Buy Apollo 18 Movie. Watch online or Download
Genres: ThrillerHorrorSci
Starring: Ryan Robbins, Warren Christie, Lloyd Owen
Director(s): Gonzalo López-Gallego
Available Quality: Hi Def
Country: USA, Canada
Year: 2011
Available Quality: DivX, Hi Def
IMDB Rating: 5.3 out of 10 (16802 votes)
Decades-old found footage from NASAs abandoned Apollo 18 mission, where two American astronauts were sent on a secret expedition, reveals the reason the U.S. has never returned to the moon.
 |
Apollo 18 (Hi Def) | Resolution: 1280x728 px | Total Size: 4470 Mb |
|
|
 |
Apollo 18 (DivX) | Resolution: 624x352 px | Total Size: 700 Mb |
|
Movie Photos:
We have taken some photos of "Apollo 18". They represent actual movie quality.
Visitors Review
vitor-fernandes1983 (25 May 2012)
Great movie
Did I just watch the same movie as everyone else? This movie was great.Whoever says this is boring must not have been paying attention to themovie. After watching Cowboys and Aliens recently, I thought sciencefiction genre was lost. This is the best science fiction movie I'veseen since District 9, and I watch 1 or 2 movies everyday. This is theprove you don't need lots of special effects, CGI and explosions tomake a good movie.The acting is believable, the actors actually act like real people, notaction movie heroes. The plot is good, the way it's done is originalfor a movie in space. It is not a masterpiece, but it's worth a watchfor sure. I really felt connected with the movie. Best of all, theending is not predicable, at all, but you'll like it. Just don't gothinking you'll get a horror movie in space, it' not paranormalactivity in space, it's more like a documentary with a little bit ofdrama to keep things interesting. Repeat with me, 'I'm not going towatch this movie to get scared', then you can go ahead and disregardany reviews that say this movie isn't scary. I recommend this movie ifyou liked the movie 'Moon' from Duncan Jones, not a scary one as well. The only bad thing is, I don't understand how NASA would have gottenthe footage, and some sounds in reality you wouldn't actually hear, sothe movie is technically flawed. More research and editing needed.
andell (24 May 2012)
Beware of moon rocks that go missing...you might be in the sequel!
By now, I assume most people reading this are aware of the fact thatthis is a film that is apparently spliced together from footage takenby the crew of the ill fated "Apollo 18" mission to Mars. Of course it's a faux documentary, but I suspect if you can suspendyour disbelief until after you see the film, it may make the experienceif not more enjoyable, at least less boring! Three astronauts take off for the moon; two of them are to collect rocksamples from the moon's surface, while the third is in orbit above themoon. No one seems to question the need for scores of cameras...butneedless to say, cameras are set up all over the place, and the twoastronauts on the planet have a camera fastened to their space suit! On day 1 of their two day mission they encounter strange rocks thatfeel different...but they still bag them and tag them and take themback to their "lunar pad" if you will. That night they hear strangesounds around them...but they don't draw any conclusions about them.The following morning, they discover one of the rocks is no longercontained, but is sitting on the floor of the quarters. Thinkingnothing much of it, they set out on the second day, discovering aSoviet lunar ship that has landed, and the inside is stained withblood.Searching a dark crater, they find the remnants of the SovietCosmonaut, and decide to hole up until their mission ends. Attempts tofind out if NASA knew about the Soviet mission are quelched with a"need to know" provision.The next morning when they are preparing for take off, they are rattledfrom outside, and their communications are damaged. Unable to take offwithout fixing communications, one of the astronauts leaves the ship torepair the damaged equipment...and realizes something is moving aroundin his space suit.If this description sounds bland, it's because the film IS bland! Mostof the efforts made to keep the audience engaged include zoom shotsthat you can't really see anything in, sounds that seem to have beenselected to try to create atmosphere, and eerie shadow shots of theastronauts on the moon.It's the latter that is somewhat effective at creating the menacingatmosphere...but nothing is really done with it.In the end, none of the astronauts make it home, the government isimplicated in knowingly sending the men to their deaths (as per usual),and we learn that the moon rocks that were so strange are in fact arespider like creatures that, not unlike the aliens in Alien, seem to getinside your body, multiply, and cause you to explode in a washof...alien rock spiders! Oh, and we also learn that something like 500 tonnes of moon rocks havebeen brought back to Earth...most were given away as souvenirs andgifts to foreign dignitaries...and many are now unaccounted for!Duh-duh-daaaaahhh! In earnest, this is a very shallow imitation of the Blair WitchProject, except involving aliens and the evil government rather than awitch. My advice would be to save your money, and either watch "Alien"or "The Blair Witch Project." This is not a good movie!
