[x]

See Where You Rank in Virginia



  1. Moon (2009)

    Director - Duncan Jones
    Runtime: 97 min; R

    Cast
    Sam Rockwell – Sam Bell
    Kevin Spacey – GERTY (Voice)

    The low-budget film Moon can actually be summarized in a few sentences, and yet it has a little more going for it than just a simple topographical view. I’m going to keep this review short mainly because I know that much of what I would want to say would revolve around a pretty major spoiler, and I’m content with just a quick discussion of the overall premise.

    It is a time when those on earth have discovered a way to harvest energy from the moon, and Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell) has been living in the space station on the moon for almost 3 years. He is starting to lose it, in a sense, and his lack of reliable communication with those on earth, including his family, is really starting to drive him mad. His only real contact is with the computer GERTY voice by Kevin Spacey in a monotone way reminiscent of other sci-fi films we all know.

    The isolation that Sam experiences and the strange circumstances that befall him are at the heart of the film, and it is a very intriguing premise which I was completely willing to let draw me in…

    Unfortunately there is something lacking in this film that keep it as a very good idea and a well executed low budget film, but not quite fleshed out enough to make it something special. Sam Rockwell is really wonderful here, carrying the film and showing a complete devotion to his character. I am fairly certain that this film will be seen as astounding by some and boring by some, but for me it is an above average film that is worth a look, but not something I’m ready or eager to push upon you.

    <H2>*** out of 5</H2>
  2. I absolutely loved this movie. Rockwell really pulls you in....

    I'd give it 4 out of 5 for sure.
  3. Ahh yes, now I remember the previews for this movie. I think you are officially caught up with your reviews now, slacker!
  4. *jfuylvhibhybib.

    okay. i know i insulted your opinion in the past without having watched the movie. but i saw this one. and it was awesome. from start to finish. at least 4 *'s man come on.
  5. I read previous threads on this months ago when people had started seeing it, and I knew I would get slammed, but 3/5 is still pretty good. It's not like the 1/5 I gave Transformers.

    It's an interesting film and has a lot going for it, and I really enjoyed the twist of the film, etc, but I think too much is lacking in background and current earth situations to say that just Sam Rockwell alone is enough to make this an excellent film.

    Good enough to see for sure, and I hope everyone does, but please see The Hurt Locker or Hunger before this.
    Thread Starter
  6. *blah fair enough, i guess if you write all these reviews you probably get payed to do it and idk if that gives your opinion more merit or not but it certainly means you do it enough to most likely have a good grasp of what should get 3 stars and what should get 4 so ill concede on this.*

    nh gg
  7. All opinions welcomed. People on this forum actually liked Transformers 1 and 2, so who am I to argue with that logic?

    I just post my thoughts and hope it sparks discussion. I am not an expert and do it mainly for fun.
    Thread Starter
  8. While I agree that the movie itself wasn't as astounding as it intended to be, I'd definitely give it better than a 3/5 for Rockwell's performance alone, but then as I've said before, acting is what I love most about movies.

    My main problem with Moon is that it was supposed to be a sci-fi thriller, but it never really attempted to thrill. They definitely don't try and hide the twist - it's blatantly evident what's going on 20 minutes into the movie - and I for one don't unerstand why the pace wasn't more suspensful and atmospheric. Moon is simply all about Rockwell and he's certainly great, but it could've been an amazing flick if the other elements had just kept up with his intensity.
    1
  9. I'll agree with everything you said... I could go to 3.5./5 but not a 4. It just didn't make it for me after the initial 45 minutes.

    I also think that GERTY was a pretty big letdown... not that I needed it to be a central role, but I thought it could have been more.
    Thread Starter
  10. I think I'm with skeeze on this one. While the movie was well made and Sam Rockwell is very very good, I came away feeling that it could have been more. As is, it is a very good movie and worth a watch, but not great and won't stand the test of time. The ending implies, and I have heard tell of a sequel, which could pose some verrrry interesting questions. I would definitely watch a second movie.
  11. Rockwell was terrific, no doubt, but as far as the movie goes I agree with Skeeze. For me, it was underwhelming and half-baked, though definitely not a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination. It's undeniably an ambitious debut and I'll definitely check out the next movie that's directed by the son of David Bowie. I didn't feel that the film's themes and ideas were very well executed and I understand that science fiction, of all genres, is tough to pull off on a small budget, but it looked distractingly low-budget. Likewise, Moon didn't transcend its filmic influences imo - the visual quotes remained merely quotes for example.

    The world would be a better place, however, if more filmmakers loved 2001: A Space Odyssey and Blade Runner and aimed to make comparable movies. Accordingly, I appreciate Jones's eagerness to shoot for the stars (or moon). I just feel that the project got stuck in orbit. Three stars out of five is still a good rating in my book. I'd give it that or a little less.
  12. Really reeeally don't agree with you skeeze. This movie a minimum 4/5 imo. Come to think of it, I really don't agree with a lot of your ratings. Sorry :-/
  13. i liked moon alot, prob 3.5 outa 5

    i just watched like 40 minutes of hunger and was completely fucking clueless... prob finish it later

    watching hurt locker right now, this movie is awesome

    thanks for the reviews
  14. Anyone else think this was a joke post about davin moon lol
  15. i saw hunger earlier this week. i thought it was one of the worst, most boring movies ive ever seen. the 1st 40 minutes were meaningless. that movie could have been 30 minutes long and gotten the same points and emotional connection to the characters across.

    i do enjoy your movie reviews and agree with most of them, but hunger was just not very good imo.
     
  16. Since you're name is one of my favorite characters from a movie I'll let it slide...

    &quot;Hi Hooooops!&quot;
    Thread Starter
  17.  
    Originally Posted by Pooplips View Post

    Anyone else think this was a joke post about davin moon lol

    no because

    1) no one talks about poker here, this is OT
    2) there have been several massive thread here already about this movie*
    3) youre a n00b go away
  18.  
    Originally Posted by dippydough View Post

    i saw hunger earlier this week. i thought it was one of the worst, most boring movies ive ever seen. the 1st 40 minutes were meaningless. that movie could have been 30 minutes long and gotten the same points and emotional connection to the characters across.

    i do enjoy your movie reviews and agree with most of them, but hunger was just not very good imo.

    I haven't seen Hunger, but given its 90% rating on Rotten Tomatoes (not an easy or dismissible feat), I have to think you're in the distinct minority on this one.
    1
  19. Damn! I'm still going to see it but I kinda had the feeling when I first saw the trailer that there was no way the movie was going to be as good as it looked. O'Well
  20. Anyone have a link for me? The torrent someone posted a few weeks ago didnt work for me. Someone has to have it streaming by now
     
  21. http://www.watch-movies-online.tv/movies/moon/

    Not sure which ones are any good...but I'm sure one of them works.
    Thread Starter
  22. ***SPOILER WARNING OBV***

    I agree with ***/5

    The movie was good, but had a lot of wasted potential.

    It seemed like they sort of got impatient of trying to figure out how to get the most out of the plot and how to build the suspense/crescendo properly for the movie and just went &quot;Fuck it, who cares, c'mon let's just make this movie alfuckingready!&quot; and then just leaned on Rockwell's acting to pull off a decent movie. Which is unfortunate since it really could have been a superb *****/5 movie if they had taken it to its true potential imo.

    Anyway all that has already been said blah blah etc etc, however, there is one thing I would like to mention which I'm not sure anyone has talked about:

    The interaction between Sam and his clone. Some of it was great (i.e. when they are discussing a chick from their younger years on earth when they are together in the moonrover) but a lot of it, at least imo, was not so great. While I understand that the absurd lengths of complete solitude is supposed to make a person act/react to things differently from a normal person, I still think they took it a little too far/unrealistic/not so great in the way they had Sam interact with his clone when they first meet. Punching a punching bag and ignoring the other guy and neither of them even pointing out for quite a loooooong time that they looked identical to each other, or seeming at all interested/psyched out about that fact is just silly. Come on now. I don't care how wired you are from sitting around by yourself on the moon, if you see your clone, and neither you nor your clone ever had any clue that something like that was going to happen, that is NOT what your reaction would be. Not even close. The acting hostile towards each other was fine, I liked that, despite how illogical it was, but the initial reaction of stonewalling towards each other was just crappy imo and should've been done differently.

    I wish Stanley Kubrick were still alive. If he would've directed this thing... oh man... fucking rapesauce.
  23. I agree with Skeeze's points here. When someone posted the link to the torrent a while back you'd swear this was a top 10 movie of all time, most ppl were going apeshit over it. After it was over I was sorta like &quot;really? that's what all the hype was about?&quot; Definitely watchable but nowhere near what i thought it would be.
  24.  
    Originally Posted by bfactor View Post

    ***SPOILER WARNING OBV***

    but a lot of it, at least imo, was not so great. While I understand that the absurd lengths of complete solitude is supposed to make a person act/react to things differently from a normal person, I still think they took it a little too far/unrealistic/not so great in the way they had Sam interact with his clone when they first meet. Punching a punching bag and ignoring the other guy and neither of them even pointing out for quite a loooooong time that they looked identical to each other, or seeming at all interested/psyched out about that fact is just silly. Come on now. I don't care how wired you are from sitting around by yourself on the moon, if you see your clone, and neither you nor your clone ever had any clue that something like that was going to happen, that is NOT what your reaction would be. Not even close. The acting hostile towards each other was fine, I liked that, despite how illogical it was, but the initial reaction of stonewalling towards each other was just crappy imo and should've been done differently.

    I wish Stanley Kubrick were still alive. If he would've directed this thing... oh man... fucking rapesauce.

    I realy like what you say here... I think that was one of the intangible aspects that when it was over left you wondering what was actually missing, and in a strong sense it was that you were watching a 'sci-fi' film and had to suspend disbelief and all, but not to the extent that the characters would do something so strange and 'unrealistic' as ignore each other... And +1 to Kubrick giving it a go.... would have been sweet to see him do it like 25 years ago.
    Thread Starter

Similar Threads