6:15 Imagine sitting through 90 minutes of this, only to realize that it was just an elaborate way for the movie theater to tell you to turn off your phone during the movie, and then the previews end, and you remember you're there to see Toy Story and Furious 26...
Also 2012 was based, at least lightly, on a book written by two pretty good writers who did a huge amount of research... and found themselves laughed at after publishing. Now a lot of the weather problems that they pointed out were likely to happen, well, _are_ happening (late snows, big storms, etc.). So starting to make a movie with a good idea is always a... good idea.
Well, in 2012 that Russian ‘bad’ guy plummeting from the ledge to push his son onto boat is still remembered 10 years later by me. And it a film I’ve seen only once. Damn, that was a moment that even most ‘drama’ films don’t achieve.
Yeah, it was a haunting scene. It made me sympathise with him and his sons. He wasn't a good man but he died doing his duty of protecting his children.
I watched this with my Grandpa and we were just laughing at how bad this was and our main question was: When the the AI was stopped How the hell did the moon just suddenly return to orbit like wouldn't it keep moving into Earth if it was that close already? I understand taking liberties with realism in movies like these but when the movie is trying to use physics for why an event is happening it makes it more noticable
That is actually consistent with the story, the nanobots hindered the energy source of the moon so it couldnt self correct its flight arround earth... after destroying the swarm it was able to fly again and could self correct back into orbot. That makes sense in the universe... What didnt make sense: The energy source was a white dwarf that thing has a mass between 0.15-1.2 of our suns. Therefore it has similar gravity, therefore the spaceshipmoon can change its mass, otherwise it would have broken earth into pieces Why does it not change its mass after nearing earth to avoid damaging it...
No, no. The moon is not a moon, it's a giant spaceship that just looks like a moon. Once the super high-tech jabberwocky stopped hacking/sucking power from the core/interfering with its operation, the moon mini-AI could instantly start the big moon engine and move the moon back to the optimal position. And because the moon is a super-awesome spaceship, it could move really, really fast. Except when it's falling down to Earth. Also, the film forgets to mention that ~95% of humans, animals, and plants are probably dead already, and the interfering gravity might have ripped big slices into Earth, or might have started other tectonic-related super-disasters. The Yellowstone Caldera probably erupted. The economy and the energy grids are gone. Humanity is, if at all, back to the early dark ages. Okay, having control of the moon-ship might help recovery by a lot. Hopefully quick enough until main AI shows up. Which has probably taken over a few Galaxies and became a Kardashev 3.x Level Powerhouse. It wouldn't even need to come personally. It could just focus the power of a hundred suns into an intergalactic death beam.
You would think the environmental effects on Earth if the Moon's orbit was disrupted would be catastrophic. If there wasn't an Extinction event happening already, multiple ecosystems on our planet would at the very least be affected by the crazy weather patterns that would ensue.
I'd like to see your take on Downsizing, I think it is a good example of how a concept film can fall apart very quickly when the concept loses importance to the plot.
“Moonfall” the plot is the moon is falling. Film names have reached their peak, no other way to beat the absolute genius of this name. Just go home everyone.
That's most movie and TV show names, The Terminator is about a Terminator, Infinity War is about a war for Infinity Stones, Joker has a joker, Attack on Titan... That's just television.
Its really incredibly how they made a concept like the moon falling into earth with a mysterious alien monster being being involved beyond our comprehension and somehow make it lame and disappointing
@@jaideepshekhar4621you’d think that since a rogue Ai beat an interstellar travel capable humanity that was far far ahead of modern humanity that it wouldn’t be some lovecraftian horror since AI is already a black box, imagine that box is a trillion trillion trillion trillion times better than our strongest modern computer. There’s artificial intelligence that are Eldritch abominations like the Reapers from Mass Effect
@@jaideepshekhar4621t this point if you want to be more realistic that the nanites makes the movie weaker since because it should have been adapted to emps and extremely high levels of radiation. It should have been the main focus of the movie instead of the moon falling because the nanites would be way beyond human comprehension and current human technology it should be an unstoppable cosmic horror that humanity would just be as helpless to stop it on par with the moon actually falling into the earth
"We scanned your consciousness. You're part of the moon now." This final line made me convulse out of my seat and double over the empty seat in front of me, slapping it while screaming. No other film ever made me behave that way in public. Moonfall is a comedic triumph.
The weird thing is that 2012 (2009) feels like a bigger more extravaganza disaster movie version of The Day After Tomorrow (2004) (which was basically the blueprint to 2012 (2009)). And now we got Moonfall (2022) which tries to out do 2012 (2009). That's not happening.
@@ecogreen123 You liked it more than 2012? What exactly did you like? I felt the drama, the tension, the plot, the plausibility, the emotions and the visuals were better in the former.
Fun fact:Animals, including humans, all have a very faint electromagnetic aura. It's very weak but it's there. So if the monster can sense a phone from that distance then once closer the monster could have pin pointed the humans without the phone. Edit: there are a ton of papers on the subject of Biomagnetism but I'm not paying the fee or spending my day emailing all the PHDs to see if I can get a free copy, please look into yourself as the research is there I'm just not gonna fight you on a UA-cam comment section
Yeah, I thought they were going to use horror movie logic for one of the characters to do something stupid (bring the phone) and have it buzz or something that forces the characters into an action scene
It reminds me of something like transformers where nothing makes sense, that it's supposed to be dumb fun action. Except this movie wasn't really that. Just a flop
@@X.Y.Z.07 Sometimes films are made that are not intended to succeed. Usually so they can be tax write offs or to maintain rights to characters or stories.
At no point in chasing the little shuttle at the end of the movie does the nanocloud realize it is a CLOUD that could break apart and attack from multiple directions, instead it just continues to chase it as a big single piece.
Wow. Just realized how 2012 had me bawling my eyes out for almost every character that died. Just the intensity of knowing that anyone could die at any moment and there was Nothing they could do about it. Dang
Hollywood in a nutshell. Who needs a good story? Just shit more diversity and fake feminism. I am sure people will love it! Wait, why are we losing money?
I was literally about to comment something very similar. I think I saw one of the first trailers for this right before seeing the 1st Sonic Movie or Spider-Man: Far from Home & the instant I saw the trailer I rolled my eyes & said something along the lines of "Oh geez, another one of these?"
My biggest problem with this movie was that I never felt human kind actually dying. Only 7 characters died on screen. If you are doing a disaster movie, people need to see and be scared of the amount of destruction that is going to happen.
Facts. When the tsunami arrives i was wondering what unique approach would they take to set the movie apart from other disaster movies like maybe add sharks in the water or something, but we got non. Literally 0 dead bodies shown. And all the characters survive the mega tsunami by just going to the higher floor lmao
if you have seen War of the World, this is so pale in comparison... those alien red spray and vines are made from human's blood, and then shows the whole world being red, now figure it for yourself audience. Smart move~ Edit: Oh yeah, then there's laser zap human into dust next to the main character when running, that's intense.
