Apollo 18 (2011)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Alexander D

  
  It was in 1979 that the talented Mr. Ridley Scott struck cinematic gold with a science-fiction horror masterpiece. (If you are a living, breathing, human being, I'd expect you to know what film I'm referring to, so I won't bother to mention the title.) His message was… More
  It was in 1979 that the talented Mr. Ridley Scott struck cinematic gold with a science-fiction horror masterpiece. (If you are a living, breathing, human being, I'd expect you to know what film I'm referring to, so I won't bother to mention the title.) His message was in the tagline ("In space no one can hear you scream"), but it was more effective from watching the film. It would be downright plagiarism to use the same tagline as director Ridley Scott did in 1979, so the message of the movie is clear throughout: In space, no one can hear you scream. No one can help you, and if something happens, oh well. Even though there haven't been all too many horror films that take place in space, APOLLO 18 makes us feel as if we've been bombarded with that theme countless times. It seems so clichéd, and the use of the "found footage" technique doesn't help. This technique was used in other horror and science fiction films such as PARANORMAL ACTIVITY, THE LAST EXORCISM, [REC], and CLOVERFIELD to enhance the believability of the story and increase the level of fear and tension. It worked in those films quite effectively, but not in this one at all. Had this been a more psychological horror film about three men who got stuck on the moon, it probably would have worked great. When the obstacle in the plot is extra-terrestrial life, the laughing factor is enhanced for anyone over twelve years old. I have to give points to APOLLO 18 for being watchable, at the least. The story wasn't at all convincing; nor were the titles at the beginning informing us that this was truncated footage from thirty-seven years before, just found and leaked to the web. It even negates the entire story it conveyed in the end by giving us the official reports of the Apollo 18 mission. Somehow, there was a "so bad, it's good" type of entertainment that isn't usual for a film made as poorly and carelessly as this. That said, it was entertaining enough for its seventy-minute length, but the mistakes are so manifest that inadvertently works better as a comedy than a horror movie. READ MORE ABOUT THIS POOR RENDITION OF AN INTRIGUING TOPIC: http://themoviefreakblog.wordpress.com/2012/04/15/review-apollo-18

• Mark R

  
  Many films have tried to emulate the success of THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, some more successfully than others, but few have failed on the same level as APOLLO 18. Transplanting the horror from the woods of Maryland to the moon of all places seems like an interesting idea on paper, but… More
  Many films have tried to emulate the success of THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, some more successfully than others, but few have failed on the same level as APOLLO 18. Transplanting the horror from the woods of Maryland to the moon of all places seems like an interesting idea on paper, but the film is so desperate to maintain its level of documentary realism that it sacrifices all fundamentals of horror filmmaking, and instead teases audiences with a payoff that never really comes, aside from a few ineffective, hackneyed jump scares. Whether by design (BLAIR WITCH) or as a result of technical limitations (JAWS), often the unseen terror in movies is the most frightening, yet APOLLO 18â(TM)s creators take the â~less is moreâ(TM) concept entirely too far, leaving a film where the threat is so elusive that it becomes almost non-existent, and anytime anything interesting is allowed onscreen the found footage aesthetic is shoved down our throat with such force that one canâ(TM)t help but disengage completely. Possibly budget constraints played a part, but obscuring the scares with egregious shaky-cam and digital over-exposure of the footage achieves nothing except undoubtedly frustrating viewers. Add in the laughably clichà (C)d dialogue delivered by woefully amateur performers, and APOLLO 18 is disappointing on more or less every level. BLAIR WITCHâ(TM)s lightning in a bottle success has been in some way replicated by films willing to adapt the formula, such as CLOVERFIELD and the recent CHRONICLE, not by merely taking the same tone and narrative beats to a new location, even one as full of potential as the lunar surface. tinribs27.wordpress.com

• Film C

  
  This movie certainly had its moments and did make me jump in places but overall it is a slow and boring movie for majority of the time. the camera work isvery make compared to that of the blair witch project and i didnt care for it much then either!

