Thursday, September 8, 2011

Apollo 18

Apollo 18 -- 2/5

I'm going to drive right into this review with budget comparisons! So apparently according to IMDB, this movie cost $5 million to make. Well, at least it can say it made money, but did it really cost that much to make this super unappealing movie? Though I'm not crazy about it either, when someone can make Paranormal Activity for $15,000 and it honestly looks better than this movie, I worry. Now, let's compare + contrast my favorite and least favorite horror movies of this first person POV genre (from greatest to least amount spent).
Paranormal Activity: $15,000 (3/5)
The Blair Witch Project: $60,000 (3/5)
Rec: $2 million (4.5/5)
Apollo 18: $5 million (2/5)
Cloverfield: $25 million (4/5)
I would say my favorite out of them all would be Rec, the Spanish zombie infestation movie (maybe you have seen the remake Quarantine?). I think it was done very well, and it was quite spooky. And the best part about it was the fact that it didn't shake as badly as some of the other previously mentioned movies above do. They all have similar-types of stories, but the one thing that can totally mess up one of these movies is the direction, and Apollo 18's was horrible.
I liked the idea that someone had captured alien life on the moon and no one knew about it, and I also thought the acting wasn't too awful, though it wasn't fantastic either. The problem was the plot holes and the direction. The fact that most of the footage was caught via super 8 film that was destroyed by a crash or left behind, confused me a little. How did someone retrieve said super 8s? It was quite a perplexing little plot hole.
Also, the way time lapsed was really boring to watch. I understand the reason for no music, but the action was so painfully slow to get into, that I never really got scared. There were no jumps, because they were a little obvious and expected.
I also found the aliens a little laughable. Attacking rocks? Apollo 18 should go meet up with Don't be Afraid of the Dark and look at their "scary" tiny monsters, and see where they went wrong. It's not that tiny monsters can't be scary, you just present them and design them better, and on top of that write them better. No fairies, no rocks.
I suppose I should have known this movie would be bad when it kept jumping around with release dates (a tell tale sign that a production company doesn't know how to advertise the movie, and on top of that they do not have faith in it). September movies also tend to be on the not so good side, so that maybe should have been flashing red lights already. Oh well, time goes on, and people waste time watching mediocre movies. Maybe you saw this movie, and maybe you were lucky enough not to. Even if it hits Netflix instant (which after this month, you may not even be a subscriber), I'd say skip it and watch something better.

No comments:

Post a Comment