alistairc_2000 (23 May 2012)
Good documentary style SF movie
There was a moon mission that was not reported. Everyone thought thatApollo 17 was the last mission. Now new footage has emerged of thefinal mission. PlotThere was an extra mission to the moon that no one knows of and thisfootage shows the reason why. Whilst there they make a discovery...This is done in diary of the dead style. It was a good movie that wasslightly spoiled by some yobbos have a fight at the back of the cinema.I do think that this movie was more suited to DVD that the movies...9/10.... if you liked Moon.
Solo2070 (23 May 2012)
Great idea, poor execution
I am a fan of the "found footage" concept. It is an interesting way toportray a story, that can really get to you. This film started off very good. There was the appropriate amount oftension, and just enough background information was given. While thefootage was not of the highest quality, I understand why they did it.It fits the timeline. It does take a bit to get used to to, but afterabout 20 minutes you don't even seem to notice it. The tension was building, and it was doing so quite well. There wassuspense, and the sound added a nice element to it. The problem cameabout 3/4 of the way in. The suspense began to disappear and it was just replaced with scenesdesigned to startle you. They could have held some camera shots alittle longer to build the suspense more, and they could have presentedsome scenes a little differently. Once we actually saw the "creatures," I just thought the movie became alittle dumb. First off, these creatures are something right out ofPirates of the Caribbean. Almost a flat out copy cat. Also, the problemwas that the creatures, and the situation was just too hard to relatetoo. After a bit, I just started to get bored. Some have compared it to the Paranormal Activity films. That is justsimply not a valid comparison. They are the same concept as far asfilming goes, but the styles and delivery are all different. This filmwas by no means as good as those films. I give this a solid 5 out of 10.
Jose Picazo (23 May 2012)
Not what I was Expecting .
When i first heard of this movie I was actually not that excited,mostly because I wasn't really into "Lost-and Found footage" type ofMovies. When I had the opportunity to see it I didn't hesitate andwatched it not really expecting much. When I came out of the theater Iwas not disappointed at all. Let me state the Cons First: 1: I did feelthe Movie in the beginning was pretty slow 2: Sometimes during theMovie I couldn't figure out what they were saying because of the effectthey used for the audio to make it sound like it they were in space.Those are practically all the cons I had with the Movie And now for thePros: 1: The movie kept my attention through out, even with the pacingissues in the beginning. It displayed an original idea that I had notseen before in a movie and provided a good time at the theater 2: TheVisual effects, While not that jaw dropping, were still pretty decentconsidering it was meant to look like it was recorded on a old Videocamera. and finally 3: The ending was not bad (Despite what people say)It was a nice way to conclude the a great movie.In the end I really did enjoy this movie. It adds variation to the"Lost-and found" type of movies and honestly does not disappoint.8/10
thebrighteyes (22 May 2012)
Half-Baked Horror
For a movie with what must have been a fairly low budget, the Apollo 18filming team definitely did a great job. The moon and space sceneslooked very realistic, and the director definitely knows how to film amovie in the "found footage" genre. The small cast of actors also did apretty great job. So what went wrong here? Overall, I think, the"horror" element of the movie seemed half-baked, and the monstersseemed tacked on.For example, with any good horror movie, the villain is given some sortof motivation - even if those motivations are left vague. But, askyourself, what were the motivation of these moon-rock spiders? Theywould simply attack these astronauts, make them slowly go crazy, themleave them to die. ...Even when they pulled the astronaut into the darkcrater, he re-appeared a little crazier but no worse for ware.For this and other reasons, it seemed that little thought was put intothe plot. Still, the movie was a good way to kill 70-minutes.
Christian_Dimartino (20 May 2012)
It's bland, and it made my stomach ache the second it started.