@jaxon perez Actually seeing people suffer and having to imagine it are two very different things and if you’re making a cheesy disaster movie then you should not be doing the latter.
Not the same type of movie, but remember how in Nope we know Jean jacket is an alien predator that you can’t look in the eye and that’s it. It remained creepy while giving us enough we needed to know about it
Just like with how Geostorm failed, I think brining in a malicious entity as the primary cause of the disaster cheapens it. One of the horrifying aspects of these sorts of stories is that the disasters just happen as a part of nature. No evil villain or monster is making it happen. It's just the world screwing us over, and we can do very little to stop it. Making it the work of a villain or monster means that you can punch them in the face to solve the problem. You can't really punch nature in the face.
To be fair my family just wanted to see a disaster movie and the moon falling from the sky sounded like a cool idea. Shame it was such a shit show of a movie, I even laugh at the very end when the movie DARES to say this movie would get a sequel. Like HELL NO.
So a small recap: Make the monster have consequences and not overcomplicate its mechanics. Show the disaster causes issues and moves the action forward. Emotional hook should be part of the motivation for the protagonist and we need to see more of them. Actions hace consequences, show not tell and emotional motivation should be demonstrated.
I maintain that Contagion was the best disaster with no *visual* disaster. It wasn't about the spectacle, it happened rather quietly in hospitals and conference rooms and all the chaos that happened was because of humanity's response to it - and the movie did a great job of making a disaster movie very human.
@@charlespuruncajas9663 In 'Greenland' the movie, there are few slow-paced scenes, but the rest of them are running, chasing, and avoiding. Greenland does a decent job, just like 2012. Unlike this Moonfall, where the characters are acting lazily in a disaster movie.
Contagion was definitely a great movie, but I feel like it’s not really fair to compare a movie like this to a movie like that. Yes, they’re both disaster movies, but they aren’t the same “genre” of disaster. Disaster via disease and disaster via monster/geo/space/event have vastly different requirements. Contagion didn’t show visual disasters like this movie because there literally weren’t any to show, not because they chose to. The only scenes you can show in disease disaster movies are human panic, there is no spectacle. Where-areas, event disaster movies like 2012 or Moonfall are required to have visual disaster and spectacle. Haha, doesn’t help this movies standing at all, just wanted to point that out.
If you asked me what the best movie of all time was id say moonfall. If you asked me what the worst movie of all time was id say moonfall. This movie is a bold step forward for cinema in a way never truly done before. This movie is astounding in its ridiculousness. It pushes new boundaries in asking what will a movie go’er accept. It doesn’t have time to ask questions about “science” or “logic” or even basic character development. It is bad in a way I’ve never seen before and I loved every single second of it. Im so sad we wont get to see a moonfall 2.
The funny thing is this is mostly independently funded. The studios aren't entirely at fault here. And after a bombing of this caliber on that kind of money, I'm wondering how Roland will convince funding for his next feature. Now this is gonna scare off independent funders from him too.
Haven't seen the movie but it looked like pieces of the falling moon were drawing things up, as if gravity drew you from the surface of the larger object to a distant smaller object...
@@VladOS_Ur He did the exact same thing in Independence Day 2, however I think he did it better there as that film while weak in story had good disaster moments.
My father & I watched this together, and we both have a strong physics background... we couldn't stop laughing at the physics, decisions, & dialogue in this movie
Tbf, that’s just a science fiction take on tidal force changing as the moon gets closer to earth. It’s not really that ridiculous in a science fiction film. There is science its based on, it just takes it to an unrealistic extreme which, yeah, is what science fiction does.
You were WAY to nice on this failure. One of the other major failures, among many others, is that the science behind many of the moon's effect on earth are so painfully wrong that any high school educated person knows that it's bullshit. Example 1: Moon will rip away atmosphere in mountains: gravity doesn't discriminate between oxygen and the rest of the atmosphere. ALL of it would thin out, meaning you would need a space suit to survive. Example 2: Gravity from the moon is shown visibly lifting cars into the air, but if you run fast enough and hide in a wood barn you won't get lifted into the air?? Riiiiiight... (One thing Roland Emmerich has been consistently a failure at in all his films, successful or not, is basic Science. Luckily, in some of his past films this was so minor you could overlook it, but in this one it was much more important and his lack of understanding really showed.)
Okay but uh... it's called suspension of disbelief. I'm not saying the movie is good, but going after a film about evil aliens and the moon plummeting to earth for being unrealistic might not be the best idea. In films, there's this idea called suspension of disbelief, which is basically that you have to draw lines around where you're gonna obey real world logic, and where you expect the audience to understand you taking creative liberties with real world logic, such as the real world science of the moon falling to the earth. The movie expects the audience to be able to suspend their disbelief the same way star wars expects you to be able to believe that there could be laser swords and wizards who can make objects float because of little creatures in their blood. It's not a "major failure" of the movie, it's just an inherent part of filmmaking.
Plus the fact that radio towers still work, plus a white dwarf being way too big to be able to fit in the moon, plus the mass of one, plus the fact that Dyson Spheres are significantly larger than that. Honestly, it's way more than you can count.
@@apersonwhomayormaynotexist9868 That’s not how suspension of disbelief works. Movies need rules for people to care about what they’re seeing. In Star Wars, it’s established that light sabers work and the Force is real. In this movie, they’re using our rules of physics, yet apply them arbitrarily. People can accept magic in a Harry Potter movie because they have established rules. But if Harry Potter defeated Voldemort by pulling out a light saber and using Force powers, people would complain. Suspension of disbelief doesn’t mean turning off your brain. That sort of thinking is why so many movies are unwatchable. Just because a movie does something doesn’t make it ok.
I watched this movie one time, forgot everything by the morning (to be faire i was drunk). the second time (sober) i still forgot everything the next day. First time it happens to me from watching a movie, and I've watched forgettable movies before
I wish I watched this movie drunk. Maybe I wouldn't have hated it. I even wanted to leave in the middle of the movie, I only stayed because of my family.
And lets not forget how many scientific fallacies are in this movie. Just for a start, the entire white dwarf the moon is built around realistically would have a minimum size of at least the Earth, plus a white dwarf has tons more mass than the Earth. On top of that, Dyson Spheres are also significantly bigger by default. And then there's the fact that phones and other ways of contact still work despite them usually going down as one of the first thing in such a disaster. The list goes on.
This movie was a guilty pleasure of mine, but I fully acknowledge all the movies faults and short-comings. I thought that Greenland did this much better. I'm not saying that it was a masterpiece, but the family aspect of that movie was much more compelling and engaging than this.
