Search
Search results
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019 (Updated Jun 21, 2019)
A group of students are taking a cruise to New York. A couple, who's part of the group, ventures off on their own in their own private boat. They wind up drifting through Camp Crystal Lake for a little quality time together. They set anchor and wind up resurrecting Jason in the process. Now as the cruise ship sets off, with Jason in tow, our students may have more than their biology projects to worry about.
Re-watching this was not a pleasant experience. I really had to force myself to watch it and once I finally did it was almost painful to make myself sit through the entire thing. Continuity is probably the film's biggest flaw. When we see young Jason drown, he looks like a normal little boy. Whenever Rennie sees him, however, he suddenly looks like he has down syndrome and like somebody beat him with a 2x4 made from every ugly branch they could get a hold of. On top of that, he pretty much has a different appearance every time Rennie sees him. Then there's the whole Crystal Lake leading into the ocean thing and the ending. Heavens, the ending is atrocious.
The script isn't so hot either. Julius is probably the best example. After Wayne asks him what weapon he's going to take after they realize Jason is on the ship, Julius replies, "Nothing," then pauses for a moment before following with, "...but this gun." The kills were also lacking. Jason takes a guitar to a girl's head and throws a guy onto an antenna. That's about as inventive as we get this time around. The one enjoyable factor of the film is Kane Hodder as Jason. The scene in Times Square is probably the highlight of the film. It's disappointing that the last film with "Friday the 13th" in the title is so bad.
Re-watching this was not a pleasant experience. I really had to force myself to watch it and once I finally did it was almost painful to make myself sit through the entire thing. Continuity is probably the film's biggest flaw. When we see young Jason drown, he looks like a normal little boy. Whenever Rennie sees him, however, he suddenly looks like he has down syndrome and like somebody beat him with a 2x4 made from every ugly branch they could get a hold of. On top of that, he pretty much has a different appearance every time Rennie sees him. Then there's the whole Crystal Lake leading into the ocean thing and the ending. Heavens, the ending is atrocious.
The script isn't so hot either. Julius is probably the best example. After Wayne asks him what weapon he's going to take after they realize Jason is on the ship, Julius replies, "Nothing," then pauses for a moment before following with, "...but this gun." The kills were also lacking. Jason takes a guitar to a girl's head and throws a guy onto an antenna. That's about as inventive as we get this time around. The one enjoyable factor of the film is Kane Hodder as Jason. The scene in Times Square is probably the highlight of the film. It's disappointing that the last film with "Friday the 13th" in the title is so bad.
Kelly (279 KP) rated Ghost Stories (2018) in Movies
Jan 15, 2019
This would not be out of place in the Twilight Zone
In a time where the audience has become accustomed to jumpy Hollywood horrors, it’s hard to create a horror that provokes the viewer. Ghost stories does this well.
The film itself follows paranormal sceptic, professor Phillip Goodman, as he tries to unpick and denounce three separate cases. The bulk of the film centres around these three cases, all three cases play on the audiences inner fears of the unknown - I’m sure we have all scared ourselves at some point by objects that look differently to what they are in the shadows of the night! To me, the second case, Simon’s story, was the most disturbing simply for how jumpy and scared the character Simon clearly was with the situation. I was a little confused by the ending to Mike’s story, although I understand that it was necessary to move the story to the next stage, I did feel that more explanation was needed.
The format of this film played out like an episode of the Twilight Zone, including the unexpected twist in the end. This too me was what made the film more compelling. Following the big reveal, I spent a little time revisiting each of the cases, and some of the unusual behaviours of the characters and apparitions made more sense.
The acting within the film was good and believable- I am a fan of Martin Freeman, which did draw me to the movie, and although some of the script was a little bizarre, he did act well.
In conclusion, the film was not scary enough to lose sleep over, however it is disturbing enough to make me think and consider my own views on the paranormal.
The film itself follows paranormal sceptic, professor Phillip Goodman, as he tries to unpick and denounce three separate cases. The bulk of the film centres around these three cases, all three cases play on the audiences inner fears of the unknown - I’m sure we have all scared ourselves at some point by objects that look differently to what they are in the shadows of the night! To me, the second case, Simon’s story, was the most disturbing simply for how jumpy and scared the character Simon clearly was with the situation. I was a little confused by the ending to Mike’s story, although I understand that it was necessary to move the story to the next stage, I did feel that more explanation was needed.
The format of this film played out like an episode of the Twilight Zone, including the unexpected twist in the end. This too me was what made the film more compelling. Following the big reveal, I spent a little time revisiting each of the cases, and some of the unusual behaviours of the characters and apparitions made more sense.