• Manu G

  
  There's a reason we've never gone back to the moon. Not that good. This film could have been like an episode of the X-files yet it was more dull than that. It had potential but really the film failed miserably in scaring the viewers or even explaining in detail certain… More
  There's a reason we've never gone back to the moon. Not that good. This film could have been like an episode of the X-files yet it was more dull than that. It had potential but really the film failed miserably in scaring the viewers or even explaining in detail certain things. Big fail. Decades-old found footage from NASA's abandoned Apollo 18 mission, where two American astronauts were sent on a secret expedition, reveals the reason the U.S. has never returned to the moon. In December, 1973, the crew of the previously-cancelled Apollo 18 mission is informed that the mission is a go, though it has now been deemed a top secret Department of Defense mission. Commander Nathan Walker (Lloyd Owen), Lieutenant Colonel John Grey (Ryan Robbins) and Captain Benjamin Anderson (Warren Christie) are launched towards the Moon to place detectors to alert the United States of any impending ICBM attacks from the USSR. Grey remains in orbit aboard the Freedom Command/Service module while Walker and Anderson land on the moon in the lunar module Liberty. While planting one of the detectors, the pair take samples of moon rocks. While attempting to sleep, the pair hear noises outside and a camera captures a small rock moving nearby. Houston (Andrew Airlie's voice) claims the noises are interference from the ICBM detectors. Anderson finds a rock sample on the floor of Liberty despite having secured the samples. During further exploration they discover footprints that lead them to a Soviet LK lander nearby, finding it functional but blood-stained. Anderson follows tracks leading into a dark crater and finds a dead cosmonaut. Walker queries Houston about the Soviet presence but is told only to continue with the mission. The following day the pair find that the flag they had planted is missing. Their mission complete, the crew prepares to leave the Moon but the launch is aborted when Liberty suffers violent shaking. An inspection reveals extensive damage to Liberty and non-human tracks that Walker cites as evidence of extraterrestrial life. Walker feels something moving inside his spacesuit and helmet and is horrified as a spider-like creature crawls across the inside of his helmet. Walker disappears from view and Anderson finds him unconscious outside of Liberty. Walker later denies the events. A wound is discovered on Walker's chest; Anderson feels, and removes, a Moon rock embedded within him. The pair find themselves unable to contact Houston or Grey due to increased levels of interference from an unknown source. Anderson speculates that the true intention of the ICBM warning devices is to monitor the aliens. The pair also increasingly wonder if the devices are the source of the interference; Houston had assured them that this was not so. Walker shows signs of a developing infection around his wound and he becomes increasingly paranoid. The mission cameras capture the rock samples moving around in the interior of Liberty, revealing that the aliens are the moon rocks (or indistinguishable from the real rocks). Increasingly delusional, Walker attempts to destroy the cameras within Liberty but accidentally damages the system controls, causing Liberty to depressurize. Realizing the Soviet LK is their only source of oxygen, the pair travel to the LK lander in their lunar rover. Along the way, Walker attempts to run away, believing he should not leave the Moon because of the risk of spreading the infection to Earth. Anderson crashes as he attempts to stop Walker. Anderson awakens and tracks Walker, finding him at the crater where they found the cosmonaut. Walker is pulled into the crater by the creatures. Anderson gives chase, using his strobe light to illuminate the area. The rocks start to sprout their spider-like legs, causing Anderson to flee to the Soviet LK. Using its radio he makes contact with USSR Mission Control who connect him to the United States Department of Defense. The deputy secretary of the department informs Anderson that they will not allow him to return to Earth, admitting they are aware of the situation and fear he is also infected. Anderson manages to contact Grey and they make arrangements for Anderson to return to Freedom. Anderson prepares the lander for launch but it is attacked by Walker. Before Walker can breach the vehicle, he is swarmed by the creatures, which crawl into his helmet and cause his blood to splatter onto the lander. Anderson launches the LK lander successfully with the intent of arriving near Freedom and entering it via spacewalk. Grey is informed that Anderson is infected. Grey is ordered to abort Anderson's rescue or communication will be ceased, rendering him unable to return to Earth. Inside the lander, the reduced gravity causes small rocks within the Soviet craft to float. Anderson realizes with horror that some of the rocks are actually alien creatures. Anderson is attacked and infected by the creatures, preventing him from controlling the vehicle, leaving it headed toward Freedom. Grey yells to Anderson that he is coming in too fast. The space footage ends abruptly, implying a collision. The footage cuts to before the pilots' mission, showing them having a barbecue with friends and family. The "official" fate of the astronauts is given, describing them as having died in various accidents that left their bodies unrecoverable. An epilogue explains that many of the rock samples returned from the previous Apollo missions are unaccounted for.