Whereas for me Greenland was soured by the focus on the family stuff, haha! I wanted more CGI schlock and sludge, less familial tears and fears especially since the characters were unlikeable (as are they often are in Emmerich flicks this side of 2000). Both Greenland and the movie of subject exemplify the same issue: Emmerich seems to have missed why we tune in to his disaster fests. McDonald's needs not serve steak. We want the paper-thin Big Mac and mystery meat nuggets with the cardboard fries.
@@blueberry01120 Well, I think it could be argued Greenland, although in the same genre, was trying to be a more serious movie. It was basically trying to be a more dramatic 2012.
i personally really liked this movie but that's probably cuz i don't really care about how good character development or story is, etc. if it's good, just another plus, if not, i don't notice and enjoy the movie anyway. but that's definitely just me.
Watched this with my dad earlier this week. He really likes it, me not so much. Probably my main issue is the main character - the British guy. I never managed to find a reason to like him, he constantly found a way to irritate me. And as a brit myself I tend to lean towards them, but that never happened. In fact, when he sacrificed himself I went "hah good" because I didnt like him enough to want him to live- a little cold but the truth. It was easy short term entertainment, but really confusing and become boring over time.
When I saw the teaser of the moon about to hit Earth, I got chills. Such a dope idea. As soon as I saw another trailer for it showing off the monster, I was instantly taken out of it.
My parents dragged me to this movie because they thought it was something else. I spent the entire run time roasting the shit out of it. This is probably one of the worst films I've seen in a theater.
I remember a novel called Moonfall. In that novel, the Moon actually finished falling (as large chunks, with widespread ruin), and it was not - as far as I know - anything to do with an alien AI or anything like that. I had hoped, for all its badness, that this film would be the film of that book, and that I could at least seek it out to watch it and compare it to the book. However, it looks as though the only thing they have in common is the title.
well, it's not like it can physically fall into Earth, it would turn into a ring around the earth and periodically some fragments would enter the atmosphere
@@Ensign_Cthulhu yeah, you're right, that's another thing that often happen in this kind of movies, even in 2012 "oh yeah, there were 12° earthquakes, but fear not, SOMEHOW africa remained intact"
To somewhat counter your point at 2:14, it’s not that humanity has gotten smarter. It’s just that we’ve seen all this stuff before and we were sick of it years ago. Now it’s just gotten sad.
I wish you called this video: Moonfall - How to fail at 2012. Because this movie reminded me of 2012, where it has this end of the world schlock, full of CGI disaster moments, qwerky characters that can always cheat death, kinda combines real life moments with its own fictional story and more along that I can’t describe. Not only that but I’m curious on your opinion of 2012. Is it good, bad, a bit of both? For me, I still love it.
2012 did a lot right where this movie fails The side characters where shity Version of the side characters in 2012, i think the new husband of the alkoholic loser dad had the same name, and he also died. It was the 2012 skript with new cgi +spaceshipmoon
I went into this movie on opening night thinking it would be a genuinely competent disaster movie to rival 2012 or Armageddon. I used up a whole $50 AMC gift card for that film...
I like how the Roland Emmerich disaster movies have been getting worse since the day after tomorrow (which was great). Maybe it is foreshadowing the annihilation of the film industry like a Roland Emmerich movie plot?
I just learned this movie exists. I think part of the failure is 0 marketing. With 2012 people were bombed with advertising. It's a big factor for going to the movies.
2012 also had the actual date coming up and so on that helped with the hype where as moonfall was it's own thing. I also enjoyed the humans in 2012 more than the ones in moonfall which felt bland, boring and insufferable. When they're in the interior of the moon and they cut back to the family fighting over gas I genuinely said "wtf" in the theatre. We're seeing THE INSIDE OF THE MOON and you're cutting away to show us a car chase???
Personally, the biggest problem is the weak main characters and lack of consistent build up to the final conflict and it’s resolution. Marcus was the only character I liked and should have been the main antagonist.
That 10 year jump is what messed me up - I missed the text and all of a sudden his son was a teenager in prison / juvie - it makes a lot more sense now - I thought they just forgot about the small boy and he had an older son from another marriage.
the idea to make the hollow moon conspiracy theory and advanced ancient civilization concept into a movie was pretty interesting and got me excited to see it but for me it was wasted potential. Some cgi scenes were good but thats it
I mean they could have made an awesome movie or even trilogy based on these concepts. Yet the plot was so poorly written and also threw "the machines took over" in there which was overkill. The movie, especially the reveal that it was an ancient advanced civilization who built it, wasn't made very believable. It seemed almost like during filming they quickly changed it from aliens to ancient humans
"You don't wanna know about it here, but I'll tell you one thing. The MOON. It comes crashing into Earth! And what you do then? It's two brothers and I- and...and they're gonna...it's called 'Two Brothers' ...'Two Brothers'...it's just called 'Two Brothers'!"
Thank you Filmento. I’m a DM starting a new campaign where there will be a cosmic threat that carries some of the same themes, so it’s always good to see where the pitfalls can be. In this case, the PCs won’t have a ton of information available for a while, and I’d already made it a point to ask the question for each chapter of how the BBEG is effecting events and how the PCs can further their quest to uncover the mystery of what it is they need to fight and how to even attempt to do so. So very well timed video.
When the adverts first released, from the tacky name, poor acting, etc, I genuinely thought this was a spoof disaster film. You blew my mind with this video.
Even if we detonated *ALL the nukes EVER,* we couldn't nudge the Moon *an inch.* So how can one monster move it? Ok, so the movie acknowledged the Roche Limit and then ignored it. Those effects with "atmosphere stripping" and "gravity screwing" wouldn't happen. The Moon would be CHUNKS before that point Hollow or not.
Who cares? Who cared how many blows a real life Rocky could take before fainting, who cares where Hulk gets his additional mass from or how Cap America's pants managed to grow with him? Who ever understood the economics of Harry Potter or wondered where the cinetic energy in John Wick goes to when his bulletproof suit saves him from being perforated? I would never go into a movie that's realistic, not even if it's about a boy and a girl falling in love ...
Aside from the story itself, my biggest gripe I couldn’t get over was the total lack of chemistry between *any* of the leads… I truly didn’t care about their success or failure
12:54 Hey, Samwell Tarly appears! Summary of Filmento advice: If you have an A, it should lead to a B. And if there is a B, it should first be caused by an A.
it's just soooo hilarious everyone at mission control is seeing crew get obliterated by the tentacles but it's just OHH NOOO anyway back to looking at my screens, and time for main characters monologue about AI
The loss of enthusiasm in your voice really hit me menh, these terrible movies really kicking your ass huh😂😂 hang in there king, we need your service 🔥🔥
My only question to the movie is: why it waited for more then 11 years to atack? It was waiting for other monsters? No. Doing something to "hack" the Moon? Maybe, we don't know. My guess this gap was in the movie to just separate mains hero family, to use the same cliche over and over again
@@nachomartinez8978 thanks for explaining it, it's fairly obvious it has problems with the hull of the hanger, and when you look at their decent into the moon the metal looking layer is *VERY* thick to say the least not forget the fact it's a small swarm of nano-robots.