The acting within the film was good and believable- I am a fan of Martin Freeman, which did draw me to the movie, and although some of the script was a little bizarre, he did act well.
In conclusion, the film was not scary enough to lose sleep over, however it is disturbing enough to make me think and consider my own views on the paranormal.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated X-Men: The Last Stand (2006) in Movies
Jul 4, 2019 (Updated Jul 30, 2019)
It's all just a bit...meh
The Last Stand is not completely awful, but there is an absolutely huge setback here - the writers tried to cram the epic Dark Phoenix saga into one film.
Couple this with an interrupted production and you have a messy result.
A fair amount of what is likable about the first two is still intact - the strongest asset here being the strong cast, doing their absolute best with a sub par script and story.
As for newcomers - Kelsey Grammer is a welcome addition as Beast, as is Ellen Page as Shadowcat - unfortunately Angel is pretty wasted here, as are characters like Psylocke, who is relegated to an extended cameo. Whoever decided to cast Vinnie Jones as Juggernaut deserves a good slapping.
The Dark Phoenix storyline in the comics is pretty epic, a lot of it takes place in space, and the tragedy of the X-Men fighting one of their own is fleshed out very well - something that the movie adaption practically ignores. After being hinted at the end of X2, Jean Grey is promptly bought back, and turns to the dark side very quickly, without any real build up.
Some character story arcs are concluded abruptly and in emotionless ways, as the film just sort of limps along to a pretty underwhelming conclusion.
Bryan Singer left production midway through to helm Superman Returns, and it shows.
The slickness and solid narrative of X2 is replaced by a choppy mess, full of quips that don't land ("I'm the Juggernaut bitch" anyone!?), and Brett Ratners involvement was just a misfire.
This particular comic arc deserves so much better (and judging by what I've heard about the 2019 effort, this is still the case!)
Couple this with an interrupted production and you have a messy result.
A fair amount of what is likable about the first two is still intact - the strongest asset here being the strong cast, doing their absolute best with a sub par script and story.
As for newcomers - Kelsey Grammer is a welcome addition as Beast, as is Ellen Page as Shadowcat - unfortunately Angel is pretty wasted here, as are characters like Psylocke, who is relegated to an extended cameo. Whoever decided to cast Vinnie Jones as Juggernaut deserves a good slapping.
The Dark Phoenix storyline in the comics is pretty epic, a lot of it takes place in space, and the tragedy of the X-Men fighting one of their own is fleshed out very well - something that the movie adaption practically ignores. After being hinted at the end of X2, Jean Grey is promptly bought back, and turns to the dark side very quickly, without any real build up.
Some character story arcs are concluded abruptly and in emotionless ways, as the film just sort of limps along to a pretty underwhelming conclusion.
Bryan Singer left production midway through to helm Superman Returns, and it shows.
The slickness and solid narrative of X2 is replaced by a choppy mess, full of quips that don't land ("I'm the Juggernaut bitch" anyone!?), and Brett Ratners involvement was just a misfire.
This particular comic arc deserves so much better (and judging by what I've heard about the 2019 effort, this is still the case!)
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated X-Men Origins - Wolverine (2009) in Movies
Jul 10, 2019
A low point for the X-Men franchise
X-Men Origins: Wolverine is an awful awful film, for many reasons.
Firstly - no one really seems to be too enthusiastic about what they're doing. Hugh Jackman, Liev Schreiber, and Danny Huston do the best with the piss-poor script, but everyone else just seems to be going through the motions.
Secondly - the characters. This movie contains not one, but two fan favourite X-Men characters, making their big screen debut, just to be thrown under the bus. Gambit for starters, is a shadow of the character he is in the comic - Taylor Kitsch just being himself, whilst getting one very brief action scene that hardly shows off his powers.
The other character is of course Deadpool - Ryan Reynolds is entertaining enough throughout the opening scene - but when we're introduced to the proper Deadpool near the climax of the film... Words truly fail me, it's just embarrassing.
Thirdly - what the hell on Earth is going on with the CGI in this movie? This is the fourth X-Men film and the effects are worse than ever. Wolverines claws look like a child had just drawn over the film.
It's just terrible from start to finish. The fact that the following X-Men Origins: Magneto got cancelled almost immediately after this was released is a example of just how much of a misstep this film was.