2011 was an impressive year for scary movies. But as always, there wasthat one bad one, the one that stood out. And for me, that was Apollo18, a bland, poorly acted, and stomach churning fiction about why therearen't space missions anymore.That is the premise to this quick movie(clocking in at a whopping hourand 26 minutes). Obviously, it doesn't lead you to believe that whatthey're telling us is true. I highly doubt that a weird spider-rockcreature infected a group of astronauts and THAT'S why it hasn'thappened in years.The movie gave me a stomach ache the second it started, and when thathappens, you know you're not gonna have fun. Also, I hate the way thatfilms such as Cloverfield and Quarantine are filmed in this style. It'sbeen done to death, and it's stupid.Is Apollo 18 the worst movie of the year? No. It doesn't come close toYour Highness, Sucker Punch, or Season of the Witch, but it's still abad movie that you will struggle watching for about 50/80 minutes. Andthat's pretty bad.C-
Neil Welch (20 May 2012)
Read that opening screen, and wonder to yourself...
Apollo 18 starts by telling us that, in 2011, 84 hours of NASA filmbecame available and this film is edited from that footage. We then seethe salient elements of the mission: the crew members, the vaguemission parameters, elements of the flight, landing, and excursions andactivities, and that is when things start to go wrong. It's also when Istart to spoiler, so bail out now if you don't want to hear any more.Turns out that the Russians have already landed in the vicinity, buttheir lunar module is deserted: the two US lunarnauts subsequently findthe dead cosmonaut, at which point - oh, the heck with it, you canprobably guess anyway - one of the men becomes infected with what turnout to be things which appear to be rocks but which look and move likegiant spiders, ticks or crabs. After various problems, the survivingastronaut takes off in the soviet lunar module, only to be attacked bythe thingies just in time to lose control of the vehicle and crash itinto the US command module, destroying them both. All for the best,probably.All well and good. It's a bit leisurely, there are a couple of made youjump moments, and you get the feeling that a lot of the time they areexpecting you to sit there going "Wow! They're really captured the lookof all the old moon footage, both the physical side of the moon and thehardware, and also the look of the video and film footage, the jargon,the sound of the radio etc." and it's true, they have. Having saidthat, this means that they have made it look like rubbishy old low-resvideo, and 16mm film with projector scratches, sprocket hole jumps etc.Well done, guys! But I could live with that, I could live with the slowpace, I could live without knowing how the creepy crawlies survive on adiet of raw rock (and the occasional passing astronaut) in darkness andvacuum and sub-zero temperatures.But tell me this - where did the film come from? There is a moderateamount of discussion about film and video equipment, it is clear thatmuch of what we are looking at is film not video (video could betransmitted back, but film is a physical medium and the filmsthemselves needed to be retrieved and developed), so one of theastronauts carts a bag of film to the Russian craft before he takes off- and then it crashes into the command module, destroying both craft.So the film he was carrying never made it back to Earth. So where didthe 84 hours of found footage come from, and how did they make thismovie? All it needed was a few words of explanation at the end (eg.Apollo 19 visited, photographed from orbit, picked up the bag of films,didn't land). They blew it, right at the end.
Richard Bellamy (20 May 2012)
Faux space documentary better than predicted
Framed as leaked "found footage" from the era of space exploration inthe 1970s, Apollo 18 is an attempt to out conspiracy the already rifeconspiracy theories concerning the lunar landings. The trouble withframing something as being documentary style footage is you have to getthe science right and be free from any loopholes that might break theaudience out of the illusion. Apollo 18 falls short on this count.López-Gallego manages to recreate to a certain extent the lunarmissions. Portrayed through the various cameras feeding live footageback to Earth we have a Big Brother style look into the doomed from thestart space mission. The two man crew of the lunar lander also filmthemselves on 16mm cameras. Herein lies some of the flaws in thedirector's logic. We need to get into the character's perspective torelate. This is solely done through these 16mm cameras. They filmthemselves on the moon's surface as well as personal records in themodule. The rest is all caught on remote cameras, the audience beingallowed to see the threat before the crew do, privy to the danger theDepartment of Defence has exposed them to. The live footage makes senseto have been documented; however the 16mm film rolls do not make itout, they share the crews dire fate. How then are we seeing the actionsof the crew amidst this found footage? It makes no sense pulling anyreasonably astute watcher beyond the line of suspension of disbelief.It seems clear López-Gallego wants us to care about the cast. We needto care for the conspiracy theory to resonate. The story very directlyharks into the era of Watergate where the powers that be cannot betrusted. But his illusion of found footage does not stand up at allwell. Does the story really fail on this account? No. It's actuallyfairly entertaining as it goes. The tension builds; the threat isrevealed and played out. However the conspiracy theme and thedocumentary framing lend the film no real benefit and do not pay off.While there is reams of data on the films website to build theconspiracy it is not present enough on screen to sideline the notion weare victim to a none to subtle slight of hand. What the film did do with the early footage was remind me why, as achild, I was so fascinated with space. It shows with sufficient realismwhat the actual Apollo astronauts did and how we as a planet reachedfor the stars. This is not history as it tries to suggest, but it is areminder, to me at least, of how sad it is that we no longer pursuesuch epic destinations as the moon or beyond.