• Justin Y

  
  While running with an intriguing concept, Gonzalo López-Gallego's <i>Apollo 18</i> ends up as a major disappointment.<p>75 minutes is all this film needs to wrap up a mystery on the moon, but when nothing highly amusing takes place, the story falls flat on its… More
  While running with an intriguing concept, Gonzalo López-Gallego's <i>Apollo 18</i> ends up as a major disappointment.<p>75 minutes is all this film needs to wrap up a mystery on the moon, but when nothing highly amusing takes place, the story falls flat on its face. What this film has going for it is the sense of mystery and uncertainty; however, the story never takes full advantage of that, as the characters are boring and the thrills fail to peak at anywhere throughout the picture.</p><p>The "lost footage" documentary style of the film gets old quick. The shakiness is very limited, which is a positive and while there is a sense of realism in the camera angles, the lack of clarity can be frustrating, especially when the paranormal creeps in.</p><p>Warren Christie, Lloyd Owen, and Ryan Robbins do what they must. There really isn't much to note when it comes to their performances.</p><p>By the time the ending of <i>Apollo 18</i> rolls around, there is still an unfulfilled feeling left in the air. Not a good thing.</p>

• Bruce B

  
  Far from what I expected looking at the previews. Supposed to be based on declassified notes from NASA. A secret space mission to put tracking devices on the moon to detect Russian missile launches, while setting up the tracking units a Russian space craft is discovered with no crew.… More
  Far from what I expected looking at the previews. Supposed to be based on declassified notes from NASA. A secret space mission to put tracking devices on the moon to detect Russian missile launches, while setting up the tracking units a Russian space craft is discovered with no crew. The alien life is discovered ion the form of rocks that imbed themselves in humans. Overall a movie that is sure to put you to sleep. 3 stars

• Jeff "

  
  Derivative found footage horror film, Apollo 18 doesn't try to do anything new with the genre, but manages to still be entertaining at times. For what it is, it's a decent film, not great by any means, but not as bad as what everyone has claimed it to be. The film is… More
  Derivative found footage horror film, Apollo 18 doesn't try to do anything new with the genre, but manages to still be entertaining at times. For what it is, it's a decent film, not great by any means, but not as bad as what everyone has claimed it to be. The film is predictable and like I previously stated doesn't do anything, new, original or refreshing. The film explorers the same old ideas of previous films in this tired out genre of horror films. I liked the film, but it could have been much better than this. The problem with Apollo 18 is that it follows the same trend as other found footage horror films. Having said that, the film is predictable and doesn't do anything that will grab your attention. The idea of the film is interesting and entertaining, but there's something clearly missing to make this a great horror film. Overall I didn't hate the film, I thought it was decent considering that it's an old concept for a horror film. The film has some tense moments, but it's clear that the filmmakers were struggling to find something that would work. The best they could come with was mixing a bit of the body horror genre with the found footage and sci fi horror genres of film. I stated this was body horror because one of the astronauts become infected with a parasite, and mutilates his body. Apollo 18 is a decent little horror film. The film has minor suspense and terror, and as a whole it's not as bad as what everyone has said it was. I liked the film, and despite its predictability, it's a mindless found footage sci fi horror flick that you need to shut your mind off to enjoy.