There are a few positives though - the opening montage of Logan fighting in different wars throughout history was pretty cool, Liev Schreiber is a welcome addition as Sabretooth after Tyler Mane in the original X-Men movie, and the best thing about this film? The adaption of Deadpool was so abysmal that Ryan Reynolds took it upon himself to eventually get a proper Deadpool movie rolling.
Final thought - please don't let Will.I.Am near anymore movie sets, thanks.
Firstly - no one really seems to be too enthusiastic about what they're doing. Hugh Jackman, Liev Schreiber, and Danny Huston do the best with the piss-poor script, but everyone else just seems to be going through the motions.
Secondly - the characters. This movie contains not one, but two fan favourite X-Men characters, making their big screen debut, just to be thrown under the bus. Gambit for starters, is a shadow of the character he is in the comic - Taylor Kitsch just being himself, whilst getting one very brief action scene that hardly shows off his powers.
The other character is of course Deadpool - Ryan Reynolds is entertaining enough throughout the opening scene - but when we're introduced to the proper Deadpool near the climax of the film... Words truly fail me, it's just embarrassing.
Thirdly - what the hell on Earth is going on with the CGI in this movie? This is the fourth X-Men film and the effects are worse than ever. Wolverines claws look like a child had just drawn over the film.
It's just terrible from start to finish. The fact that the following X-Men Origins: Magneto got cancelled almost immediately after this was released is a example of just how much of a misstep this film was.
There are a few positives though - the opening montage of Logan fighting in different wars throughout history was pretty cool, Liev Schreiber is a welcome addition as Sabretooth after Tyler Mane in the original X-Men movie, and the best thing about this film? The adaption of Deadpool was so abysmal that Ryan Reynolds took it upon himself to eventually get a proper Deadpool movie rolling.
Final thought - please don't let Will.I.Am near anymore movie sets, thanks.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Bride of Chucky (1998) in Movies
Nov 6, 2019
One of those 'guilty pleasures' you here so much about
Bride of Chucky is a prime example of what Horror films were like in the aftermath of Scream.
Ditching the straight up horror path of the first couple of movies for a silly, self aware, and often humorous movie.
Quite simply, Bride of Chucky is trashy nonsense. It knows it too, and just about walks into 'so bad , it's good' territory.
Chucky has been promoted from villain to main character, and for the most part, it's pretty enjoyable. Brad Dourif works wonders with a cheesy script, dragging Chucky into a post Scream horror landscape, and creating more of an antihero that gained propularity pretty quickly.
Props to Jennifer Tilly as well for going along with the silliness with enthusiasm.
The main issue with Bride of Chucky is the protagonists were supposed to be rooting for. Nick Stabile and a young Katherine Heigl play a young couple taken hostage by Chucky, and I think they are definitely in the running for the most brain dead characters I've ever seen in a horror.
Most importantly, there is not a single atom within my being that gives the slightest shit about them, or their completely uninteresting eloping side story.
It very nearly stops the movie dead in it's tracks, but thankfully, any scenes that involve Chucky and Tiffany (which is often) is entertaining enough to make the film watchable.
The story is nonsense though, make no mistake.
The animatronic work on Chucky and Tiffany is genuinely impressive, and an obvious step up from the first trilogy. Chucky's design is also genuinely horrific.
Overall, Bride of Chucky is an un-scary, silly and cheesy experience, but it has some fun moments and is one of those horror films that I will probably watch until the end every time I see it on TV 😂
Ditching the straight up horror path of the first couple of movies for a silly, self aware, and often humorous movie.
Quite simply, Bride of Chucky is trashy nonsense. It knows it too, and just about walks into 'so bad , it's good' territory.
Chucky has been promoted from villain to main character, and for the most part, it's pretty enjoyable. Brad Dourif works wonders with a cheesy script, dragging Chucky into a post Scream horror landscape, and creating more of an antihero that gained propularity pretty quickly.
Props to Jennifer Tilly as well for going along with the silliness with enthusiasm.
The main issue with Bride of Chucky is the protagonists were supposed to be rooting for. Nick Stabile and a young Katherine Heigl play a young couple taken hostage by Chucky, and I think they are definitely in the running for the most brain dead characters I've ever seen in a horror.
Most importantly, there is not a single atom within my being that gives the slightest shit about them, or their completely uninteresting eloping side story.
It very nearly stops the movie dead in it's tracks, but thankfully, any scenes that involve Chucky and Tiffany (which is often) is entertaining enough to make the film watchable.
The story is nonsense though, make no mistake.
The animatronic work on Chucky and Tiffany is genuinely impressive, and an obvious step up from the first trilogy. Chucky's design is also genuinely horrific.