blillion (19 May 2012)
Awesome/Terrible
I really have a thing for movies shot with the whole "home movie"format. "Cloverfield" is one of my favorite movies, and I reallyenjoyed "Blair Witch" and "Paranormal Activity". But these types ofmovies do always have some glitches, because there's no way someonecould actually take enough usable footage to make an enjoyable film.This movie had an awesome premise: 3 astronaugts on a secret mission tothe moon. You know from watching the original preview that somethinggoes wrong, but you don't exactly know what.The beginning of the movie consists of individual interviews with thethree men, and footage of a BBQ before the mission. It's a little bitboring, but it works. Then they embark on their mission, get to themoon, etc. The first 20 minutes is just setting up cameras and trickingviewers into thinking a scare is coming up. Then they find a Russianastronaugt who had been killed, and they realize some serious stuff isgoing down in space. There were a lot of cool camera effects; myfavorite being the use of a flash generator in a pitch black hole. Theydid take the scene from "Paranormal Activity" where Katie is standingover the bed watching Micah sleep, but it still sort of works for thismovie, so I didn't hate that too much. The ending was actually reallyupsetting, though, and it makes me kinda want to punch America in theface. Like really hard. There was a HUGE plot whole with how they gotthe reels back to Earth, which is annoying.But ultimately, I really enjoyed this movie. If you're a fan of thistype of film format, definitely go see it, but if not, shut up.
SonOfSalem (18 May 2012)
Excellent Sci-Fi Chiller imbued with brave cinematic flair
I feel that it is necessary to build decent expectations of this movieso that the viewer might better make a more concrete choice and lessenthe possibility of a negative time at the cinema. So I have compiledthis list to service that end.1) If your attention span is less than 3 minutes, don't watch this.2) If you need a blonde to fulfil your movie experience, don't watchthis.3) If you need said blonde to be wearing a tube-top, don't watch this.4) If you need said blonde to be butchered by an axe wielding manicthat we have seen at least a thousand times before, please don't watchthis.5) If you believe "Micheal Bay" is the future of Cinema, don't watchthis.6) If you believe that every movie that comes out AFTER a movie thatsets a new genre, should be judged against "that" movie, simply becauseit is "in" the original movies genre... don't watch this.7) If you can't understand, or at least reconcile in some minusculefashion that, "ALL" creativity, and a great amount of inspiration isinfluenced by that which has gone before it, don't watch this.8) If you are a slave to your peers and are afraid to formulate yourown opinion, don't watch this.9) If you feel like watching this, with the expectation of walking outin the first twenty minutes, so that you can rush home and write areview on IMDb, but have to watch a trailer so that you can find outwhat it was actually about so that you can write your "review", don'twatch this.10) "Apollo 18" in my opinion, comes VERY close to capturing that lost(sadly) pioneering spirit of the manned space program; (the real one,and not the satellite service) when men were men, and who had nevereven heard of Aloe Vera. A lot of men died up there. A lot. We don'tnormally hear about it. But they did. And although the movie hasobviously used this tragic mystique to great effect, it does fall shortwith pacing issues and the depth of writing could have been a littlebit more refined. But that said, I found these to be only minorinfractions as my flesh chilled beneath the breadth of it'scinematographic wings.I hope you get some enjoyment out of it.-{ A great percentage of the best horror movies are foreign. Don't beafraid of them! }-
pal-borresen (18 May 2012)
What??