• Pedro H

  
  <i>There's a reason we've never gone back to the moon. </i> <b>quite fun</b> This is actually a pretty good movie. The concept and Idea is very out there and may seem a little goofy, but Lopez-Gallego does an awesome job in building up the… More
  <i>There's a reason we've never gone back to the moon. </i> <b>quite fun</b> This is actually a pretty good movie. The concept and Idea is very out there and may seem a little goofy, but Lopez-Gallego does an awesome job in building up the suspense and avoides hitting the critical level of stupidity that this movie was bound to hit. Apparently Apollo 18 was a secret mission that was never reported until now. This movie follows the events and what happened out there. It is done in a fun, Paranormal Activity, Cloverfield, way where the super 8 camera is free hand and that just adds to the atmosphere of suspense. The movie is fun, but can be a little too stupid. The acting in it is great. Personally I was dissapointed because when I first saw the trailer I expected much more. I was also dissapointed in the lack of horror this movie had, I wasn't scared at alll. But overall it was just fine. <u> Ben </u> : <i>" There is something out there"</i>

• Lorenzo v

  
  <i>"There's a reason we've never gone back to the moon."</i> Decades-old found footage from NASA's abandoned Apollo 18 mission, where two American astronauts were sent on a secret expedition, reveals the reason the U.S. has never returned to the… More
  <i>"There's a reason we've never gone back to the moon."</i> Decades-old found footage from NASA's abandoned Apollo 18 mission, where two American astronauts were sent on a secret expedition, reveals the reason the U.S. has never returned to the moon. <center><font size=+2 face="Century Schoolbook"><b><u>REVIEW</u></b></font></center> The screenplay from Apollo 18 is something like an hybrid of Alien, Sunshine and Moon, even though with all the fantastic elements reduced in order to increment the realism from the story. That might be the main reason why the film did not leave me very satisfied, and it even bored me a little bit during its most "exciting" moments. The trailers of Apollo 18 promised a horror film, but the truth is that it lacks of the necessary impact in order to provoke an emotional or even visceral impact. Even the "scares" feel forced in the documentary context (not to mention the difficulty of accepting the fact that the characters keep filming when any sensible person would have dropped the camera in front of the first sign of danger). Another problem is that the performances feel bland and not very credible. It was undoubtedly a good decision to pick unknown faces not to ruin the "realistic" premise, but I think they should have picked actors with more talent and charisma. Having said all that, I have to give Apollo 18 a slight recommendation because of its solid recreation of the lunar mission. The version of the Moon presented by the movie might not be totally faithful from the scientific point of view, but it is more than enough for us to accept the premise and visually transport us to the satellite we had only seen in brief clips from the NASA and in sci-fi movies which had only showed various stones on a sandy field. I know that I should not be giving a movie even a slight recommendation only because of its special effects, but they are so good in this movie that I am going to make an exception, also stating the fact that the movie achieves a few good moments of tension during the first half. However, I regret the fact that the visual talent from this film could not adorn a better (and more terrifying) story.

• Luke B

  
  I love fake documentary movies. I hate the film. It's painfully bad. First of all, you never believe this is real footage. The actors seem as though they are acting. The film tries so hard to look authentic, it just ends up looking crappy. It also doesn't help that every… More
  I love fake documentary movies. I hate the film. It's painfully bad. First of all, you never believe this is real footage. The actors seem as though they are acting. The film tries so hard to look authentic, it just ends up looking crappy. It also doesn't help that every camera is static, and we never see anything. I couldn't even understand what was going on at certain points. There was lots of cameras falling down, some shouting, and many static shots. There was no tension built, and when something was sort of revealed, it was just an anticlimax. This was honestly hard to sit through, and I can never imagine watching it again. I watched this just a few hours ago, and I can't remember a thing about it, because nothing happened.