Overall, Bride of Chucky is an un-scary, silly and cheesy experience, but it has some fun moments and is one of those horror films that I will probably watch until the end every time I see it on TV 😂
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Assassin's Creed (2016) in Movies
Nov 12, 2019 (Updated Nov 12, 2019)
Nahhhh
Assassin's Creed is a series of (mostly) decent games that I personally enjoy. It's got a simple yet solid premise that has a story running in a select time in history, whilst simultaneously having another story running in modern day. It's full of parkour action, and flashy combat, and lends itself nicely to a movie adaption format?
So just how on Earth is said movie adaption so damn forgettable?
It's got a strong cast - Michael Fassbender, Marion Cotillard, Brendan Gleeson, Jeremy Irons - all fantastic actors, and all completely wasted in a boring story, and boring script.
A huge part is the issue, is perhaps that a lot of the film is stuck in the modern day setting - there's only so much of Fassbender becoming unhinged whilst strapped to the (admittedly pretty neat re designed) Animus.
The parts set in the past (taking place in the 15th Century Granada War) is much more fun. It's here that the movie looks and feels like the beloved game series, and I like that the writers set it in a period we haven't yet seen in the games.
The costume design and setting looks great.
The action set pieces we get here are entertaining, even if they are sometimes hidden between quick cut style camera work.
But it's all a bit light on this side of things.
Assassin's Creed isn't an all out awful film, it's just a bit of a non event, lacking in excitement and proving to be mostly forgettable, leaving me with little desire to rewatch.
It's a shame - if Assassin's Creed can't be adapted well, then I have little hope left for anything video game related (Once again, except Detective Pikachu goddamn it)
So just how on Earth is said movie adaption so damn forgettable?
It's got a strong cast - Michael Fassbender, Marion Cotillard, Brendan Gleeson, Jeremy Irons - all fantastic actors, and all completely wasted in a boring story, and boring script.
A huge part is the issue, is perhaps that a lot of the film is stuck in the modern day setting - there's only so much of Fassbender becoming unhinged whilst strapped to the (admittedly pretty neat re designed) Animus.
The parts set in the past (taking place in the 15th Century Granada War) is much more fun. It's here that the movie looks and feels like the beloved game series, and I like that the writers set it in a period we haven't yet seen in the games.
The costume design and setting looks great.
The action set pieces we get here are entertaining, even if they are sometimes hidden between quick cut style camera work.
But it's all a bit light on this side of things.
Assassin's Creed isn't an all out awful film, it's just a bit of a non event, lacking in excitement and proving to be mostly forgettable, leaving me with little desire to rewatch.
It's a shame - if Assassin's Creed can't be adapted well, then I have little hope left for anything video game related (Once again, except Detective Pikachu goddamn it)
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Rampage (2018) in Movies
Dec 11, 2019 (Updated Dec 11, 2019)
A stupidly fun pile of nonsense
Rampage is a big old pile of dumb fun, teeming with mostly passable CGI, and featuring The Rock fighting giant monsters.
The plot is something along the lines of - big shady corporation is practicing illegal genetic tinkering (in space, because Hollywood), they lose control, space ship crashes, experimental lab must infects a few animals, including a Gorilla that is looked after and raised by The Rock (an ex military badass zookeeper helicopter pilot, because Hollywood), the animals become big and aggressive, blah blah blah, BIG MONSTERS FIGHTING EACH OTHER AND DWAYNE JOHNSON AND DESTROYING CHICAGO.
It's absolutely absurd from start to finish, but it knows what kind of film it is.
The Rock is hugely likable as always, Jeffery Dean Morgan is likable as always, everyone else I can kind of give it take.
The script is pretty standard for this kind of film, but does verge into laughable at times, especially when the films 'villains' are on screen. Played by Malin Akerman and Jake Lacy, they go just a bit too overboard with the whole evil CEO schtick, to the point of annoyance.
Also, Naomie Harris is in it for some reason, but doesn't really serve much of a purpose, and therefore, is a waste of her talent.
The CGI is pretty decent for the most part, but make no mistake, Ramage is a CGI orgy, and as such, it does fall apart here and there (that parachuting scene is just haunting).
Rampage is stupid, loud, obnoxious, but it's entertaining enough to be a good time.
The Rock holds it all together, and it could have been a lot worse had it been lead by someone else, and as far as video game movies go, it's not half bad.