When was this ever exciting or horrifying? Never! This movie wassomething I'd been looking forward to for a long time, and what do Iget in return? Nothing! Who cares if they got killed or left behind?Nobody! Yes, I'm disappointed because John Rambo would have done abetter job than this sorry bunch! Houston, we have crap! Disappointedup my yahoo! After the movie was over we thought about checking out theBD extras to see alternate endings! Why!!!!!? Why!!!?? Anyway, if ithand't been for my life having extra spare time at the moment I watchedit (and now review it), I'd like to have one of those bugs in myunderpants too! Thank you!
brittandbaby (18 May 2012)
Don't waste your money!!
I am so glad I did not pay for this!!! I am a huge scifi, horror fan,and I also have a lot of family that works at NASA, so I knew this wasa fake Mockumentary.. But It was so ridiculous that my husband I wereboth laughing in the multiple "scary scenes". Especially when one ofthe astronauts gets an infection and starts looking like a 'zombie' andhe stands over the other sleeping astronaut video taping him, we bothjoked saying "I want your brains"-Because it was that silly. Would havemade a better comedy!! I was happy when it was over, I could not waitfor it to be over with. I could've made a better movie than that! Ohand I've seen many home movies from Astronauts in space, and let metell you, the real Nasa has better cameras, scenes and screenshots thanApollo 18 crappy movie!! This was AWFUL!
sndybandy (18 May 2012)
Wouldn't give a $1 at RedBox for this movie.
If you like old black and white movies that are scratchy, blurry, andfuzzy looking with sound that is barely understood, then you'll lovethis movie ! NOT ! I love old black and white movies that I can see andhear but we couldn't do either in this movie. Everyone seemed soperplexed as to what the heck did we just spend hard earned money on !I wouldn't advise you to spend a $1 on it at Red Box ! It is that badto me. I was so looking forward to an afternoon with my sister to watcha good movie, and came away so disappointed. That is about all I cantell you about the movie since we couldn't see it ! I think it's about2 men who go to the moon and something bad happens but not sure whatall went on. The End.
ws-dm (16 May 2012)
Thought provoking.
I found Apollo 18 thought provoking. The alien rock creatures(spider-like creatures) kept the "what if" conspiracy theory frombecoming "I believe that may have happened;" it countered realism withsci-fi.It did make me consider some things. Would a government conceal thetruth from the populous? Would an agency send someone on a missionconcealing the real purpose of the mission from them? Are servants ofthe state true sons, willing to give their life for the welfare of thecountry? I saw the correlation between God sending Jesus to earth, withman sending men on a mission (in this case, man sending men to the moonwith a hidden agenda kept back from those sent).God was willing to send His Son (Jesus) to Earth. Yet, Jesus fully knewHe would give His life for all mankind. He was fully aware deathawaited Him at Jerusalem; "Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Sonof Man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes,and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to theGentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third dayhe shall rise again." Matthew 20:18-19. At the age of twelve Jesus knewHe "must be about His Father's business." Luke 2:49 Some young men mayjoin the military; they may join to get a job or to get away from home.They may not know their father nor know their father's will. (fatherbeing who they are now under authority to). Their father may send themon a mission, even a mission that they do not fully understand, or amission unto death. Some go because they are under authority, others goblindly, some may be willing to follow their father even unto theirdeath.God was willing to send Jesus for the salvation of all mankind. Jesuswas willing to come and give His life for the salvation of all mankind.When upon the cross, Jesus cried out, "My God, My God, why hast thouforsaken me?" Matthew 27:46.In Apollo 18, there came a moment when the crew realized the truth.They had been sent on a mission without full disclosure of knowledge onhand. They realized they were going to be sacrificed for the welfare ofthe nation. NASA was not going to bring them home. In that moment ofunderstanding their reality, they understood their "fathers" wereabandoning them. The "fathers" were willing to give up the "sons" forthe good of many.God answered Jesus' outcrying of "My God, My God, why hast thouforsaken me" when after Jesus yielded up the ghost, the veil of thetemple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. Matthew 27:46-54Jesus opened the way for man to approach unto God; Jesus, the GreatHigh Priest, done away with earthly sacrifices that could never takeaway the sin of man. God allowed Jesus to die for all man, but God didnot leave Jesus in death; God raised Him up; and all who believe areraised up with Him.I see a correlation between God the Father and man as fathers, with Godbeing the greatest Father in whom we can trust.I found Apollo 18 to be thought provoking.