Well ,all the things you mentioned in the video (and usually mention about bad films) , they're fine and all, but the weird part is that i already thaught it'd be a horrible film for some reason, and this is a recurring theme,
"All you have to do is turn off your phone..." Truly the greatest horror story of the 2020s.
O
M
F
G
XD
Oh? Ever seen the Day Of The Triffids as a serie or heard on the radio? That end must have crushed you…🫠
It would be interesting to see what would happen if all the cell phones quit working for two days.
Definitely a lot of kids are dying.
lol seriously? that's what the movie is about? wow
6:15 Imagine sitting through 90 minutes of this, only to realize that it was just an elaborate way for the movie theater to tell you to turn off your phone during the movie, and then the previews end, and you remember you're there to see Toy Story and Furious 26...
2012 wasn't exactly a great movie, but wow, this really shows that it was a well-put-together 'fun' disaster movie.
Also 2012 was based, at least lightly, on a book written by two pretty good writers who did a huge amount of research... and found themselves laughed at after publishing. Now a lot of the weather problems that they pointed out were likely to happen, well, _are_ happening (late snows, big storms, etc.). So starting to make a movie with a good idea is always a... good idea.
there is a 2012 book? Interesting
At least 2012 checked most the boxes, just not spectacularly.
@@debbys-abqnm4537 Or at least don't let Roland Emmerich write the script himself.
Tbh i enjoyed 2012
Well, in 2012 that Russian ‘bad’ guy plummeting from the ledge to push his son onto boat is still remembered 10 years later by me. And it a film I’ve seen only once. Damn, that was a moment that even most ‘drama’ films don’t achieve.
It was good scene. 🙂 I liked it.
It's rememberable because secretely we've always hated Russians before Ukraine,Syria,Tjetnyia, Georgia, Cuba Crisis, Nuke rattling and Stalin...
@@dagg497 So, you hate simple Russians for the sins commited by those in charge of them?
@@fastwing3295 putin is also 'simple russian' who just happen to made it. It is a culture of ruthlessness. Russians love their dictators.
Yeah, it was a haunting scene. It made me sympathise with him and his sons. He wasn't a good man but he died doing his duty of protecting his children.
Like the famous Filmento once said, "if your main character doesn't care, why should we".
How the hell movie studios keep losing $100's of millions of dollars year after year and yet still continue to stay in business is beyond me.
I watched this with my Grandpa and we were just laughing at how bad this was and our main question was: When the the AI was stopped How the hell did the moon just suddenly return to orbit like wouldn't it keep moving into Earth if it was that close already? I understand taking liberties with realism in movies like these but when the movie is trying to use physics for why an event is happening it makes it more noticable
That is actually consistent with the story, the nanobots hindered the energy source of the moon so it couldnt self correct its flight arround earth... after destroying the swarm it was able to fly again and could self correct back into orbot.
That makes sense in the universe...
What didnt make sense:
The energy source was a white dwarf that thing has a mass between 0.15-1.2 of our suns.
Therefore it has similar gravity, therefore the spaceshipmoon can change its mass, otherwise it would have broken earth into pieces
Why does it not change its mass after nearing earth to avoid damaging it...
No, no. The moon is not a moon, it's a giant spaceship that just looks like a moon. Once the super high-tech jabberwocky stopped hacking/sucking power from the core/interfering with its operation, the moon mini-AI could instantly start the big moon engine and move the moon back to the optimal position. And because the moon is a super-awesome spaceship, it could move really, really fast. Except when it's falling down to Earth.
Also, the film forgets to mention that ~95% of humans, animals, and plants are probably dead already, and the interfering gravity might have ripped big slices into Earth, or might have started other tectonic-related super-disasters. The Yellowstone Caldera probably erupted. The economy and the energy grids are gone. Humanity is, if at all, back to the early dark ages.
Okay, having control of the moon-ship might help recovery by a lot. Hopefully quick enough until main AI shows up. Which has probably taken over a few Galaxies and became a Kardashev 3.x Level Powerhouse. It wouldn't even need to come personally. It could just focus the power of a hundred suns into an intergalactic death beam.
@@Dampfaeus But did you see the Lexus?
@Dampfaeus Dave's not here man.....
You would think the environmental effects on Earth if the Moon's orbit was disrupted would be catastrophic. If there wasn't an Extinction event happening already, multiple ecosystems on our planet would at the very least be affected by the crazy weather patterns that would ensue.
I'd like to see your take on Downsizing, I think it is a good example of how a concept film can fall apart very quickly when the concept loses importance to the plot.
Yeah, that film was all over the place. It was a very weird watch.
That movie was so bad
that was a decent film, it doesnt really take itself seriously
“Moonfall” the plot is the moon is falling. Film names have reached their peak, no other way to beat the absolute genius of this name. Just go home everyone.
Ahahaha, you shouldve seen Japanese light novels and manga ahahaha
I saw a comic about the sun is failing and need to be restarted
The end quote: "it's Daylight Saving Time"
That's most movie and TV show names, The Terminator is about a Terminator, Infinity War is about a war for Infinity Stones, Joker has a joker, Attack on Titan... That's just television.
well I for one would've watched Skyfall sooner if this was the new way to title films.
Wait till you see “gladiator” “hobo with a shotgun”and “killer clowns from outer space”
Its really incredibly how they made a concept like the moon falling into earth with a mysterious alien monster being being involved beyond our comprehension and somehow make it lame and disappointing
It's amazing how you can have a bunch of really stupid concepts & throw them all together and somehow come up with a really stupid movie.
@@proto-geek248 Naah, the execution was terrible. There are plenty of good alien movies, plenty of good ai movies, plenty of good world ending movies.
@@jaideepshekhar4621you’d think that since a rogue Ai beat an interstellar travel capable humanity that was far far ahead of modern humanity that it wouldn’t be some lovecraftian horror since AI is already a black box, imagine that box is a trillion trillion trillion trillion times better than our strongest modern computer. There’s artificial intelligence that are Eldritch abominations like the Reapers from Mass Effect
@@simonpetrikov3992 Also hilarious that this advanced an AI did not develop any defenses against EMP. :)
@@jaideepshekhar4621t this point if you want to be more realistic that the nanites makes the movie weaker since because it should have been adapted to emps and extremely high levels of radiation. It should have been the main focus of the movie instead of the moon falling because the nanites would be way beyond human comprehension and current human technology it should be an unstoppable cosmic horror that humanity would just be as helpless to stop it on par with the moon actually falling into the earth
"We scanned your consciousness. You're part of the moon now."
