Talk:Spaceman (2024 film)

"Putting back together"?

It follows an astronaut sent on a mission to the edge of the solar system who encounters a creature that helps him put his earthly problems back together.

Sorry, but how does one "put problems back together"? Are these problems you've solved, then you bring them back? Or problems that somehow fell apart, and you reassemble them? Is the phrase deliberately mysterious, or unintentionally opaque? Or maybe it's an inexplicable Sandlerism that's best left as-is?
If anyone does know how to put this particular problem back together, that'd be great. I don't think you can put it back together, though, as it never seems to have been, like, together, AFAIKT. – AndyFielding (talk) 09:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

The Czech mission has arrived shortly before the South Korean astronauts to the post.

Hi Jack Sebastian,

=> re:

What I meant in my previous edit of the phrase above in the title field: "to the post" there sounds confusing (which post is meant exactly?) and out-of-place - unlike the idiom "pip to the post" which I myself introduced into the text of the plot making changes yesterday. Objection was raised that that idiom is a colloquialism and wording was replaced with "has arrived to the post", which just doesn't sound right, IMO. Hence my suggestion that the text be amended to "The Czech mission is slightly ahead of the South Korean astronauts" - which to me sounded the best. I'm just not sure that the text now has the same meaning (plus, to me at least it just sounds a bit "off", with that confusing "to the post"). 😕

To add a little bit further: the race in the film (from the dialogue) between the Czechs and South Koreans has been for being the first to launch - hence, the Czech mission has pipped the Korean astronauts to the post. And the reason why I added that whole sentence about competition between the Czechs and Koreans was by way of explanation why Jakub gets picked up by Korean space vessel at the end of the film - because his mission is ahead of Korean astronauts (being the first to launch). You see, both of the statements in my edits are correct - but the phrase "The Czech mission has arrived shortly before the South Korean astronauts to the post" is confusing and misleading because it suggests that there's been a race to Chopra itself.😒Szagory (talk) 20:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I see what you mean now, Szagory. My sole issue was with the term 'pipping' - a term as fraught as 'beat/beating', and less with the destination point. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 22:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

And about the phrase "pip to the post" being not only an idiom, but also a colloquialism (they don't mean the same thing, you know) - quick search on Wikipedia gives a few immediate matches where that phrase is used:

=> Iron Butt Association (silly name for a serious organisation, but the page is there nonetheless)

=> The Boxer Rebellion (band)

=> K.R.C. Genk

... and other pages more

So how come that this idiom (which hasn't been classified as colloquialism, to the best of my knowledge) was allowed to be used on those pages?

Szagory (talk) 22:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

But yes, just as suggestion: let's replace the current wording with something like "The Czech mission reaches Chopra shortly before the South Korean astronauts" (although in actuality it's NOT an event taking place at the beginning of the film, as would be suggested by that wording; rather it's a process spread over the entire duration of the film).

Enough time spent on debating over a minor semantics point, IMO. 😉

Szagory (talk) 23:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

First of all, OSE - Other stuff exists. I am not going to debate where else a colloquialism/idiom exists; it doesn't belong here. Semantic games do not help the conversation along, Szagory. Don't be that guy.

And, not to be a dick or anything, but here's the definition: A colloquialism is a spoken language style used for informal communication. An idiom is a figurative phrase that has an understood meaning that differs from its literal meaning.

Lastly, I disagree that the term 'reaches' is more encyclopedic than the term 'arrives before' - the latter phrase being more concise, as the Czech mission isn't actually 'reaching' (as in using one's arms towards something).

'Arrives before is a better term. If you feel that this point of definition and usage is an insurmountable point of discussion for us to find agreement on, feel free to initiate 3O or and RfC; more eyes on an article is always a good thing, in my estimation. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 06:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps MikeAllen wouldn't mind taking a look and adjudicating? I obviously didn't mean for this discussion to turn into a revision-undoing war, and the whole thing has already escalated to an unintended (and almost ridiculous) level... But to me "Czech mission has arrived to the post" doesn't sound right linguistically, neither does that statement describe the events in the film accurately (in the film there's no race-like behaviour between Jakub and the South Koreans on the way to Chopra for the phrase "to the post" to be used; Hanuš and Jakub reach Chopra at the very end of the film, not in the beginning, as would be suggested by the current wording). 🤔

👉🏾 MikeAllen: does the phrase "to arrive to the post" sound alright to you (disregarding the temporal inaccuracy of that wording, and ignoring the fact that "to the post" in that phrase is a semantic solecism)? ⁉️

Szagory (talk) 08:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Pronoun confusion

"after he left her and their unborn daughter behind to go on the mission."

Is the word "her" means "him" or "his"? 182.253.54.120 (talk) 04:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Adaptation differences

It would be instructive for the reader to explain the differences between the novel and the adaptation (if the sources allow one to do so). As it stands, the novel wraps up all the questions the reader has about the story, but the film adaptation does exactly the opposite. As someone who enjoys books and films, I find this kind of thing to be very frustrating. I understand that a film adaptation is not a novel (and vice versa), but it does a disservice to the original text to create a completely different work of art. In the novel, we are given some indication that Hanuš may have, in fact, been real, but in the film, there is no such certainty, and it is left to the viewer's imagination. Also, the idea of "every moment of time [existing] simultaneously" as the denouement has been done to death already, receiving its most public viewing with Interstellar in 2014, and receiving yet another look in Everything Everywhere All at Once in 2022, so it boggles the mind that they thought it was a good idea to do this again. I just don't get the thinking behind this. Surely, they understand that the niche audience for science fiction, the very people who would watch Spaceman, have already seen Interstellar and Everything Everywhere All at Once, and don't want to see the same thing again? Or is this reflective of the studio suits, who contrary to the writers, want a film to resemble other films because they think the audience wants to see the same thing, over and over again? Viriditas (talk) 21:06, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Picked up versus rescued

Jakub is picked up by the South Korean space vessel.

I changed "picked up" to "rescued", as that is the underlying point of the scene, as Hanuš tells Jakub, right before he dies, that this might not be his end. Hence the importance of "rescue" over "picked up". Viriditas (talk) 22:37, 26 June 2024 (UTC)