Brent Lidstone

I don't care what anyone says- this movie was awesome. If you're looking for a thought-provoking, intelligently written sci-fi film, this isn't what you're looking for. It makes a few heavy uses of "Deus Ex" writing, it doesn't exactly always make sense. But if you just want something action packed, funny, extremely violent, and entertaining, it's an exhilarating thrill-ride of a movie. Sometimes you just want to unplug and watch stuff blow up for a couple hours. My 4 star rating is based on my personal opinion of its entertainment value, not any sort of judgement of the cinematic or artistic quality. The cast, however, is pretty great, and the acting holds the movie through.

Although it's an interesting movie, it's first and foremost a biopic into the personal and emotional life of Neil Armstrong. There's next to no real exploration of the scientific and technical achievements of the Apollo program. The adherence to shaky cam and an extremely Art-House style is purely about emphasizing emotion, at the cost of taking away from most aspects to do with the scientific and historical significance of the event itself. If you are intrigued by the idea of a historical space movie that really has very little to do with space or history, and is instead almost completely about the personal life and emotional state of Neil Armstrong, then you would likely find this movie to be very compelling. If on the other hand, you'd prefer a movie with this subject matter to be much heavier on the science and historical aspects, you'll probably find it somewhat bland and underwhelming. In addition to that, the astronauts themselves are portrayed as being filled with dread from start to finish. There is almost no joy in them at any point. It is true that a dozen other astronauts had died during the 60s space program, but most accounts of the time say the astronauts did not act that way. The characters in this movie act as though they were selected to be sent to their deaths against their will. They do not celebrate their achievements. I find this emotional portrayal to be dubious at best. For a movie that focuses almost entirely on emotion, it appears as though even that aspect is not very realistic. This, combined with my first point about it's lack of scientific subject matter, makes it difficult to for me to recommend.

Although a great Sci-Fi show, they've deviated too much from what Star Trek is supposed to be about. They've gone the route of the lastest JJ Abrams movies, and made the story mostly about the action. Star Trek shows are traditionally driven by intense realism, philosophy, and dialogue. Here they've thrown the realism out the window in many places, which screws up how this show is supposed to fit within the Star Trek canon. It might be more popular with people that don't normally like Star Trek, but regular long-time Star Trek fans are left disappointed. Not with the story, per say. It was very entertaining. But the fact that there seems to be little dedication to what made all the other Star Trek shows so great and enduring: The fact that they are so real. The point of Star Trek has always been to be as realistic as possible. The crew react in realistic ways to whats going on around them. It seems this show has basically disregarded that dedication to realism. It's in the Star Trek universe, and Star Trekky things are happening, But instead of realism its all about the action and the suspense. The technology introduced in this show doesn't even make sense. We can suspend disbelief for Warp Drives and sub-space communications because those things might even be possible in the far future. But what they've added in this show, I don't want to give it away, but it makes no sense whatsoever. And that's really what Star Trek fans don't like about the show. Instead of hard realism of science, crew reactions, and situations, we have a much less realistic space opera. Don't get me wrong, I liked the show a lot. It was very entertaining. Buts not really Star Trek on the inside, just on the outside.