Moonfall

In terms of price and performance, Roland Emmerich has already destroyed the planet several times in a much better way and with a nicer humanistic furor. This incel-conspiracy vision is fine as long as it plays by the rules of a disaster film, but then my brain was skipping out on this attempt at lobotomized sci-fi. It should have ended up on Netflix, because I haven't seen such ugly green-screens on the big screen in a long time. Being able to put the laundry in the washing machine and look out the window would only have added to the film. I don’t expect much from Emmerich, but certainly something more fun than Moonfall. (2022-02-03)

A mix of Independence Day and 2012, but it can’t hold a candle to either. Sure, this is primarily light entertainment, or classic Emmerich, if you will, though even lighter than usual because it’s worse than even Godzilla in character work, dialogue and level of stupidity, and that's saying a hell of a lot. Surprisingly, even the visual effects flourishes don't dazzle to any extreme, and the once so inventive wizard has fallen into the average green screen, where he greases up one unimaginative make-up scene after another. What would Elon do? I'm sure he wouldn't have made this occasionally funny travesty. (2022-05-15)

Thanks Roland! This is the kind of honest bollocks, obviously exaggerated (as it’s based on crazy conspiracies and genre aesthetics of the 50s, and even the 90s) and going full throttle from the start, that has been missing in cinemas for a long time. I don't really understand the complaints about the haphazard logic and the final existential interlude – it's a science fiction movie, not a NASA instructional film. And it's a bloody fun sci-fi, where the deadlines work brilliantly and the deliberately overblown and implausible big-screen plot simply draws you in. Some of the dialogue is admittedly cheesy, and the smoothness of the smoothly narrated Independence Day and 2012 makes up for the overly fast pace in places, but whatever. I was smiling like a little boy and it never ceased to surprise me. Emmerich still does this like nobody else in the business. 75 % (2022-02-06)

Yesterday I was in Apollo 10 1/2, today it’s the regular Apollo 11... Emmerich destroys a planet again in a similar way, but this time he does it a bit differently. Perhaps everything is a bit more laid back here and the destruction isn’t as opulent as in his previous disaster hits like 2012 or the climatic The Day After Tomorrow. This time round, the destruction somehow takes a back seat. The main things here are the journey to the center of the Moon and the mystery of the Dyson Sphere, entertaining mucking about involving a cloud and a decrepit space shuttle, family values and great lines. It’s a hair’s breadth worse than the other Emmerich movies to date, but it’s still good entertainment for two hours, during which your brain can get some rest. (2022-04-03)

This is so heavenly stupid that it's kind of beautiful. This movie is about 60 years late, and that's actually a good thing. I felt like I was watching vintage sci-fi from the 1950s again, only that Roland goes much, much further with the stupidity. In the 1950s, during the Golden Age of science fiction, these pieces were made like Bata's trainers, nothing makes sense to today's viewer, but you still have fun and smile because you can feel the sincere effort to make a good film. Probably like Edward D. Wood Jr. when he was hanging models of flying saucers on string, Roland has the technical side of the craft down pat, but the boys are on the same page in terms of message. Emmerich is a genre on his own. I don’t want to watch it again, but it was a guilty pleasure. (2022-04-02)