This final line made me convulse out of my seat and double over the empty seat in front of me, slapping it while screaming.
No other film ever made me behave that way in public. Moonfall is a comedic triumph.
O
M
F
G
XD
“You are part of the moon now, go sit down and become a moon rock”
@QuinzerrakFalse. The hero of the story is the Moon. The Moon gets what it wants.
Join us, make us whole again
Critics love Moonfall!
Robert Penner says,
“Moonfall is a comedic triumph.”
Don’t miss your chance to own “Moonfall” on Blu-Ray!
The weird thing is that 2012 (2009) feels like a bigger more extravaganza disaster movie version of The Day After Tomorrow (2004) (which was basically the blueprint to 2012 (2009)). And now we got Moonfall (2022) which tries to out do 2012 (2009). That's not happening.
i'll be honest... i liked it more then i liked 2012... but that's probably just my shit opinion.
@@ecogreen123 I'm with you
@@ecogreen123 You liked it more than 2012? What exactly did you like? I felt the drama, the tension, the plot, the plausibility, the emotions and the visuals were better in the former.
@@jaideepshekhar4621 big monsto :^)
Fun fact:Animals, including humans, all have a very faint electromagnetic aura. It's very weak but it's there.
So if the monster can sense a phone from that distance then once closer the monster could have pin pointed the humans without the phone.
Edit: there are a ton of papers on the subject of Biomagnetism but I'm not paying the fee or spending my day emailing all the PHDs to see if I can get a free copy, please look into yourself as the research is there I'm just not gonna fight you on a UA-cam comment section
Also the current in the ship was turned on all the time given that they were breathing so they could have been detected
The monster has the WiFi password. Mic drop.
Yeah, I thought they were going to use horror movie logic for one of the characters to do something stupid (bring the phone) and have it buzz or something that forces the characters into an action scene
that's not why it couldn't see them.
@@neonbunnies9596 and they even commented about the phone earlier in the scene. like wtf
Moonfall feels like it was made with the intent to flop. Like a “Producers” scheme but for a movie and in real life
It feels like it was written as a parody but filled as a serious movie.
Why would they want it to flop tho?
It reminds me of something like transformers where nothing makes sense, that it's supposed to be dumb fun action. Except this movie wasn't really that. Just a flop
@@X.Y.Z.07 Sometimes films are made that are not intended to succeed. Usually so they can be tax write offs or to maintain rights to characters or stories.
@@ptonpc or they straight up pulled a "The Producers" and placed massive bets on it flopping
At no point in chasing the little shuttle at the end of the movie does the nanocloud realize it is a CLOUD that could break apart and attack from multiple directions, instead it just continues to chase it as a big single piece.
BIG BRAIN 🧠
@@w_maurice Galactic Brain Moment
Artificial intelligen't.
@@Dani_RdM YEP
XD
You're implying that the writers were using any kind of basic intelligence when they came up with this idea.
Wow. Just realized how 2012 had me bawling my eyes out for almost every character that died. Just the intensity of knowing that anyone could die at any moment and there was Nothing they could do about it. Dang
"A special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing"
George Lucas
Hollywood in a nutshell.
Who needs a good story? Just shit more diversity and fake feminism. I am sure people will love it!
Wait, why are we losing money?
A special effect without a story could make us break even, at least
-Investor
"I would like a word with you".
- Michael Bay
Said the man who gave us clones vs robots ad nauseum
So we’re gonna act like the prequels don’t exist 😐
Your ability to find quotes from the movie to use in your commentary is awesome! Loved "It's been nearly 3 hours. Can't be a good sign." lol
I remember seeing the trailer for this movie in theaters while waiting to watch spiderman no way home and instantly thinking "wow that looks horrible"
I was literally about to comment something very similar. I think I saw one of the first trailers for this right before seeing the 1st Sonic Movie or Spider-Man: Far from Home & the instant I saw the trailer I rolled my eyes & said something along the lines of "Oh geez, another one of these?"
The premise intrigued me enough to buy me and my buddy a ticket, despite the horrible trailer.
That's money I'll never get back.
Lol I saw the trailer while watching NWH too but I was intrigued by it
Well at least the trailer did its job properly... As it warn us about how bad this movie was
Funny thing is: I thought the same about No Way Home ...
"Because...China." That had me rolling! XD
My biggest problem with this movie was that I never felt human kind actually dying. Only 7 characters died on screen. If you are doing a disaster movie, people need to see and be scared of the amount of destruction that is going to happen.
Facts. When the tsunami arrives i was wondering what unique approach would they take to set the movie apart from other disaster movies like maybe add sharks in the water or something, but we got non. Literally 0 dead bodies shown. And all the characters survive the mega tsunami by just going to the higher floor lmao
if you have seen War of the World, this is so pale in comparison... those alien red spray and vines are made from human's blood, and then shows the whole world being red, now figure it for yourself audience. Smart move~
Edit: Oh yeah, then there's laser zap human into dust next to the main character when running, that's intense.
@jaxon perez Bro how many people did you see dying in New York? That’s my point
@jaxon perez Actually seeing people suffer and having to imagine it are two very different things and if you’re making a cheesy disaster movie then you should not be doing the latter.
@@hatefulgaming1800 well said my brother
Not the same type of movie, but remember how in Nope we know Jean jacket is an alien predator that you can’t look in the eye and that’s it. It remained creepy while giving us enough we needed to know about it
"It's not a disaster movie, it's a disaster of a movie"
- Filmento 2022
Just like with how Geostorm failed, I think brining in a malicious entity as the primary cause of the disaster cheapens it. One of the horrifying aspects of these sorts of stories is that the disasters just happen as a part of nature. No evil villain or monster is making it happen. It's just the world screwing us over, and we can do very little to stop it. Making it the work of a villain or monster means that you can punch them in the face to solve the problem. You can't really punch nature in the face.
We punch nature in the face everyday though 😂
@@TheRealRunningwolf1980 that we do. We could probably punch nature a bit less though. Just a bit.
That little kid giving the exposition dump had me laughing so hard
Alot of people say they want mindless fun movies where you can turn off your brain.
And when they get them they start analyzing the shit out of them.
Work at a theater and a lot of guests said they were excited for this movie and all I had to say was, "...Why...?"
I mean an artificial moon coming to destroy Earth. It’s a pretty cool concept to try check out.
To be fair my family just wanted to see a disaster movie and the moon falling from the sky sounded like a cool idea.
Shame it was such a shit show of a movie, I even laugh at the very end when the movie DARES to say this movie would get a sequel.
Like HELL NO.
Is it a cool job?
@@livingashtree1942
If you can handle the usual Karen, I heard is not a bad job from a friend.
@@NcrXnbi Like do they get to watch new movies for free??