• Will C

  
  This is one of those found footage films. These movies have created a modern genre within the last decade or so. I'm a fan of the genre and I really liked "Cloverfield." It had a cool premise and realistic interactions between the characters. Not to mention, it was… More
  This is one of those found footage films. These movies have created a modern genre within the last decade or so. I'm a fan of the genre and I really liked "Cloverfield." It had a cool premise and realistic interactions between the characters. Not to mention, it was truly horrific. Many people call the starter to the found footage genre "The Blair Witch Project" and many people call that film highly original. That movie was such a disappointment. Everyone talked about it so I decided to put in the DVD player this summer and watch it. I couldn't even finish the whole thing it was so terrible. It had bad acting and just dragged on and on until I had to turn it off. The point to my rambling is that these movies are really hit or miss. Although I'm a fan of the genre it doesn't mean that all of these found footage movies are good. So, how about "Apollo 18?" The film takes place in the 1970s during the period of the U.S. Apollo missions. We all thought that 17 was our last one but supposedly there was another mission that we never found out about. When we watch the movie, it's supposedly "recovered footage" from that mission that the astronauts never returned from and this is the first time it's being seen. "There's a reason we've never gone back to the moon." The acting is good. The actors in the film know what they're doing and are good at creating an atmosphere of being caught off guard. There are some good scares, one especially good one using a flash object that the astronauts utilize. That's a very creative scare and it builds up suspension perfectly. We know something is going to happen. We know that something is going to pop up. When it finally does we still jump. When that happens, that's when you know a scare works. When you are prepared for something and you still get scared by it. Also, the shots of the surface of the moon are immersive and incredibly realistic. As for the rest of the movie, it's just fair. What brings it down from other found footage films? It tries to be way too artistic with its material. There a lot of elements in here that made it seem like the director was trying to be insightful with his camera work and unique with his storytelling and these elements just fall flat. For example, the whole movie is shot with the four corners of the screen darkened off, dirty spots of film splattered on the frames throughout, and crackles every once in a while to add a sense of aged film. But these things simply don't work and come off as cheap. The look of the screen could've been done with my "8 mm" camera app on my Iphone. It's so poorly done. In fact, the whole 70s thing doesn't seem to be real when one is watching the film. The only thing the filmmakers did was slap some run down 70s clothes on the actors from the studios' costume warehouse to make it look like that decade. The whole movie is like a sick and twisted version of an intro to "Wonder Years" in space. Did the movie spend all its money on advertising? Look, I understand if someone is on a tight budget but the movie is being advertised as a horror movie with a lot of special effects. It barely goes into any sight-seeing of the unknown creatures. We barely ever see them. I think the director thought he could be Steven Spielberg and make his movie scary by what you don't see. I'm afraid the characters are just too shallow for that sort of thing to happen. The three pros of this film are its actors, a good scare tactic using a flashing object, and the movies' impressive moon set. Unfortunately, the cons outweigh the pros. The movie is slow yet, somehow, the twist at the end seems rushed at our faces. At only 1 hr. and 26 min. the movie still drags on showing us the same shots occasionally. I'd say this movie is a rental on a rainy day if you're looking for a couple of good scares.

• Dead A

  
  The story had a lot of potential but at some point, it couldn't be expressed well enough. I liked it a bit but wouldn't it again. It's one of those waste-of-money kinda movie.

• Everett J

  
  I really like "found footage" movies. "Blair Witch Project" and "Cloverfield" are two movies that I really dug, and thought were clever as hell. "Apollo 18" is kind of like a "Blair Witch" in space type of movie. The movie is… More
  I really like "found footage" movies. "Blair Witch Project" and "Cloverfield" are two movies that I really dug, and thought were clever as hell. "Apollo 18" is kind of like a "Blair Witch" in space type of movie. The movie is footage cut together documenting two astronauts on a secret mission to the moon. It starts out very slow, but about half way through the suspense gets kicked up a notch and the movie gets much better. Don't want to give away too much as it's probably better to know less about the movie before watching(I really had no idea what to expect). While no where near as good or entertaining as "Witch" or "Cloverfield" it's still worth a watch. The footage feels genuine and very authentic. The effects are good, and the performances while not the best, are pretty convincing. A good little sci-fi movie, much better than last years "Moon". If you're in the mood for something a little different, then give it a shot. May not love it, but it's a decent enough way to spend 80 minutes.

