Good movie, but questionable sequences and headache-inducing camera work

Rating: 7/10 (15 October 2018)

"First Man" (2018 release; 141 min.) brings the story of Neil Armstrong and NASA's quest to get a man on the moon before the Russians could. As the movie opens, Armstrong is testing a plane in the upper reaches of the atmosphere (140,000 ft. altitude), and after initially bouncing off of the atmosphere, managers to get back safely, at which point the movie tells it's "1961, Mogave Desert, CA". We get to know the Armstrong family, including the desperate health battle of their young daughter Karen. Armstrong makes it through the Gemini astronaut selections in 1962, prompting a move to Houston. "It's a fresh start", comments Janet. At this point we're less than 15 min. into the movie but to tell you more of the plot would spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see for yourself how it all plays out.
Couple of comments: this is the latest movie from director Damien Chazelle, whose previous two films ("Whiplash" and "La La Land") hit the bull's eye. Here he brings the book of the same name to the big screen. The biggest challenge with a movie like this is how to keep things interesting, if not dramatic, when we already know the outcome (will Armstrong perish in the test flights? urr... NO!). That doesn't mean that some of the footage of these flights isn't terrific. I have a greater issue with the camera work. I totally get it that Chazelle wants to convey the claustrophobic feeling of being inside the small space capsule , and he does a terrific job at that (if you have visited the National Air $ Space Museum, it truly is shocking to see how small and primitive-looking these capsules were). But the movie incessantly features extreme close-ups and headache-inducing handheld cameras for much of the time, for no apparent dramatic reason (at one point Janet crosses the street to talk to her neighbor Pat--you'd think that an earthquake with a magnitude of 6 on the Richter scale has just hit). Also questionable to me are some of the sequences involving Neil and Janet (just one example: when Janet visits Neil in quarantine upon returning to earth, neither of them has any smile or joy--or sign of relief. I doubt that was really the case. But maybe I am nitpicking.
In case you aren't aware, Neil Armstrong lived the last 30+ years of his life here in Cincinnati (where I am) until his passing in 2012. He was a notorious pack rat of memorabilia throughout his career (never mentioned or alluded to in the film) His sons Mark (who still lives in Cincinnati) and Rick have recently announced that thousands of items from Neil's personal collection will be auctioned off...
The movie opened wide this weekend, and the Sunday evening screening where I saw this at was attended nicely but not quite a sell-out. The movie performed not quite fully up to expectations at the box office ($16.5 million). I can't help but feel that many expected bigger things. The movie is good, maybe very good, but it is not the critical home run that was either of Chazelle's earlier movies. Still, it will likely garner a number of Oscar nominations. If you liked "The Right Stuff" or "Apollo 13", I'd readily suggest you check this out, be it in the theater, on VOD, or eventually on DVD/Blu-ray, and draw your own conclusion.