So a small recap:
Make the monster have consequences and not overcomplicate its mechanics.
Show the disaster causes issues and moves the action forward.
Emotional hook should be part of the motivation for the protagonist and we need to see more of them.
Actions hace consequences, show not tell and emotional motivation should be demonstrated.
summary: just make a Majora's Mask movie
"Emotional hook should be part of the motivation for the protagonist and we need to see more of them."
No.
I maintain that Contagion was the best disaster with no *visual* disaster. It wasn't about the spectacle, it happened rather quietly in hospitals and conference rooms and all the chaos that happened was because of humanity's response to it - and the movie did a great job of making a disaster movie very human.
You gotta see Greenland (starring Gerard Butler) then
The original Andromeda Strain is a good example of this.
@@charlespuruncajas9663 In 'Greenland' the movie, there are few slow-paced scenes, but the rest of them are running, chasing, and avoiding.
Greenland does a decent job, just like 2012.
Unlike this Moonfall, where the characters are acting lazily in a disaster movie.
Contagion was definitely a great movie, but I feel like it’s not really fair to compare a movie like this to a movie like that. Yes, they’re both disaster movies, but they aren’t the same “genre” of disaster. Disaster via disease and disaster via monster/geo/space/event have vastly different requirements. Contagion didn’t show visual disasters like this movie because there literally weren’t any to show, not because they chose to. The only scenes you can show in disease disaster movies are human panic, there is no spectacle. Where-areas, event disaster movies like 2012 or Moonfall are required to have visual disaster and spectacle.
Haha, doesn’t help this movies standing at all, just wanted to point that out.
I feel like geostorm is much better
And marketing was horrible, I didn't even know it existed outside of seeing a poster while I was at the theater setting another movie.
If you asked me what the best movie of all time was id say moonfall. If you asked me what the worst movie of all time was id say moonfall. This movie is a bold step forward for cinema in a way never truly done before. This movie is astounding in its ridiculousness. It pushes new boundaries in asking what will a movie go’er accept. It doesn’t have time to ask questions about “science” or “logic” or even basic character development. It is bad in a way I’ve never seen before and I loved every single second of it. Im so sad we wont get to see a moonfall 2.
exactly. This movie will have an impact for decades.
Moonfall - How to Win at Comedy
SUNWARDS
XD
With this thinking you may as well say geostorm is the best movie ever
@@CarlosAM1 lmao no, moonfall is better than geofailure.
The part that cracked me up was, super advanced humans, who built AI swarm drones, built moons and stuff but couldn't build an EMP.
It gets EVEN better. Apparently, they can UPGRADE that EMP, but can't build it! WTF! XD
I don't know why studios keep giving a chance for Roland Emmerich
He got nothing to offer
Indeed Sir, indeed...he seems to be unlearning basic things as he grows older. You'd think he'd be getting better at it. Very sad.
The funny thing is this is mostly independently funded. The studios aren't entirely at fault here. And after a bombing of this caliber on that kind of money, I'm wondering how Roland will convince funding for his next feature. Now this is gonna scare off independent funders from him too.
He hates earth and step dads
@@poisonpotato1 Bwahahaha
@@motherplayer And he will still be blaming Marvel movies
I love how the step dead just dropped dead. "you know this beat, let's not waste time on it"
Haven't seen the movie but it looked like pieces of the falling moon were drawing things up, as if gravity drew you from the surface of the larger object to a distant smaller object...
Oops! : D
Yep, this how gravity works in last Emmerich films.
@@VladOS_Ur He did the exact same thing in Independence Day 2, however I think he did it better there as that film while weak in story had good disaster moments.
My father & I watched this together, and we both have a strong physics background... we couldn't stop laughing at the physics, decisions, & dialogue in this movie
Tbf, that’s just a science fiction take on tidal force changing as the moon gets closer to earth. It’s not really that ridiculous in a science fiction film. There is science its based on, it just takes it to an unrealistic extreme which, yeah, is what science fiction does.
I've never seen or heard of anything about this movie other than penguinz0's explanation. It's weird to see the clips from the film.
You were WAY to nice on this failure. One of the other major failures, among many others, is that the science behind many of the moon's effect on earth are so painfully wrong that any high school educated person knows that it's bullshit. Example 1: Moon will rip away atmosphere in mountains: gravity doesn't discriminate between oxygen and the rest of the atmosphere. ALL of it would thin out, meaning you would need a space suit to survive. Example 2: Gravity from the moon is shown visibly lifting cars into the air, but if you run fast enough and hide in a wood barn you won't get lifted into the air?? Riiiiiight... (One thing Roland Emmerich has been consistently a failure at in all his films, successful or not, is basic Science. Luckily, in some of his past films this was so minor you could overlook it, but in this one it was much more important and his lack of understanding really showed.)
Yes but he's comparing it to 2012
You should watch The Wandering Earth.
Okay but uh... it's called suspension of disbelief. I'm not saying the movie is good, but going after a film about evil aliens and the moon plummeting to earth for being unrealistic might not be the best idea. In films, there's this idea called suspension of disbelief, which is basically that you have to draw lines around where you're gonna obey real world logic, and where you expect the audience to understand you taking creative liberties with real world logic, such as the real world science of the moon falling to the earth.
The movie expects the audience to be able to suspend their disbelief the same way star wars expects you to be able to believe that there could be laser swords and wizards who can make objects float because of little creatures in their blood. It's not a "major failure" of the movie, it's just an inherent part of filmmaking.
Plus the fact that radio towers still work, plus a white dwarf being way too big to be able to fit in the moon, plus the mass of one, plus the fact that Dyson Spheres are significantly larger than that. Honestly, it's way more than you can count.
@@apersonwhomayormaynotexist9868 That’s not how suspension of disbelief works. Movies need rules for people to care about what they’re seeing. In Star Wars, it’s established that light sabers work and the Force is real. In this movie, they’re using our rules of physics, yet apply them arbitrarily.
People can accept magic in a Harry Potter movie because they have established rules. But if Harry Potter defeated Voldemort by pulling out a light saber and using Force powers, people would complain. Suspension of disbelief doesn’t mean turning off your brain. That sort of thinking is why so many movies are unwatchable. Just because a movie does something doesn’t make it ok.
My "favorite" part was at the end when the movie teased a sequel. (Sarcasm)
I watched this movie one time, forgot everything by the morning (to be faire i was drunk). the second time (sober) i still forgot everything the next day. First time it happens to me from watching a movie, and I've watched forgettable movies before
I wish I watched this movie drunk.
Maybe I wouldn't have hated it. I even wanted to leave in the middle of the movie, I only stayed because of my family.