• Phil H

  
  Made in the same kind of style as 'Blair Witch' with lots of shaky handheld cam and supposedly using real life footage from a real life space mission. The premise is based around historical accuracy when NASA cancelled the Apollo mission but the film tells us that they did… More
  Made in the same kind of style as 'Blair Witch' with lots of shaky handheld cam and supposedly using real life footage from a real life space mission. The premise is based around historical accuracy when NASA cancelled the Apollo mission but the film tells us that they did actually go ahead with the flight to the moon and this is the 'uncovered' results which have been kept secret. Now this has received many poor reviews since release but I must go against that and say its actually a good tense little thriller. I wouldn't say its a horror, its not scary and the moon aliens are errr kinda silly but the whole film looks great, very realistic and does a sterling job of making you believe we are back in the 60's space program. You can guess how the plot unfolds of course as its not original, the setting is quite original but not the actual plot. Mainly based around two astronauts the cast are perfectly fine and do the job, I wasn't blown away or anything but they both make you believe. Its kinda predictable in the fact that you know there is an under current of treachery going on from earth HQ, as usual all is not well within the US government and their over the top secrecy to the point where it does really make you wonder in reality haha Ends on a question mark which again is kinda easy to spot coming, the designs for the aliens are most certainly unique if anything but at the same time a little bit crappy too and doesn't make much sense of course (what would they live on on the moon? how/why do they attack the astronauts? you don't see much). Basically its a good thriller in my opinion that works because of its setting and clever use of actual events which, in my opinion, always make a plot much more fun and interesting. Now go read up on the Apollo missions and the brave men involved.

• Brad W

  
  Apollo 18 is basically The Blair Witch Project in space, but instead of it being scary, its boring and not scary at all. It tells the story in a documentary style way where it is supposedly the footage found on the Apollo mission that nobody knew about, and it tells the story of… More
  Apollo 18 is basically The Blair Witch Project in space, but instead of it being scary, its boring and not scary at all. It tells the story in a documentary style way where it is supposedly the footage found on the Apollo mission that nobody knew about, and it tells the story of three astronauts on a mission to the moon, and who believe they is extra-terrestrial life with them, and what we basically know is that in the end these two will not survive. The plot is so boring and pointless, if its missing footage then of course they will both die, and there is no tension or anything for that matter that makes a great horror film, the director just probably figured "its a horror movie in space, people will see it." These two guys are basically inside space suits for the whole movie, so I cannot say the acting was good or bad, because if it seemed to me that they were just doing as the director told them, and they weren't doing anything spectacular. The horror was not scary at all, I was never scared, or frightened, or even flinching, I could basically tell when all the scares were gonna happen, it was very boring. The special effects were not very bad, it was kind of cool to get a full view of what the moon looks like, and the effects were made me feel like I was in space, so that was the one positive thing about the film. Apollo 18 is not a memorable movie, in fact the opposite, you might wish you had forgot seeing it altogether, because this movie was not scary or even fun for that matter, I was very disappointed.

• Brett A

  
  In space, no one can hear you scream, but sometimes a horror film is so bad you do it anyway. Lloyd Owen and Warren Christie star as two American astronauts sent to the lunar surface on a top secret mission gone horribly wrong. Written by Brian Miller and directed by Gonzalo… More
  In space, no one can hear you scream, but sometimes a horror film is so bad you do it anyway. Lloyd Owen and Warren Christie star as two American astronauts sent to the lunar surface on a top secret mission gone horribly wrong. Written by Brian Miller and directed by Gonzalo Lopez-Gallego in his English language film debut, "Apollo 18? suffers from less than memorable performances, a predictable plot, a lack of atmosphere, and technical issues. The film uses relatively unknown actors in an attempt to make the characters relatable and real, but this backfires as the two protagonists are not memorable enough to create a lasting impression. A major reason why this happens is because the movie never really takes the time to flesh out its characters, except for a few moments in the opening scenes of home movie footage. The plot is nothing special, or original for that matter. Because it is being portrayed as "found footage" you already know how it will end long before the credits roll. "Apollo 18? is essentially an inferior version of "The Blair Witch Project," the biggest difference is that the astronauts are not nearly as entertaining to watch as those three arguing teenagers were. The film tries to create a sense of dread through a combination of static interference, ominous noises and weird camera angles, but the technique ends up being far more annoying than unsettling. A few scenes in the darkness of an impact crater do make for pretty effective scares, but these are too isolated and have no real tension building up to them. The consequence of this is the film has absolutely no atmosphere, and that is not just because it takes place in a vacuum. Apollo 18 also has many technical issues, the biggest of which is the inexplicable appearance of full gravity inside the lunar lander. The lack of realistic physics may be due to the fact that the filmmakers had a low budget to work with, but this is a movie that is asking its audience to take it seriously. Perhaps the best aspect of the movie is the moon landing sequence itself. Real NASA stock footage has been spliced with shots of the actors inside the lander, creating a nice authentic effect for those who have seen the real deal. There are some eerily beautiful vistas and several interesting shots of Earth from space, but unfortunately the found footage cliché is so overdone that even the exotic lunar location can't save "Apollo 18? from sinking into mediocrity. Grade: D