The plot is something along the lines of - big shady corporation is practicing illegal genetic tinkering (in space, because Hollywood), they lose control, space ship crashes, experimental lab must infects a few animals, including a Gorilla that is looked after and raised by The Rock (an ex military badass zookeeper helicopter pilot, because Hollywood), the animals become big and aggressive, blah blah blah, BIG MONSTERS FIGHTING EACH OTHER AND DWAYNE JOHNSON AND DESTROYING CHICAGO.
It's absolutely absurd from start to finish, but it knows what kind of film it is.
The Rock is hugely likable as always, Jeffery Dean Morgan is likable as always, everyone else I can kind of give it take.
The script is pretty standard for this kind of film, but does verge into laughable at times, especially when the films 'villains' are on screen. Played by Malin Akerman and Jake Lacy, they go just a bit too overboard with the whole evil CEO schtick, to the point of annoyance.
Also, Naomie Harris is in it for some reason, but doesn't really serve much of a purpose, and therefore, is a waste of her talent.
The CGI is pretty decent for the most part, but make no mistake, Ramage is a CGI orgy, and as such, it does fall apart here and there (that parachuting scene is just haunting).
Rampage is stupid, loud, obnoxious, but it's entertaining enough to be a good time.
The Rock holds it all together, and it could have been a lot worse had it been lead by someone else, and as far as video game movies go, it's not half bad.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Black Christmas (2019) in Movies
Dec 19, 2019
Horrendous
There are a lot of films that are so bad they're good, but unfortunately Black Christmas is so bad it's terrible. There is nothing redeemable about this film at all. I came out of the cinema after watching this feeling frustrated, exasperated and bored as hell.
This is the worst example of a horror film I've seen in a long time. The scares arent scary and despite the fact that it's a 15 certificate there's no blood or gore either. There's no tension, no suspense - there is literally nothing in this film that makes it an even halfway decent horror. It starts off slowly and doesn't get any better, and the acting and script are truly awful. Even Imogen Poots who I've previously thought was good in other films is terrible in this too. 30 minutes into this film I would've happily walked out and not cared about the outcome. And the worst thing about this is the plot and the completely irrational actions of the characters. The men vs women plot is trying to be modern and relevant, but actually comes across as preachy and beyond stupid. And some of the actions and decisions by characters in this film had me nearly shouting at the screen in exasperation.
This film was only 100 minutes long but it felt more like 100 hours. I went to see this purely because I was intrigued as to whether it turns out exactly like the trailer, and sadly I wasn't wrong. Don't waste a couple of hours of your life watching this, just watch the 2 minute trailer instead - it sums up the entire thing and is actually a lot more exciting! This is without a doubt the worst film I've seen at the cinema all year.
This is the worst example of a horror film I've seen in a long time. The scares arent scary and despite the fact that it's a 15 certificate there's no blood or gore either. There's no tension, no suspense - there is literally nothing in this film that makes it an even halfway decent horror. It starts off slowly and doesn't get any better, and the acting and script are truly awful. Even Imogen Poots who I've previously thought was good in other films is terrible in this too. 30 minutes into this film I would've happily walked out and not cared about the outcome. And the worst thing about this is the plot and the completely irrational actions of the characters. The men vs women plot is trying to be modern and relevant, but actually comes across as preachy and beyond stupid. And some of the actions and decisions by characters in this film had me nearly shouting at the screen in exasperation.
This film was only 100 minutes long but it felt more like 100 hours. I went to see this purely because I was intrigued as to whether it turns out exactly like the trailer, and sadly I wasn't wrong. Don't waste a couple of hours of your life watching this, just watch the 2 minute trailer instead - it sums up the entire thing and is actually a lot more exciting! This is without a doubt the worst film I've seen at the cinema all year.
JT (287 KP) rated Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) in Movies
Mar 5, 2020 (Updated Mar 10, 2020)
Godzilla rises from the deep once again, this time to stand side by side with part of the human race to fend off monsters summoned by the crypto-zoological agency Monarch. Monarch has been able to devise a way to control the giant creatures using a sonar device called the Orca, in the hope that they will be able to live together in perfect harmony.
“Sometimes… the only way to heal our wounds is to make peace with the demons who created them,” says Ken Watanabe‘s Dr Ishiro Serizawa. That theory is short-lived when eco-terrorist Alan Jonah (Charles Dance) threatens to unleash hell, all for the greater good.
It’s one big mess. I don’t know how else to describe it other than that. I lost interest halfway through and only raised an eyebrow when Godzilla arrived on-screen to pummel the shit out of the three-headed Ghidorah and Rodan. In 2014 Godzilla was rarely seen, albeit for the odd glimpse of a whipping tail. Here that is rectified and he’s placed front and centre as he smashes everything to smithereens.