talentedripples (16 May 2012)
Suspending Disbelief
Apollo 18, supposedly the final shuttle mission to the moon, collatedfrom real footage of a real mission by NASA. The trailer easily invitesviewers in with a question: Why didn't we go back to the moon? It's asimple enough thing to ask, citing curiosity and a chance to enter aworld of fiction.Yes. Apollo 18 can only be fiction. Real footage does not require aDirector and the actors are listed in another films as well. Also, nolife can be sustained upon the Moon. there is no atmosphere because themoon's mass is too small to create gravity and without gravity youcan't have atmosphere. So how are alien spiders running around themoon? also the astronauts walk around as normal, shuffling even. NASAmost likely abandoned going to the moon because it's not possible toterraform it.As long as you suspend your disbelief and take the movie for what itreally is - fun fiction - then Apollo 18 is a good thriller. The movieis filmed on video creating a grainy quality with a hand held camera tocreate a more realistic atmosphere. Although lacking in great splashesof action, the movie is short and concise pushing the story along at aneven pace.Suspend your disbelief and you find yourself in a thrilling mysterytwisted with betrayal and fear. Apollo 18 is a good movie as long asyou ignore the silly claim that it could possibly be real. On the wholeit is very enjoyable and moves along at a very good pace.
kerithion (16 May 2012)
Above Par Found Footage Horror
Reading the negative reviews for this film, it seems to me that themajority of reviewers who thought this was a poor movie didn't actuallyfollow the plot very closely. There are no major flaws in the storythat I could detect, and while the movie does require attention on thepart of the viewer to follow what's unfolding, it's hardly rocketscience.The cinematography was fantastic, evoking a real sense of a moonmission, and as such, this is one of the few "found-footage" films(along with "REC") that provides the principles with a believablereason to document what occurs out-with the questionable"I-must-film-this-for-posterity" nonsense served up by the likes of"Cloverfield".The small cast do a sterling job, and I don't quite follow how someother reviewers found the characters "unlikeable". The performances inthe film evoked my interest. I found myself sympathising with theirplight from the outset, and my involvement increased as the filmcontinued. Much of this came from the terse script which was pleasantlyfree from filler and the baggage of back-story.I thought the pacing of "Apollo 18" was excellent, creating anedge-of-the-seat uneasy tension building to absolute horror. I thinkfans of "Paranormal Activity" will enjoy this film. Those who didn'tenjoy "Paranormal Activity" will most likely not like "Apollo 18". Inthe end, I guess it all depends on what scares you. "Apollo 18" scaredme. That makes it a successful horror movie in my opinion. But horror,like so much else, is a relative concept.I have friends who didn't enjoy "Paranormal Activity", and I canunderstand why: it simply didn't poke them in their scary-bone. Me, Iended up sleeping with the light on after watching it. "Apollo 18" isone of those films - if it's going to scare you, it'll really scareyou; but if gradually-rising terror isn't your thing, it'll probablydisappoint.Despite being a low budget production, there's nothing amateur aboutthe delivery. I think "Apollo 18" is a taut and disturbing horror storythat puts bigger budget disappointments like the cliché-filled"Cloverfield" to shame. Think "Moon" meets "Paranormal Activity". Ifthat sounds like your type of movie, then don't let this one slip underyour radar.