• Robert C

  
  Normally I'm a sucker for the "found footage" scenario. It can be quite powerful and even disturbing when done properly. Unfortunatly in this case (for the most part) it jus feels sort of "gimmicky". It's a great premise, I just don't feel like… More
  Normally I'm a sucker for the "found footage" scenario. It can be quite powerful and even disturbing when done properly. Unfortunatly in this case (for the most part) it jus feels sort of "gimmicky". It's a great premise, I just don't feel like the execution of it was as powerful as it could have been. For example; there is the horribly claustrophobic feel and shockingly haphazard method to early space travel (portrayed powerfully in other films) that (in and of itself) is the stuff of nightmares for most of us. That aspect never really comes across very strongly. And I won't even get into the specifics of what terrorizes then while on the moon. Not only because of a concern for "spoilers"..but mainly because it's still all very vague to me.

• Jason S

  
  I thought the story had a lot of potential but the "found footage" genre didn't help this film. I think that it would have been better served if it had been shot in a traditional manner. The acting was fine for what the film was but it wasn't anything that stood… More
  I thought the story had a lot of potential but the "found footage" genre didn't help this film. I think that it would have been better served if it had been shot in a traditional manner. The acting was fine for what the film was but it wasn't anything that stood out.

• Nate Z

  
  Apollo 18 is the latest in a growing subcategory of films known as "found footage," movies that purport to be discovered documents and aesthetically adhere to this premise. That means lots of handheld camerawork, selective editing, and other efforts meant to convey that what… More
  Apollo 18 is the latest in a growing subcategory of films known as "found footage," movies that purport to be discovered documents and aesthetically adhere to this premise. That means lots of handheld camerawork, selective editing, and other efforts meant to convey that what the audience is watching is not a movie made by professionals. It's a professional attempt to look unpolished and amateurish, which is like having a four-star chef make you Taco Bell. 1999's The Blair Witch Project popularized the found footage concept, and to this day there are still people today hoodwinked into believing it as unvarnished reality. Maybe that's why NASA issued an actual press statement this week wishing to inform the general public that Apollo 18 is a work of fiction. I don't think they have much to worry, because very few people will be seeing Apollo 18 and even fewer will enjoy it. Apollo 18 concerns the failed secret mission of three astronauts (Warren Christie, Lloyd Owen, Ryan Robbins). The astronauts were sent to the moon for the Department of Defense, which means this is the second film of the year to concern a covert reason for landing on the moon. The two astronauts who actually land of the moon's surface discover a dead Cosmonaut and some strange occurrences. They realize that they have been lied to by their own government and placed in a danger that few can comprehend. But an intriguing premise can only get you so far and Apollo 18's clumsy execution makes the movie disintegrate upon reentry, or, any critical thought. A secret NASA mission that went horribly wrong sounds like a great start to a conspiracy thriller, that is until you realize all you're being presented with is the fake found footage. That means that we spend an eternity watching guys in suits float around, biding their time. Then they go outside and wander around the lunar surface. Then they hear an occasional noise. Or did they? Then they go back to floating around, to make up for the lost time they weren't floating around. Really, this movie is an hour of nothing. It fails to create a sustainable atmosphere of dread or even basic curiosity. But when locked into the found footage concept, we are generally left with a lot of time on our hands. You would think that the basic premise that people have reassembled this footage would lead to cutting a lot of the filler and just getting to the good parts. It seems almost resentful that this hypothetical editor trying to showcase a long-buried truth would decide that the important stuff can wait. I was so thoroughly bored with Apollo 18 that I started counting stars. The