The human element is just as bad. With a cast that boasted the likes of Vera Farmiga, Kyle Chandler, Charles Dance and Strangers Things starlet Millie Bobby Brown I would have expected more from the experienced group. I blame the script which falls by the wayside. Loud, thundering action set pieces do offer a little bit of satisfaction but it’s not enough to carry the film home. Plenty of scenes could have been cut which might have made it bearable.
There are suggestions that we could be getting a Kong Vs Godzilla film at some point which would loosely tie into a Kaiju styled universe but after this load of tripe, they will have their work cut out.
“Sometimes… the only way to heal our wounds is to make peace with the demons who created them,” says Ken Watanabe‘s Dr Ishiro Serizawa. That theory is short-lived when eco-terrorist Alan Jonah (Charles Dance) threatens to unleash hell, all for the greater good.
It’s one big mess. I don’t know how else to describe it other than that. I lost interest halfway through and only raised an eyebrow when Godzilla arrived on-screen to pummel the shit out of the three-headed Ghidorah and Rodan. In 2014 Godzilla was rarely seen, albeit for the odd glimpse of a whipping tail. Here that is rectified and he’s placed front and centre as he smashes everything to smithereens.
The human element is just as bad. With a cast that boasted the likes of Vera Farmiga, Kyle Chandler, Charles Dance and Strangers Things starlet Millie Bobby Brown I would have expected more from the experienced group. I blame the script which falls by the wayside. Loud, thundering action set pieces do offer a little bit of satisfaction but it’s not enough to carry the film home. Plenty of scenes could have been cut which might have made it bearable.
There are suggestions that we could be getting a Kong Vs Godzilla film at some point which would loosely tie into a Kaiju styled universe but after this load of tripe, they will have their work cut out.
JT (287 KP) rated Moon (2009) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
The first few shots of Moon feel like any normal run of the mill sci-fi. There’s shots of the space station with the earth off in the distance, shots of computers and consoles and of course shots of a lone astronaut.
Shot in just 33 days Moon is one of the more eye opening sci-fi films for 2009. It has a Space Odyssey feel about it as the camera pans its way through white crisp interiors and what are seemingly chunky and dated equipment.
Even though this is set in 2024 you’d be forgiven it might have been set years earlier.
Astronaut Sam Bell has a quintessentially personal encounter toward the end of his three-year stint on the Moon, where he, working alongside his computer, GERTY, sends back to Earth parcels of a resource that has helped diminish our planet’s power problems.
What starts out as seemingly inauspicious hallucinations, after Sam is involved in a crash in his rover turn into something much more. As we don’t ask ourselves what might be wrong with Sam but who the hell he is?
The script is tight and seeing as Sam is really the only major star alongside talking computer GERTY (voiced by Kevin Spacey) director Duncan Jones does well to build dramatic, emotional and thought provoking moments.
If a 33 day shoot seems small then it has a budget too match as it only cost around $5 million to make, and when you see the shots of the space rover trundling over the Moon’s rough surface you can see exactly what that money might have been used for.
It might not have been up there with many of the biggest blockbusters in 2009 but one thing is for sure, Moon is an enjoyable trip into the unknown.
Shot in just 33 days Moon is one of the more eye opening sci-fi films for 2009. It has a Space Odyssey feel about it as the camera pans its way through white crisp interiors and what are seemingly chunky and dated equipment.
Even though this is set in 2024 you’d be forgiven it might have been set years earlier.
Astronaut Sam Bell has a quintessentially personal encounter toward the end of his three-year stint on the Moon, where he, working alongside his computer, GERTY, sends back to Earth parcels of a resource that has helped diminish our planet’s power problems.
What starts out as seemingly inauspicious hallucinations, after Sam is involved in a crash in his rover turn into something much more. As we don’t ask ourselves what might be wrong with Sam but who the hell he is?
The script is tight and seeing as Sam is really the only major star alongside talking computer GERTY (voiced by Kevin Spacey) director Duncan Jones does well to build dramatic, emotional and thought provoking moments.
If a 33 day shoot seems small then it has a budget too match as it only cost around $5 million to make, and when you see the shots of the space rover trundling over the Moon’s rough surface you can see exactly what that money might have been used for.
It might not have been up there with many of the biggest blockbusters in 2009 but one thing is for sure, Moon is an enjoyable trip into the unknown.