TomSawyer-2112

This movie has a lot in common with the excellent The Gorge and The Occupant: the male/female relationship, the crash, the survival struggle, and the search.

It really started off on the wrong foot though. Noise of vibrating engines in space? Come on - still no astrophysicist consulted? Then the passengers are in hibernation while the ship crawls through an asteroid field lined up like bowling pins. Anyone who's asked an expert knows asteroids in the Kuiper Belt are ridiculously far apart. And why were they even sleeping? The ship was moving painfully slow... maybe to dodge rocks, but let's be real: the energy wasted braking and then accelerating again for a ship that size makes no sense in terms of "taking a short cut".

Then humour kicks in - lots of it, visual and verbal, and refreshingly original. That shift allowed me to forgive the initial clichés and see them as intentional ridicules.

I particularly enjoyed the dynamic with the AI, maybe because I've been playing around myself with different chat AIs, pushing them into absurd corners.

The visual effects are excellent, the action is strong. What grated was the endless, mindless chatter of the female voice in his headset - a bit too much of modern teenage communication, and something I'd already found overdone in The Occupant.

The actors do their job well enough. Not in the same league as Miles Teller or Anya Taylor-Joy, but decent.

Overall, I enjoyed it. I never looked at my watch, and I left the theatre with a pleasant feeling.

For those who enjoyed "The Gorge", even if Long Distance does not have its depth, its an equivalent refreshing entertainment.

I gave both a 7, maybe I should give "The Gorge" an 8 rather than downgrading Long distance.

The film is professionally made, with a few standout scenes featuring original dialogue.

Robert De Niro plays both roles: two young mobster friends who share similar views on making a living as Italian immigrants. Over time, their paths diverge. This dual casting seems to be a creative attempt to highlight the contrast between their personality shifts-Frank Costello becomes measured and diplomatic, Vito Genovese remains aggressive and unyielding.

The film contrasts how one man adapts to life in a new country, while the other-after spending seven years back in Italy-remains stuck in his old ways. It suggests that while aggressive tactics may bring fast success, lasting power comes from adaptability and diplomacy.

But what is the underlying message? Are violent immigrants somehow softened or reformed by American society? Is Italy being portrayed simply as a nation of mafiosi? That feels unfair. My own ancestors were Italian immigrants-honest, hardworking people who took pride in their skills and integrity.

Is the film subtly commenting on modern immigration policy? A critique of hardline views like Trump's-implying that forcing people out only hardens them further when they return ?

Regardless, the movie is worth watching. What isn't, unfortunately, is De Niro's double role. Not because of the makeup-but because his signature presence is too strong. His body language, expressions, the way he moves shines through the face make up and the camera setups.

It all feels unmistakably like De Niro, no matter the character.

If there's one takeaway, it might be the long-standing critique: that De Niro often plays a version of himself. Despite his legendary status since Taxi Driver, one can argue he's been somewhat overrated-especially when it comes to his range of playing a wide variety of roles with different personalities, emotions, and styles.

His ego limits his ability to completely disappear into very different characters.

As a European, I find it difficult to rate this movie.

I likely rate a 4 or a 7.

To accept the plot's circumstances, I feel it's required to be receptive to the mindset and practices of Asian remote rural areas.

Who would tolerate being compelled to give up his daughter, sister, and beloved without some sort of struggle, denouncing to some authority? I successfully challenged all authorities and typical unfair applications of laws that separated me from my children throughout a divorce. The non-existence of an organized resistance is beyond my comprehension, but I decided to accept that initial plot.

Then greatly romantic vibrant pictures merge with the harsh poor dusty captivity, giving the movie the cachet of a fable.

The contrast is quite upsetting. The religious parts of the traditions are not clearly laid forth. It is rather suggested that a group of local dominant men exploit traditions to impose their own personal interests and impulses. Their abusive behaviours are in no way religiously or morally motivated.

It is difficult to accept that the girl survived so many atrocities for years, on the dusty floor of a single room cabin without proper clothing, water, or a bed, only to peacefully fade away at the moment of her rescue.

This culminates in an inappropriate amount of melodrama and sentimentality included in may scenes.

However, the film left a deep impression, as I could identify so deeply with the victim's fate.

It effectively depicts how oppressive rules make it impossible to be respected, resulting in abusive punishments, uncontrollable emotional resistance, and an overall denial of responsibility. So much misery for so many involved, all in the name of honouring a tradition and a family.

So I gave it a 7 as it felt more like a bestiary with human beasts than a true story.