structure of the story is just too insular and limited in scope. I strongly feel that Apollo 18 would have benefited greatly by opening up its storytelling parameters. It could have kept the found footage motif, but instead of being an entire 90-minute movie the found footage would be one component of a wider faux documentary. Interviews with science experts, conspiracy theorists, former NASA employees speaking under the protection of anonymity, and even family members, particularly the now grown-up son of one of the astronauts holding out hope, would add some balance. It would make the story feel larger and more authentic, let alone give the audience something new to watch. There could have been a parallel story of the discovery of this evidence, the process of getting it authenticated, and the potential dangers that would be exposed. It all seems a little too slapdash and simplistic to just say the footage was uploaded to a website. Anything, really, is what I'm looking for to broaden Apollo 18. There's so much more that could have been added, but alas we're stuck with three blander-than-bland characters collecting moon rocks and battling interstellar cabin fever. Now I'm about to enter into the orbit of some serious spoilers concerning the ending to Apollo 18, so skip to the next paragraph if you wish to remain pure. The entire premise of this mission gone wrong (why did NASA create Apollo 18 uniform patches for a secret mission? It seems counterintuitive to create merchandise for something meant to be covert) is that there is something on the moon that the higher-ups in government want to investigate. This dangerous mystery claimed the life of a Russian cosmonaut, whose body is discovered by our American squad. When exactly the Russians put a man on the moon is never explained; yet another ingredient that would have worked better as a faux documentary. So you have one dead man on the moon, but soon the body count rises. It's not some strange cosmic virus that infects the astronauts, leading them to psychotic episodes and murder. No, that would have been too plausible. You see, the villain of Apollo 18 is the moon rock. The rocks themselves somehow can transform into spider-like creatures that like to scurry around. Never mind the fact that we're dealing with life that evolved in an environment without any atmosphere, but what have these moon rocks been doing for billions of years? It seems to me that after Neil Armstrong stepped onto the moon, the rocks must have been like, "There goes the neighborhood." After twelve moon walkers, my only explanation for the motivation behind these killer rocks is that they just got sick and tired of being disturbed so often ("You stomp around like you own the place, you leave your trash behind, that's it!"). A post-script tells us that these moon rocks were brought home and sent as "gifts" (their emphasis, not mine) to leaders and dignitaries of foreign countries. What are the implications with this? That the United States has kept its place atop the world because of the threat of moon rocks? Do the moon rocks even work on a planet with a vastly different climate than the arid moon? For that matter, since Apollo 18's mission ended circling the moon, how the hell was any of the film footage retrieved? It wasn't broadcast, so how did NASA or any truth-seeker come a hold of this damning evidence of killer lunar rocks? And to think we once thought that the moon was made of cheese. Oh how naïve we all were. Apollo 18 is probably the most boring of all the found footage horror movies thus far. It does nothing to justify being 90-minutes, lacks any minor thrills or chills, and seems creatively stagnate. There are some cheap jolts, including having a character awake from a dream screaming twice. This Paranormal-Activity-on-the-moon fails to live up to the possibilities of its intriguing premise, instead settling for something aiming for slow-burn but achieves no-burn. The laughable conclusion is meant as a payoff but only for the nuttiest of geologists. Apollo 18 sticks with its core limited concept to the bitter end. This is a disappointment from all angles. It fails to scare, it fails to stimulate, and it fails to entertain big time. In space, no one can hear your boredom. Nate's Grade: C-

• Liam G

  
  ''Apollo 18'' has one or two suspenseful moments and some pretty interesting ideas, but it is lazy, dull and filled with plot holes.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings