Movie review:- 🌟🌟🌟
About the movie:-
Like many other Hollywood disaster movies, the world is also coming to an end in 'The Fall of the Moon', but the only difference is that this time the villain is the Moon. In a way, because an evil force has now invaded the moon, which is theorized to be a "mega structure" floating around in this rushed sci-fi, built by our ancestors using cutting-edge technology, including artificial intelligence. As the film progresses, its central premise becomes increasingly ridiculous and absurd as the actors struggle to make it believable. However, there is hardly a moment that feels real in this fictional event. Which is exactly why it seems so hard to feel invested in this laborious saga of life and death. Poor writing takes its toll on everything. This makes the script feel tedious and repetitive as almost every action sequence takes place as if the world is coming to an end. While it's thrilling, adventurous, and sometimes even edge-of-your-seat, it still doesn't feel the least bit convincing. Screenwriter and director Roland Emmerich (2012) is known for his vast vision and vivid imagination. about cosmic events that can destroy our existence. "Moonfall" comes from the same thought process, but this time the theory about the villainous "alien technology" just doesn't play a part. It follows similar disaster movie tropes of several central characters trying to save their loved ones and the world. Then there are the series of clichés that herald bizarre astrophysical nonsense and parallel scenes of massive world monuments biting the dust. It might give the audience a sadistic pleasure to see it, even though you can clearly tell it's special effects and fake prototypes, but without a solid story, it's all colossal garbage.
Summary:-
Roland Emmerich is destroying the world again with "Moonfall," but this time his heart just isn't in it. The German nihilist blockbuster filmmaker, who rarely met a conspiracy theory he didn't like, became a "master of disaster" with films like "Independence Day" and his own global warming epic "The Day After Tomorrow." But while his film "2012" in particular was stunning in its passion for turning mass death into an exhilarating roller coaster ride with two kids in the back seat, here is "Moonfall" which proves that a boring apocalypse movie is worse than a movie fixated on how we are all doomed. Moonfall' depicts the horror that would occur if the moon left orbit and crashed into the earth. Before this large impact, the Earth's gravity would gradually decrease while the Moon would shed debris as it approached. For good measure, Emmerich throws in a "Transformers"-esque edge to the hare-brained science of why this might happen, but it also comes with lackluster imagination and execution. Don't be fooled, this movie has more value as a comparison to Lars von Trier's "Melancholia" about a giant planet attacking Earth than as decent entertainment. The US military decided that the moon, well, had to be nuked. But something else is going on with the moon—something inside—and it's ultimately up to three smart people to stop the moon from destroying Earth, including disgraced astronaut Brian Harper (Patrick Wilson), a plucky NASA boss, and Brian's fellow astronaut. partner Jocinda Fowl (Halle Berry) and a conspiracy theorist named KC (John Bradley), who has long believed that the Moon is a megastructure. Of course, KC learns of this change and releases it to the media, with NASA comparing it to only about three weeks to go. They take off in a shuttle, eventually with no crew on the ground, and it feels less like a triumph than the film's attempt to minimize the cast.All three of our heroes have their own personal connections that create gritty drama on the ground: there's Brian and his troubled son Sonny (Charlie Plummer) and his ex-wife and their two girls; Jocinda and her son and her ex-husband and the foreign exchange student she made babysit (Kelly Yu); KC and his mother and his cat Fuzz Aldrin (due to the amazing detail). Co-written by Harald Kloser and Spencer Cohen, “Moonfall” is a lumbering, long locomotive of one cliché attached to another, making time pass slowly even as there is so much juggling of these various one-dimensional relationships. The human stories themselves are gratuitous, instead of drawing us in, so telegraphed into the drama of their characters. This is how a father and an angry son meet in the middle of a movie: "I hate you." "You know what? I'll take it. 'Moonfall' suffers from other more self-consciously cut corners, suggesting a budget that could only include so much destruction (his previous film 'Midway' was more successful at looking less fake with similar constructions). It's so obvious that the film version of Colorado is a soundstage with one tiny snowy road for numerous takes; you can see the actors being cramped and specifically hear the disdain in Charlie Plummer's line readings. Working with smaller resources than his previous blockbusters, "Moonfall" seems constantly constrained by his low-key reliance on green screens and the immense work of his visual effects teams, Emmerich's blockbuster vision has closed in: he could have inspired countless direct-to-video disaster movies with titles like "2012: Doomsday," but now he's made a film that he's just as visually junky and uninspired to be even more so.A transparent and self-amusing filmmaker, Emmerich's sense of humanity can be found in who gives spirited performances and who doesn't. In this case, it's only KC who gets exclamation points to shout about how the moon is a megastructure and finally his respect for being proven right. (For a movie that comes in the era of Elon Musk and Space X flights, KC says, “I love Elon.”) But everyone else deals with periods when their experience is an exclamation point: you never heard someone minimize “Damn, the moon is rising” until you won't see "Moonfall". It used to be strange how much Emmerich's nihilism wanted to show destruction, now he's bored with humanity.
Even reliable forces like Wilson and Berry can't sell what little drama the story has. Sometimes the nonchalant feel of an end-of-the-world movie can be laughable; notice any time something devastating happens in the background of the shot and how the characters in the foreground barely react to it. "Moonfall" rarely gives way to the usual interludes of doom from Emmerich's previous films; who thought we'd ever miss them so much, or his obligatory destruction of the White House. The film practically forgets that it is dealing with an apocalypse, that all of humanity is at stake.
To be fair, there is a "gravity wave" in the middle of the movie that lifts the carriers and tankers and the bodies of water that throw them across California, and it's an impressive performance by the visual effects artists. But the apocalypse shouldn't be so dull. At least we have the crazy stuff that shows Emmerich really flexing his crazy muscles in the third act, with an explanation about the moon worthy of its own History Channel series. If you're going to invest time and money into "Moonfall," this is what you've earned. And it's clearly the thought that matters most to Emmerich in this self-assignment, as he treats it with immense seriousness and dedication, bringing the whole human factor to a halt. For other admirers of filmmakers channeling their craziest passions with massive movie stars and ones and zeroes, it might be fun. The rest of "Moonfall" is a wash; it's not even a fun-silly doomsday movie.
What people think about this movie 🍿:-
(1) I'm a sci-fi junkie and can enjoy a stupid, mindless action movie. I still find Armageddon very entertaining. This movie is terrible and has almost no redeeming qualities. The only thing I slightly liked were some cool looking destruction scenes. Even the space stuff, which is normally an automatic plus for me, didn't add anything. Perhaps the sense of space that good directors like Christopher Nolan can capture is missing. Or maybe it's because I didn't care one bit about the story or the characters. Speaking of characters... what characters? They are all cardboard cutouts. You have zero investment in any of them. He spouts lines of atrocious dialogue that sound like they were written by a computer program.
(2) Another Emmerich mess. A big budget squandered by sloppy execution and a handful of stars acting on a paycheck won't save an empty script. I wonder how many professional or talented amateur writers have had their work denied and how on earth (or the moon if you prefer) such scripts are produced. Garbage! And I'm not offending anyone, I'm just judging what I saw.
(3) Fun plot concept, but either too serious and too slow with a lack of crazy or exciting moments, or too absurd to be taken seriously. The special effects are spectacular at times but nothing new, the plot has major problems and the pacing is terrible as it jumps back and forth between different groups. The leads are fine, but the supporting characters are poorly written and acted, and the few jokes weren't funny.
(4) There can't be a worse movie right now. I tried to watch and finish the movie three times. Couldn't do it - don't waste your time or money. I BOUGHT this movie to watch soon. HUGE lapse in judgment on my part. It's just excruciatingly bad. It's not bad like the classic 60's sci-fi movies that were funny in a bad way. Just bad bad.
0 Comments