Apollo 18

Discussion in 'Sci-Fi Movies' started by Shale, Sep 2, 2011.

  1. Shale

    Shale ~

    Messages:
    5,190
    Likes Received:
    347
    Apollo 18
    Movie Blurb by Shale
    September 2, 2011

    [​IMG]

    This movie was the most appealing escapism opening this weekend so I bit. Actually, I saw the poster in theater, supposed to open back in March but it quietly didn’t.

    From the poster you know some astronauts find some other beings on the moon. But it is one of those hand-held camera movies like Blair Witch Project or Paranormal Activity, sort of a documentary style telling of a story.

    The movie opens as if some footage showed up recently from an unknown Apollo mission to the moon. From the Movie’s Site:

    “Officially, Apollo 17, launched December 17th, 1972 was the last manned mission to the moon. But a year later, in December of 1973, two American astronauts were sent on a secret mission to the moon funded by the US Department of Defense. What you are about to see is the actual footage which the astronauts captured on that mission. While NASA denies its authenticity, others say it's the real reason we've never gone back to the moon.”

    This was one of those cold war settings and from the poster printed in Cyrillic you know the Soviets were involved in the story as well.

    There are three main characters in this movie, crammed into a claustrophobic space ship. The movie is so indy that only two of the cast members are credited, Astronauts Nate Walker (Lloyd Owen) and Ben Anderson (Warren Christie) who are in the lunar-module and do most of the scary work in front of hand-held or monitoring cameras. In the orbiter is the uncredited astronaut.

    It was OK and the unknown actors did an excellent job of portraying the stressed astronauts. Sets were also done well and minimal special effects were OK. If you actually liked Blair Witch and Paranormal, you may like this movie. Even tho you know they are fake this type movie (with suspension of disbelief) are more intimately involved and makes you feel you are stuck in a corner of the set someplace.
     
  2. PEACEFUL LIBRA

    PEACEFUL LIBRA DAMN RIGHT I'M A WEIRDO

    Messages:
    4,710
    Likes Received:
    18
    I knew it was going to be a flop, there has been no good movies out for like 2 years now
     
  3. walsh

    walsh Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,678
    Likes Received:
    9
    Seriously?
     
  4. PEACEFUL LIBRA

    PEACEFUL LIBRA DAMN RIGHT I'M A WEIRDO

    Messages:
    4,710
    Likes Received:
    18
    dead serious
     
  5. walsh

    walsh Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,678
    Likes Received:
    9
    I'll agree that 2005-10 has been mostly crap.

    However 2011 had two films which automatically slotted into my top 10 films ever made - The Tree of Life and The Turin Horse.
     
  6. Duck

    Duck quack. Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    22,614
    Likes Received:
    44
    2010:
    Enter the Void
    127 Hours
    The Fighter
    Black Swan


    the first two are contenders for the best of all time list

    2009:
    Inglorious Basterds
    The Road

    the first is again, a contender for the best of all time list

    But I think the only good film this year was Hobo With a Shotgun, and while entertaining, that's not saying much
     
  7. Shale

    Shale ~

    Messages:
    5,190
    Likes Received:
    347
    That is such an overbroad and subjective statement.

    What determines whether there is a "good movie?"

    I have enjoyed several movies in the last two years. My criterion is if I am entertained by the movie, then it is good for me.

    Most ppl (especially critics) say The Tree of Life was a good movie. I did not like it. Most ppl say Colombiana is crap. I enjoyed it for what it was, a mindless action movie with a kickass Zoe Saldana.

    So, in future you would be more correct to say, "I knew it was going to be a flop, there have been no movies out for like 2 years now that I enjoyed."
     
  8. walsh

    walsh Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,678
    Likes Received:
    9
    Enter the Void was novelty trash. Seriously - best of all time? For all the technical excellence it had no substance or point to it whatsoever.

    127 Hours I liked very much, but probably wouldn't make my top 50. Haven't seen the others except The Road, which was decent.

    And yeah - people have different tastes. But an achievement and landmark in filmmaking should be recognized when it is one, and if someone doesn't like Van Gogh they shouldn't dispute his entry into the best painters list by virtue of his contribution to expressionist painting.
     
  9. Duck

    Duck quack. Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    22,614
    Likes Received:
    44
    It was to give you an experience of what it might be like to die; it's something most everyone wonders - I don't see how that can be considered pointless or without substance.

    But I have no clue why I included it on the list; it's not a Hollywood film, or even an American one.
    Such as an experiment in style, like Enter the Void? =P (But I do love Van Gogh)

    I don't care if Titanic and Avatar were among the best selling movies ever - they don't deserve much recognition in my mind.
    I think the overall quality is all that should really matter. When you consider anything else, you're just mucking up the process.
    It's like how Birth of a Nation and DW Griffith get such little respect in a lot of circles due to the controversy surrounding the film; but he was a hell of a director and the epic-nature and visceral emotion of his work was nearly unmatched in America for decades.
     
  10. Reality is BS

    Reality is BS Member

    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    1
    Apollo 18 is the worst movie I've seen this year. It's like they put all the worst propaganda together around a really bad plot. Is the director openly mocking NASAs moon productions in the "real" missions?
     
  11. walsh

    walsh Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,678
    Likes Received:
    9
    Exactly. Sales and critics mean nothing to me. The landmarks in film are not nearly as entrenched as landmarks in painting and music. Perhaps in 100 years they will be. If the audience starts to actually participate more in films in the future with their own interpretations instead of being passive observers with their brains switched off, the kinds of films which advanced that trend like the works of Lynch, Kubrick, Bergman and Malick should be regarded as Raphael and Monet are to painting. Even if modern film has been increasingly descending into trivial crap, and entering a cinema is now a cue to turn off your brain.
     
  12. hahaha04

    hahaha04 Whatevers Clever

    Messages:
    3,701
    Likes Received:
    32
    Shale, i dunno if this movie came out yet, and even though i wasnt the biggest fan of the 'hand held' kinda filming technique, i think i may still check this one out..
     
  13. Duck

    Duck quack. Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    22,614
    Likes Received:
    44
    Whoa, I totally didn't get that impression from your last post.

    I agree with most of that.

    Except, I think critics are kind've a good thing. Whether people agree with them totally or not, it does create and air of critical thinking about what you are watching. Without critics, all people have to go off of are trends and previews.
     
  14. hotwater

    hotwater Senior Member Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    50,596
    Likes Received:
    39,020
    Thanks for the review :2thumbsup:

    I’ll wait until it pops up on red box next spring as a $1 rental - it might be worth a few laughs



    H
     
  15. Hippie McRaver

    Hippie McRaver Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,444
    Likes Received:
    7
    I really liked Apollo 18. To hell with the critics I thought it was great.
     
  16. JoachimBoaz

    JoachimBoaz Member

    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    0
    sorry dude.. there was no Apollo 18.
    Its a fantasy derived from Apollo series.

    We never went to moon after 17

    11 12 14 25 16 17
    oh we did not land on moon well explain rocks formed in1/6 grav.
    science says.. they were 1/6 grav only place.. MOON
    Hubble can see lunar landers on moon.. And especially the 1st.. the eagle
    retards

    I am SO SICK of idiots trying to tell ME.. they know science.
    God made the earth in 6 days my arse
     
  17. Hippie McRaver

    Hippie McRaver Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,444
    Likes Received:
    7
    what are you talking about?
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice