Moonbase - Reduto do Crime

I saw this a few years ago. I thought that it looked OK and OK it was. Not an outstanding movie by any means but it has some ingredients that make it appealing to certain people. Obviously to some it won't. One blessing that the film has is that it features veteran character action actor Stack Pierce who plays Will . When the film swings into action mode Stack Pierce's experience in this genre comes in very handy and he plays it well. This slightly better than mediocre Scifi film that is about escaped prisoners attempting to hijack the moon base and gain passage back to earth does have a few saving graces. Stack Pierce and Kurt Fuller are two of them , and I guess that you'll have to watch the film to see the others.

No Fireworks Despite Violent Action.

Science fiction films that reflect quality are scarce indeed, largely because transposal of imaginative themes from the genre to the screen too often falls short of effective execution as a result of insufficient funding or inadequate invention, and unfortunately for its producers, this work is lacking on both counts, woefully so in the case of the latter. With essentially no budget with which to operate, it is a grave mistake to attempt the depiction of such a gamut of events as those within this scenario and, in particular, special effects of space opera warfare which appear only clownish, while seeds from the scriptors' imagination lie fallow due to some of the most fatuous misunderstanding of basic scientific principles to be found. Among these are frequent firing of weapons within a sealed environment, and a wayward law of gravity which enables freedom of movement of cast members while inanimate objects float weightlessly, but it is easier to accept these than it is to pretend that any of the episodes have a basis in plausibility. The plot involves an escape of life sentenced prisoners from a space station penal colony to a waste landfill upon our moon and their various attempts to obtain passage back to Earth, with some few capable players present who are execrably directed by first-timer Paolo Mazzucato, whose production team wastes effort upon such as holographic pornography while ignoring a pressing and basic requirement for the creation of states of suspense and of impetus.

While not the worst Sci-Fi movie I've ever seen it definitely isn't good. Special effects are bad which is to be expected with a movie of this caliber. The acting is decent for a B-movie which thankfully prevents this film from being totally unwatchable. The plot isn't particularly engaging, just a b-movie rehash of a prisoner escape attempt with a few other movie clichés thrown in. The whole movie reeks of the 80s, which is weird considering it came out in 1997. It's more entertaining than watching paint dry but I wouldn't put it on my list of maybe watch again movies. If you have absolutely nothing else going on and you're bored out of the gourd there are a lot worst things to watch.

A nice little story about self-sacrifice and redemption disguised as a low-budget sci-fi shoot-em-up. While most of the special effects are a little cheesy, the characters and storytelling are solid. Scott Plank in the lead is both heroic and vulnerable, Jocelyn Seagrave is both ballsy and tender (easy on the eyes, too). The director does a nice job with both the action and drama, and there are even a few great comic moments (the "real" Neil Armstrong story). Revelations, about the characters' past, add some emotional layers to the movie, and a couple of fun twists help round it out as well. Check out Robert O'Reilley (StarTrek's Klingon "Gow-ron") as the main bad guy (He's pretty intense as a cold-blooded convict desperate to highjack his way back to earth).

Despite being a very indie and relatively low-budget production, there are some noteworthy names involved here. Robert O'Reilly should be very familiar to any fan of contemporary 'Star Trek,' and Kurt Fuller has more than made the rounds; George Buck Flower is no stranger to genre flicks, and among still others, I recognize Gretchen Palmer, too. Though the comparative lack of resources is readily evident, it seems to me that the filmmakers made the most of what they had: the production design and art direction are fairly decent, such as they are, and the costume design - though one might cynically presume that maybe someone had connections to borrow sets and other materials from another project. I actually quite like Michael Sherwood's original score, lending tinges of flavor or even atmosphere despite its second-tier themes, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't get a measure of joy from the cheeky, fleeting use of a Type O Negative song. The special effects may be a tad outdated, but I'm not inclined to make a major fuss about this if more substantial facets are done well.

In Paolo Mazzucato's direction (seemingly his only full-length feature in that capacity), and Jesse Weathington's cinematography, one can especially discern the lesser financing and or capabilities of 'Moonbase.' Yet none of this is to say that the film is bad; on the contrary, so long as one can engage with it on its level, I think this is pretty fun! The dialogue is sometimes a little tasteless in its humor, but suitable otherwise; characters are nothing special, but fine for what the picture needs. The narrative and scene writing are nothing remarkable, yet duly capable, and sufficient to keep the interest of anyone who approaches the movie honestly. There are welcome moments throughout that show glimmers of more significant wit. If anything, I think the writing team just tried to include too much, and the end result would have benefited from omitting at least one element and tightening the whole. Did we really need an aspect of personal conflict, and meager world-building and background, on top of a dangerous secret, and the primary plot point that propels the action? All these ideas are swell in and of themselves; put them together all in one work, and this comes across as a little imbalanced and overfull, and subsequently a smidgen scattered, and each constituent part maybe gets less attention than it fully deserves.

That's the real problem here, in my opinion, and even at that, I don't think it's so critical a fault as to dampen the overall value. Moreover, it's not something that hasn't also plagued much bigger productions. I take no issue with the cast or their acting; moments of action, violence, and stunts are executed well. Despite apparent limitations of one nature or another, I think this is ably made from a technical standpoint, and all those behind the scenes turned in good work as much as they were able to. The writing is rather solid, more than not, and in combination with the hard work of everyone else involved, built for plentiful entertainment. Truthfully, while there's no mistaking that 'Moonbase' is a step or two removed from major studio fare, I think it's much better and more worthy than it has gotten credit for in the past twenty-five years. Yes, there are some discrete faults in the writing - but in my estimation, none so severe as to override suspension of disbelief. When all is said and done I had a really great time watching this, and I'm genuinely unsure why it's otherwise seemingly been received so poorly. I'm not saying that it's something to go out of your way to see, but if you can get on board with relatively low-grade projects, then as far as I'm concerned 'Moonbase' is a sci-fi action romp that's plainly enjoyable, and well worth checking out.