@@NcrXnbi If your family didn't want to leave in the middle of this disaster of a movie, you should have left all the more and look for a new family.
it's like a dream. the moment it's over, i struggle to remember it
bruh just finished the latest vid and reloaded to find it private, really good vid too
And lets not forget how many scientific fallacies are in this movie. Just for a start, the entire white dwarf the moon is built around realistically would have a minimum size of at least the Earth, plus a white dwarf has tons more mass than the Earth. On top of that, Dyson Spheres are also significantly bigger by default. And then there's the fact that phones and other ways of contact still work despite them usually going down as one of the first thing in such a disaster. The list goes on.
And how the moon made the earth is what confused me
i mean... it is a sci-fi movie...
@@ecogreen123 No, it most certainly isn't.
It's a fi movie, alright.
@@onkelpappkov2666 i... wha? ok.
@@ecogreen123 SciFi stands for science fiction. There is no science here, only fiction.
Thank you for this! I I was laughing throughout the whole video from both your commentary and editing.
This movie was a guilty pleasure of mine, but I fully acknowledge all the movies faults and short-comings. I thought that Greenland did this much better. I'm not saying that it was a masterpiece, but the family aspect of that movie was much more compelling and engaging than this.
This movie was basically Greenland, except Greenland was way better
Whereas for me Greenland was soured by the focus on the family stuff, haha! I wanted more CGI schlock and sludge, less familial tears and fears especially since the characters were unlikeable (as are they often are in Emmerich flicks this side of 2000). Both Greenland and the movie of subject exemplify the same issue: Emmerich seems to have missed why we tune in to his disaster fests. McDonald's needs not serve steak. We want the paper-thin Big Mac and mystery meat nuggets with the cardboard fries.
@@blueberry01120 Well, I think it could be argued Greenland, although in the same genre, was trying to be a more serious movie. It was basically trying to be a more dramatic 2012.
i personally really liked this movie but that's probably cuz i don't really care about how good character development or story is, etc. if it's good, just another plus, if not, i don't notice and enjoy the movie anyway. but that's definitely just me.
Greenland was absolutely fantastic to me, as it builds on its characters soo much. And it creates tension and limited time before the event happens.
The film is so fast and jumpy at the beginning and i thought the film was gonna end WAY before it actually did
Watched this with my dad earlier this week. He really likes it, me not so much. Probably my main issue is the main character - the British guy. I never managed to find a reason to like him, he constantly found a way to irritate me. And as a brit myself I tend to lean towards them, but that never happened. In fact, when he sacrificed himself I went "hah good" because I didnt like him enough to want him to live- a little cold but the truth. It was easy short term entertainment, but really confusing and become boring over time.
Who's the British guy again?
@@henrintibu John Bradley from Game of Thrones. I thought it was Josh Gad in the trailers.
You need to pretend that the movie is a comedy. It becomes much better that way.
He's probably the best character with a purpose, the rest of the were boring and went no where.
@@WheeledHamster you are correct.
Imagine if they turned this concept mixed it with groundhogs day and you’ve adapted the legend of Zelda Majora’s Mask.
The greatest failure of this movie was not having a single Majora's Mask reference in it.
pretty much the only complaint i had about this movie.
When I saw the teaser of the moon about to hit Earth, I got chills. Such a dope idea. As soon as I saw another trailer for it showing off the monster, I was instantly taken out of it.
My parents dragged me to this movie because they thought it was something else. I spent the entire run time roasting the shit out of it. This is probably one of the worst films I've seen in a theater.
I did the same and even laugh at the end when the movie dares to imply there would be a sequel to this shit show.
Sometimes the most fun part of a movie is poking fun at it.
What did they think it was? An adaptation of this novel?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonfall_(novel)
It’s fascinating to think that 2012 and Moonfall were both made by Roland Emmerich, yet the quality is vastly different.
I remember a novel called Moonfall. In that novel, the Moon actually finished falling (as large chunks, with widespread ruin), and it was not - as far as I know - anything to do with an alien AI or anything like that.
I had hoped, for all its badness, that this film would be the film of that book, and that I could at least seek it out to watch it and compare it to the book. However, it looks as though the only thing they have in common is the title.
Was it by Jack McDevitt?
@@easolinas1233 Yes, I think so.
well, it's not like it can physically fall into Earth, it would turn into a ring around the earth and periodically some fragments would enter the atmosphere
@@troloinkto Yeah, what I was trying to get across is that there was no magical "Okay, I'm going back to orbit now" saving throw.
@@Ensign_Cthulhu yeah, you're right, that's another thing that often happen in this kind of movies, even in 2012 "oh yeah, there were 12° earthquakes, but fear not, SOMEHOW africa remained intact"
Hello Filmento dude. I just wanted to say i really like your videos
To somewhat counter your point at 2:14, it’s not that humanity has gotten smarter. It’s just that we’ve seen all this stuff before and we were sick of it years ago.
Now it’s just gotten sad.
Hell, I was like, what year is this? 2012?
The worst part of this movie is that the main villain wasn’t in fact The Mooninites.
I wish you called this video: Moonfall - How to fail at 2012. Because this movie reminded me of 2012, where it has this end of the world schlock, full of CGI disaster moments, qwerky characters that can always cheat death, kinda combines real life moments with its own fictional story and more along that I can’t describe. Not only that but I’m curious on your opinion of 2012. Is it good, bad, a bit of both? For me, I still love it.
2012 did a lot right where this movie fails
The side characters where shity Version of the side characters in 2012, i think the new husband of the alkoholic loser dad had the same name, and he also died.
It was the 2012 skript with new cgi +spaceshipmoon
Its a good bad movie
You can cheat death except if you are the new love interest of the main character´s ex wife.
I went into this movie on opening night thinking it would be a genuinely competent disaster movie to rival 2012 or Armageddon. I used up a whole $50 AMC gift card for that film...
I like how the Roland Emmerich disaster movies have been getting worse since the day after tomorrow (which was great). Maybe it is foreshadowing the annihilation of the film industry like a Roland Emmerich movie plot?
I just learned this movie exists. I think part of the failure is 0 marketing. With 2012 people were bombed with advertising. It's a big factor for going to the movies.
2012 also had the actual date coming up and so on that helped with the hype where as moonfall was it's own thing. I also enjoyed the humans in 2012 more than the ones in moonfall which felt bland, boring and insufferable. When they're in the interior of the moon and they cut back to the family fighting over gas I genuinely said "wtf" in the theatre. We're seeing THE INSIDE OF THE MOON and you're cutting away to show us a car chase???
Indeed! The 'Mayan prophecy of the end of the world' did a fantastic job advertising the film. ;)
Honestly Charlie in 2012 was way more likable than anyone in Moonfall.
I think the problem was that the movie couldn't marry the alien AI and the moon apocalypse together, making the movie feel disjointed
Personally, the biggest problem is the weak main characters and lack of consistent build up to the final conflict and it’s resolution. Marcus was the only character I liked and should have been the main antagonist.
