In the Shadow of the Moon

The talanted horror/thriller director Jim Mickle (Cold in July; Stake Land) teams up with the rising star Boyd Holbrook & brings to Netflix his newest piece - the exciting and entertaining mystery detective/killer flick "In the Shadow of the Moon".

"In the Shadow of the Moon" starts like any other police thriller, introducing us to a duo of likeable cops, a damp city full of crime & a mystery in the making. Through equal amounts of engaging drama, energetic action and time skipping we steadily move forward to the solution of the mystery, accompanied by the obsessive detective Lockhart who's got some heavy burdens on his shoulders. Boyd Holbrook, whom I first saw on "Narcos" (as I'm sure many people did as well) gives a great lead performance as detective Lockhart & the supporting cast helps him out well, especially Bokeem Woodbine & Cleopatra Coleman. The revelation of the sci-fi twist & the point of the mystery comes a tad bit too slowly & doesn't quite have the impact one would wish for, but, nevertheless, while "In the Shadow of the Moon" left me wanting more, at the same time the ending felt right. The themes of horrors and wonders of humanity & family values are served well. We cannot forget that the movie also looks gorgeous, has a decent original score, well made action sequences & even features a few bloody scenes for the horror fans. In summary, "In the Shadow of the Moon" kinda looks like, feels like and plays out like a big-screen movie.

I think this movie could've been a little less convoluted, with a different, less straight forward mystery building structure, but the result is still engaging, handsome and thoughtful thriller piece. My rating: 7/10.

So people are rating this low because it is alleged that it has a political message of 'wipe out an opposite view'? have they been hiding under a rock since cinema began? Most films before I was even born have been about one enemy wiping out another, morality has not been the premise of most films through cinematic history . This is simply an action film not based on real life, its obviously not a true story , the heart of it is simply the idea that if you were to, for instance, wipe out Hitler or his parents you potentially save millions of people from all different backgrounds. so do you wipe out the few or let the millions die? I suppose these films serve a good purpose in opening up the debate so I'll give it a 7 . Watch the film, enjoy it, its a good story , somewhat predictable at times but a good twist in the end.

This NETFLIX production was a pleasant surprise. The plot centers on Tom Lockhart - a beat cop in 1988 Philadelphia who is aiming to make Detective. When what "appears" to be a serial killler starts a streak in the city, Lockhart delves into it despite the protestations of his brother-in-law Detective Holt and his somewhat laidback partner Officer Maddox. The "apparent" serial killer is stopped. But then re-surfaces 9 years later. And then every 9 years thereafter. Quite impossibly. Officer Lockharts own life unravels on multiple levels through the years "chasing" this "apparent" serial killer.

Ok - so I've used enough quotation marks to make it obvious that I am avoiding spoilers. The movie seamlessly spans a 27 year timeline and the storyline is interesting while easy to follow. This brand of sci-fi thriller can get annoying because it gets messy and confusing. But the writers and director here did a good job of letting the story make sense as it unfolds over those 27 years in 9-year cycles. Definitely worth a watch!

1988. A police officer investigates a series of murders. The only thing connecting the victims appears to be the murder method. The police manage to piece together an image of the murderer from one of their would-be victims. Now the hunt is on.

Was drawn to this by the trailer, as the movie looked like a good murder-mystery. Unfortunately, it turns out this is much more a sci fi thriller than a murder drama, and I'm generally far more into the latter than the former.

This said, the movie still had potential, but this potential was wasted. It becomes quite dull and derivative. Throw in some twists for twists sake, plot developments that don't make much sense or are just there for empty sentimentality's sake, an irritating, unconvincing performance from Michael C Hall (of Dexter fame) and a tame conclusion and it is all quite unsatisfying.

Not 12 Monkeys, but okay... starts great and goes into the sewer at the end, but a solid enjoyable watch all round.

I think it is suffering from the usual outrage brigade whenever there is a female protagonist (eventually) in a movie. Strikes a real tone given the subject matter and the current climate that we are in.

Appreciated it more after a rewatch and honestly think is a solid six or a weak seven. Given the budget and the cast, it plays well in the time travel sci-fi genre and while there are inevitably plot holes, that is with nearly ever time travel movie if you really want to be pedantic.