it on a huge screen. Formula 1 in-car footage looks good on telly, but it's a whole different thing on a huge screen. It's pretty terrifying seeing Senna come through the tunnel at Monaco, then out into blinding sunlight to a chicane with a dirty great wall the other side of it. It really shows the balls you need to have to drive those things - even now when they're much safer.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Staggered release dates

    Keeping piracy alive.

    1. Oengus

      Re: Staggered release dates

      Comes out in Oz on July 17... Looking to see if I can find it on-line but will probably fork out the cash to see it on the big screen as well.

  15. TheProf

    Well worth it.

    Read this article at 10:30 am and caught the 12:00 noon showing at the Odeon.

    I hope there wasn't a 'Nick Fury' cameo after the credits ended because I left when the pictures and sound stopped.

    Really? Dammit!!

  16. JimRoyal

    Went to see this and loved it. I had to chuckle because there was not one woman in the audience. It was a real boys night out. Highly recommended for anyone interested.

    And here's how you deal with the conspiracy nutters.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UryIstlIGks

    1. _LC_ Bronze badge
      Happy

      In that case, I can recommend it too. I’ll stick with the girls meanwhile. :-)

      1. James Hughes 1

        Do they have girls in your mum's basement?

        1. hplasm Silver badge
          Meh

          FTFY

          Do they have live girls in your mum's basement?

    2. Graham Cobb

      Plenty of women in the showing we went to (opening day). Maybe the female space geeks are more organised!

  17. Mark C 2

    _LC_

    _LC_ is really Bombastic Bob and I claim the £5!

    ;-D

  18. Wade Burchette

    Just saw it today

    It was the first showing in my area. And I was the second person in the theater. I even took off the morning from work to see it at the Imax. And I tell you in truth, if I had time, I would have bought another ticket and seen it again right away. Even now, I am strongly considering seeing it again.

    I used to watch almost every shuttle launch. When I was younger, I actually watch the shuttle go up at the area for visitors at Cape Canaveral. The thing I remember was seeing the shuttle launch, but not hearing it. And then ... BOOM. A loud shockwave after it was in the air a good distance. I will never forget it.

    I wasn't born when the Apollo missions were cancelled. But I still marvel at what NASA did. And I am sad at what NASA has been reduced to. I wish I could spend two days, at least two, in space. The earth is my home, and I want to see my home while being weightless.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019