Ron Howard’s In the Shadow of the Moon (2007) essentially remakes Al Reinert’s For All Mankind (1989), utilizing the vast collection of archive footage relating to the space program and from the missions themselves, and also incorporating interviews with the astronauts. The primary differences are their musical scores, seeing the astronauts as they are talking in interviews rather than just voice-overs, and the emphasis on chronology in structuring the footage.

Brian Eno’s score in For All Mankind was an ambient masterpiece, with a few dated mistakes here and there which I am willing to overlook. It conveyed a feeling of awe, quiet beauty, and also a feeling of something alien, of being somewhere out of your element. Philip Shepard’s score for In the Shadow of the Moon falls back on that trite, uplifting, inspirational music with choral oohs and ahhs. It works for the film because their experiences were certainly uplifting and inspirational and all. One would think, however, that in 2007, after a good century of film behind us, that we would have a better sense of how to make a film more compelling and to differentiate it from the past. Shepard’s score is the type you’d expect to find in a film from twenty years ago about a cripple regaining the ability to walk, or a television special on aquatic life. Outer space requires something more along the lines of what Eno developed in the eighties. More importantly, there is no sound in the vaccuum of space. Aside from the chatter in their helmets, these guys were in the most quiet place possible; meaning, periods of silence are to be expected and can be useful in letting the images do the talking. I strongly resent films which beat you over the head with an over-present score telling you how to feel at every moment. Reinert and Eno knew when to exercise restraint.

For All Mankind was really a marriage of sound and video. The interview footage was reduced to an audio track playing over the archival footage Reinert and company had culled from the vaults. For me, it worked well and I didn’t give it a second thought. Now, upon viewing In the Shadow of the Moon and getting to see the astronauts’ faces as they are saying these things, it makes a different impression. Some of these men have incredible faces, not just because they’re elderly and are full of creases, but faces with plenty of character imbued from birth. Charlie Duke and Mike Collins in particular are great to look at when they’re talking. Being able to see them speak, to see the emotion in their faces, adds more of a personal element to the film than For All Mankind had. This can especially be seen in the opening scenes of the film with the close-ups of each of the astronauts’ faces. The only thing I didn’t like about Howard’s approach was that he lingered on their faces for an extended period of time after they were done talking, maybe to see if they would do something revelatory, or in an attempt to make their words more profound. If I were being interviewed and somebody pulled that stunt I would be a bit perplexed as to why the camera was still running and nobody was talking. I think there’s a moment when Mike Collins’ face expresses this sentiment at some point in the film.

Reinert operated under the idea that he was going to show us what a mission to the moon would be like. “A” mission, meaning one. To accomplish this he compiled footage from a number of missions into one whole unit, like making a supercar out of parts from various automakers and using only those parts which will make this car operate best. The technique worked well for Reinert. Yes, the fashions and technology change a bit from frame to frame, but I never lost the sense of the journey that Reinert was leading us on. Howard chose a more linear approach and showed the steps toward the first successful moon landing, and briefly mentioned subsequent missions. He retains some of the interweaving, particularly in terms of what it was like to be on the moon, which he lets the astronauts from each mission talk about together. This makes sense, as their impressions of the moon do not have much to do with the year in which they were on it. Basically, both approaches work equally well.

“Inna final analysis,” as it were, I have to side with Reinert’s For All Mankind as the superior of the two. It has the better score by Eno, more astounding footage of the missions and less of the men while they are talking, and accomplishes more in 80 minutes than Howard’s In the Shadow of the Moon does in 110. The Criterion Collection release of For All Mankind makes up for the lack of face-to-face interviews in the film with plenty of these in bonus footage as well as commentary by Gene Cernan. While I certainly advocate watching Howard’s film at some point in your life, I think that For All Mankind will be the better remembered over time.