sddavis63 (15 May 2012)
Decent Enough Lunar Conspiracy Movie
This movie gets off to a rather slow start. That might explain at leastin part why it gets such bad reviews. Unless you can really stick withit through about a half hour of - well - very little, it's going tolose you. Mind you, there's honesty in the opening credits, as it makesreference to lunartruth.com. I'm not even sure if that's a realwebsite. I just tried to pull it up and I just keep getting told thatthe website isn't available. Regardless, the very name makes clear thatthis is a conspiracy type movie, the point of which seems to be toexplain why the United States gave up on moon missions after Apollo 17.In fact, the movie makes the assertion that the United States DIDreturn to the moon - that there was a secret Apollo 18, and that it wasthe events that happened during that mission and the loss of the crewthat caused the United States to give up on lunar exploration."Apollo 18" is a kind of lunar-based "Blair Witch Project," filmedsupposedly as the events are happening by a combination of hand-heldand stationary cameras. We follow astronauts Walker and Anderson onwhat at first seems to be a pretty routine lunar mission - until theydiscover strange footprints on the moon's surface. This is where itfinally starts to get interesting. Following the footprints leads themto an abandoned Soviet spacecraft - the Russians apparently having beento the moon without anyone knowing it. But there's blood in thecapsule, and the cosmonaut who left the footprints is nowhere to befound. As they investigate, it becomes clear that "something" is on themoon with them. From that point on, I actually thought this became apretty good movie, fairly suspenseful and the performances from WarrenChristie (Anderson) and Lloyd Owen (Walker) were pretty decent.It's a conspiracy movie all the way through. The astronauts areabandoned and left to die in space to avoid "contamination" back onearth, and convenient excuses are made up to explain what happened tothem and why their bodies were never recovered (since their journeyinto space was never made public.) Since the lunar creatures themselvesseemed to have some connection to moon rocks, the closing captionsnoted the volume of moon rocks that were brought back to earth over theyears, and pointed out that many of them were given away as gifts andhave since disappeared (thus leading us to wonder if there might bealiens among us!)I don't take any of the conspiracy angle of this movie seriously. Ipersonally think the United States gave up on lunar exploration because(1) it was very dangerous - everybody knows about Apollo 13, but it wasonly one of many safety problems with the Apollo program; (2) it wasvery expensive; and (3) the 6 Apollo missions that did make it to themoon didn't find anything especially interesting - the claims of thismovie notwithstanding! I guess that leads me to a question though. Isthis a serious conspiracy movie, intended to promote the idea thatthere was a secret, lost lunar mission that found extraterrestrials, orwas this intended as simply pure entertainment? I wasn't entirely clearon whether this was intended to promote the conspiracy theory (which isout there) or whether it just took advantage of it. Either way, afterthat slow start, I actually thought this was pretty decent. (7/10)
goultar1 (14 May 2012)
Rocks that rock and roll on the moon.
This was a very depressing movie, especially for those withclaustrophobic tendencies, and for the most part it was BORING. My maingripe is that it was passed off as being a real story. Do the writersof this movie think we are stupid? If this was supposed to be agovernment "cover-up," we would have found out about it by now becausethe government can't even cover up a break-in to a psychiatrist'soffice. I am sick and tired of all these alleged cover-up storiesemanating from the brains of paranoid schizophrenics.If I had been one of the astronauts, I would have made it back to Earthjust so I could get the satisfaction of punching one of the D.O.D.officers right in the face! The spider creature were, in fact, prettyscary, but how the hell were they supposed to be able to get inside asealed spacesuit anyway? I walked out of the theater pretty angry.
Apogee UK (14 May 2012)
Don't listen to those with attention deficit disorder
I give this film 7 stars plus one for being that rare beast, a moviethat takes care to portray an Apollo Mission authentically. I'm anApollo space nut more than I'm a fan of 'found-footage' movies which iswhy I'm going to disagree strongly with those who were bored by thisfilm which is surprisingly under-rated and has a lot going for it. Ifound it eminently entertaining and the technical aspects of the Apollomission were brilliantly executed, easily amongst the best I've everseen. The atmosphere realistically and plausibly sells the experienceof spending time on the Moon's surface far better than the likes of,say, 'Moon'. This was a relatively low-budget production but the filmmakers must have got a good deal on the props and costumes from 'FromThe Earth To The Moon' as the engineering details are authenticthroughout as is the portrayal of the Apollo system and its procedures.I found the performances were superb (it was weird seeing Lloyd Owen asan American astronaut as I'm more used to seeing him in 'Monarch of TheGlen', a guilty pleasure for my wife and I in the UK) and the feelingof growing tension was gripping right up to the ending. The onlyexplanation I can think of why so many are describing the film as abore is that people who watch too many of this type of movie are alllooking for big scares or perhaps a massive mind-twist of a pay-off orsomething. As another reviewer put it, this is an effective slow-burnof a movie and that's exactly how I found it. The premise is intriguingand works more as a suspense thriller than a sci-fi horror. Nowherenear as bad as some are making out.
Review total: 20, showing from 1 to 20