Too bad that guy got killed like 4 minutes into the movie
Protagonist?
I know it's not a film but I'd love to see you talk about "the expanse". I thoroughly enjoyed it and its genres include everything.
That 10 year jump is what messed me up - I missed the text and all of a sudden his son was a teenager in prison / juvie - it makes a lot more sense now - I thought they just forgot about the small boy and he had an older son from another marriage.
ITS BRILLIANT THAT YOU PUT THE SPONSOR AT THE END.. INSTEAD OF THE BEGINNING.. I HAVE MORE INSENTIVE TO LISTEN.
“It’s about an astronaut that stops the moon from falling”
Oooooh so that’s why it’s called Moonfall, I get it now
@Kyle Creswell
James Bond makes Skies Fall and Rakes Moons, but seemingly doesn't make Moon Falls.
I didn't even know this movie existed before watching this video. I'm happy about that.
the idea to make the hollow moon conspiracy theory and advanced ancient civilization concept into a movie was pretty interesting and got me excited to see it but for me it was wasted potential. Some cgi scenes were good but thats it
Check out Iron Sky and it's sequel
The moment it started talking about the ancient civilization to the main character was where it made me laugh cause of how stupid it was.
It still is very illgical
@@Hanmacx I know Iron Sky, disappointed me a bit
I mean they could have made an awesome movie or even trilogy based on these concepts. Yet the plot was so poorly written and also threw "the machines took over" in there which was overkill. The movie, especially the reveal that it was an ancient advanced civilization who built it, wasn't made very believable. It seemed almost like during filming they quickly changed it from aliens to ancient humans
You made me chuckle more in 20 minutes than I have in a month. Thanks for the content man!
Moonfall... that's exactly what the movie is about. Keep an eye for the next movie releases:
Gunwar
Saddrama
Waterwet
Patrick Wilson “ This just might be that Oscar I have been working towards”
I love the skyrim reference.
"Must've been the wind" HAHAHAHAH
Me too
TBH, I didn't want to watch it in the beginning.
But, then I watched it...
I want more.
"You don't wanna know about it here, but I'll tell you one thing. The MOON. It comes crashing into Earth! And what you do then? It's two brothers and I- and...and they're gonna...it's called 'Two Brothers' ...'Two Brothers'...it's just called 'Two Brothers'!"
I didn’t even know this movie was coming out
So, there's a scene in which an astronaut talks with a simulation of a kid about an AI that wants to kill humanity...
...YOU CANNOT STOP US, SHEPARD!
I was so disappointed this wasn't a Majora's Mask live action film.
Independence Day is really Roland’s only great movie, and he’s been trying to replicate it’s success ever since, with increasingly bad results.
Halle Berry “ I’m just here for the paycheck, I don’t need to read the script”
Thank you Filmento. I’m a DM starting a new campaign where there will be a cosmic threat that carries some of the same themes, so it’s always good to see where the pitfalls can be. In this case, the PCs won’t have a ton of information available for a while, and I’d already made it a point to ask the question for each chapter of how the BBEG is effecting events and how the PCs can further their quest to uncover the mystery of what it is they need to fight and how to even attempt to do so. So very well timed video.
Keep us updated! Sounds interesting.
7:26 I just wanted to say that The Hidden is such an good game and you are a man of great taste.
I had no desire to see the film when it came out, and even less after watching this review. Thank you.
The problem with these types of films, they've been done enough. Once you've seen one, you've seen them all. Nothing more to say, nothing new to see
Ah yes, a new filamento video on a movie i haven't seen yet.
Hey at least u can save like 2 hours from watching a bad movie
When the adverts first released, from the tacky name, poor acting, etc, I genuinely thought this was a spoof disaster film. You blew my mind with this video.
Even if we detonated *ALL the nukes EVER,* we couldn't nudge the Moon *an inch.* So how can one monster move it?
Ok, so the movie acknowledged the Roche Limit and then ignored it. Those effects with "atmosphere stripping" and "gravity screwing" wouldn't happen. The Moon would be CHUNKS before that point Hollow or not.
Yeah. Kurzgesagt channel described everything that would happen if magically the moon starts falling
@@ashikanwar8130 don’t you think things would happen differently since in this movie the moon is a megastructure? Built by super advance technology?
Who cares? Who cared how many blows a real life Rocky could take before fainting, who cares where Hulk gets his additional mass from or how Cap America's pants managed to grow with him? Who ever understood the economics of Harry Potter or wondered where the cinetic energy in John Wick goes to when his bulletproof suit saves him from being perforated? I would never go into a movie that's realistic, not even if it's about a boy and a girl falling in love ...
dare i explain what was happening.
- Internal energy source.
- Megastructure matter is strong enough to keep together.
Aside from the story itself, my biggest gripe I couldn’t get over was the total lack of chemistry between *any* of the leads… I truly didn’t care about their success or failure
12:54 Hey, Samwell Tarly appears!
Summary of Filmento advice: If you have an A, it should lead to a B. And if there is a B, it should first be caused by an A.
I'm most upset this flop probably screwed up any chance for Mutineers' Moon becoming a movie or TV series.
it's just soooo hilarious
everyone at mission control is seeing crew get obliterated by the tentacles but it's just
OHH NOOO
anyway back to looking at my screens, and time for main characters monologue about AI
The loss of enthusiasm in your voice really hit me menh, these terrible movies really kicking your ass huh😂😂 hang in there king, we need your service 🔥🔥
My only question to the movie is: why it waited for more then 11 years to atack? It was waiting for other monsters? No. Doing something to "hack" the Moon? Maybe, we don't know. My guess this gap was in the movie to just separate mains hero family, to use the same cliche over and over again
I think it was mentioned in passing that it took the thing a while to tunnel through the moon to get to the core, I think it was said at one point
@@nachomartinez8978 thanks for explaining it, it's fairly obvious it has problems with the hull of the hanger, and when you look at their decent into the moon the metal looking layer is *VERY* thick to say the least not forget the fact it's a small swarm of nano-robots.
Digging through 25 miles of metal.
The idea is somewhat similar to Naruto The Last Movie.
A hollow moon created by ancestor fall to earth with bits of it falling along the way.
Well ,all the things you mentioned in the video (and usually mention about bad films) , they're fine and all, but the weird part is that i already thaught it'd be a horrible film for some reason, and this is a recurring theme,
To be honest, this is the first I have even heard of this movie. At all. Good thing I dropped in to see what the fuss was about.
2012 wasn't a good movie, but it was actually a movie. Moonfall seems like something created by a machine.
8:04 No Mark Zuccerberg reference has ever failed to make me laugh so far xD
The movie looks incredible at some points but a golden turd is still a turd
The concept is so implausible that no amount of writing can make this work.
Please make a video on morbius i want you to explain why it is a masterpiece