Review of Apollo 13 (1995) by Troy C — 31 Jul 2012

I don't know much about politics or budget restraints, but if the work that NASA does can produce films like ``Apollo 13'' and its predecessor, ``The Right Stuff'', I'm all for keeping it around. The tenuous blend of technology and human spirit that these films celebrate is the closest thing to a man-made miracle that we have.

``Apollo 13'' is a great achievement. Not only does it capture the look and feel of the early seventies- it educates and illustrates the accomplishment that the early Apollo missions were. Ron Howard's direction is near perfect; focusing and complimenting the natural drama of the events. So powerful is the contents of the story, that the subtlety of the direction can easily be overlooked, but given the scope of the film and the infinite number of directions that it could have taken, it's easy to see that Howard knew exactly what he wanted to concentrate on and how to best cover it.

As the name implies, the film covers the ill-fated Apollo 13 mission that launched on the 11th of April in 1970. Slated to go to the moon, the ship and its crew ran into serious trouble when an explosion occurred on the third day of the journey.

The film starts by reviewing a brief history of the Apollo program, from its inception through its set-backs right up to its seemingly routine nature at the time of the Odyssey mission. Far from dull, this background gets us into the mood of the late sixties, reminds us of the virtual new-ness of the space flight activity. Space shuttles take off routinely these days with little hoopla. We take it for granted. Undoubtedly too much so. By the time of the Apollo 13 mission ( a mere three years after man first set foot on the moon), the American public had already grown nonchalant about space travel. Yet the technology was definitely far from perfected.

One scene that elicits chuckles is a VIP tour that astronaut Jim Lovell is conducting for some Washington bureaucrats debating the value of continuing to fund an expensive space program. Talking of the great strides that have been made, Lovell attempts to impress them with a description of a computer system responsible for complex operations of the program that barely fills the space of an ordinary room.

Looking back, it's hard to imagine that most of the public was still watching their favorite television programs on black and white sets. It's a poignant moment when the major networks (there were only three, if you recall) opt to ignore the astronauts live broadcast from space in favor of regular, rating-boosting sitcoms and programming. The apathy seems staggering as the crew continues its television feed, unaware of the last minute change.

From the start, the mission appears plagued. A medical decision prompts a change in the crew two days prior to the launch. The intimacy that has developed amongst the members over the months of training is upset with the replacement by the back-up pilot. When the explosion occurs it robs the crew of its chance to land on the moon. Soon, the issue becomes ``Will the crew be able to get home?''. The odds are against it.

The command module has lost power and precious oxygen. The crew is forced to take haven in the lunar module. Designed to accommodate two for approximately 45 hours worth of work, it is forced to house all three of the men. This creates its own set of problems. In order to have sufficient power to enable a re-entry, the ship is forced to shut down all its systems. Soon, the capsule is near freezing. Next, the air purification system- designed to serve two- is unable to cleanse the CO2 from the air. Without a quick solution, the men will be incapacitated.

The amazing thing behind the entire story is that in spite of the hours of training, the millions of details and the myriad considerations of the mission planners, this accident made all of the preparations completely void. None of the problems or complications that the mission encountered had been anticipated. Even the make-shift solutions forced upon the men came accompanied with new sets of problems. Both the men in space and the support team on the ground were working from scratch; improvising from the materials on hand, fighting against the impossibility of the situation and the unbending restrictions of time. There was no allowance for error, no second chance.

``Apollo 13'' stars Tom Hanks, Bill Paxton, Kevin Bacon, Ed Harris and Gary Sinise. The performances are good and certainly believable, but even so, the familiarity of the faces (especially Hanks') detracts slightly from the real-life knowledge of the scenario. Try as I might, it was hard not to see Tom up on the screen instead of astronaut Jim Lovell.

With some mild swearing of frustration, the film is rated PG-13. Though the rating will allow for younger children, the pacing and length of the film (2 1/2 hours) will make it difficult for all but the most space-happy youngsters to sit still for the duration. Be forewarned- Adults won't want to miss a minute of this exceptional film in dealing with fussy children.