justahunch-70549 Reviews

Slumdog Millionaire (2008)

Good, but overrated

[7/10 · 7 May 2024]

First off, this was not the best picture of 2008. It is a good movie and more or less a dark fairy tale in many ways. It has a few sluggish spots, but the children who play the lead character, Jamal, are all so good that they help immensely and the last half hour is very entertaining. While well performed, the Bollywood dance number at the end lost me as it has not one thing to do with the movie, but that's the way they do it in India. It's a feel good movie, though it surprisingly has some very tough scenes to sit through. More than anything else, I really am surprised at the success this film experienced.

Godzilla Minus One (2023)

For what it's worth, it's the best yet

[6/10 · 6 May 2024]

When I was a wee lad I saw a number of Godzilla movies from the 1950's, including the one with an embarrassed Raymond Burr (the first?!) on TV and while even then I showed signs of being into science fiction, I was never into this. It never scared me, it sometimes seemed just silly and I was never a fan. I did like to watch it wrecking things though. Now that I am older, they make much better, technically, Godzilla movies nowadays now that he has made a comeback for some reason. Every Godzilla movie made today looks better, but I still think they aren't all that good or interesting, but this is the best one yet to me. The acting is mostly mediocre and most of the film is story over effects, but sometimes less is more and this is the most exciting Godzilla movie I've ever seen. The special effects are good, especially considering the low budget, though some of the writing is ridiculous. How do they know how much this thing weighs?! Having said all of this, it's kind of silly to critique something that has always been silly, sometimes it seems purposely so. Looking at reviews here, it seems Godzilla has lots of fans. Enjoy. By the ending, there is more to come. Hopefully, it or they will continue to be better than the over bloated American ones.

The Zone of Interest (2023)

Consider this film a warning

[9/10 · 4 May 2024]

An extremely hard and difficult film to view even though you don't see any of the atrocities involved. That, however, is why the film is as effective as it is. It simply depicts the homelife of a husband and a wife, their children and their nice home which is next door to one of the most horrific places in history, Auschwitz, and the time is the early 1940's and the husband happens to be Rudolf Höss, a man notoriously responsible for the deaths of millions of Jews. This won an Oscar for sound that was richly deserved as horrific as it is. What the film does not allow us to see, it does allow us to hear. It also has some stunning cinematography. There are many actors in this, but only two of consequence, Christian Friedel as Höss and Sandra Hüller as his wife in a role that is light years away from her recent superb performance in the fascinating Anatomy of a Fall. However, neither of these seem like performances as they are so incredibly lifelike. We are all mostly products of our place in time, our locations and our upbringings. These are horrible human beings just doing what life has turned them into and in this case it is as cold and inhumane as man has been at any time in modern history. The final depiction of Höss descending a staircase is a bit of a puzzle. It suggests that there is some sort of conscious in this man. I'm not sure why the creators of this would want to provide us with that impression if indeed that is what they were aiming for. Jonathan Glazer has only made four feature films in the past 23 years and all have been excellent in some fashion with no similarities, though unlike this, the other three offered entertainment value, an aspect he is not interested in here. He is a major talent. It's 2024 and considering the current state of the nation, the world, this is as timely a warning as a film could be. I so hope that changes.

The Lion in Winter (1968)

Ancient history at its wittiest

[9/10 · 3 May 2024]

This is neither historically accurate or even convincing of its time period given its sometimes modern, all too witty dialogue, atmosphere and attitude, but it is grand entertainment with two magnificent legendary performers of the cinema at the top of their game in sort of a 12th century "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" only with more serious consequences involved. It's hard, if not impossible, to rank where this sits among Katharine Hepburn's screen performances, but it's pretty high up there. While she may have been the oldest in the cast, somehow it is she who comes across as the most modern of the bunch in this power struggle between Eleanor of Aquitaine and her husband, King Henry II. While so much of this is fiction, it is true Henry locked Eleanor up for a period of 16 years until his death. The film doesn't touch upon it, but curiously they both eventually got what this film depicts them fighting over, but only she would know it. It's highly unlikely they had the joyous departure as depicted here, among many other questionable time period relationships and incidents, but again, it's grand entertainment and isn't that ultimately what movies were made for? Throw in the film debuts of both Anthony Hopkins (a little wooden) and Timothy Dalton (very seductive) and you have a film buff's delight.

Chaplin (1992)

Downey deserved better

[5/10 · 1 May 2024]

A long, sometimes ponderous, not very realistic depiction of early Hollywood filmmaking that reeks of fakeness throughout, which is a shame as Robert Downey Jr in the title role is very good. Too bad he is stuck in this uninventive, unimaginative leaden movie, but then Richard Attenborough (Gandhi, A Chorus Line, etc.) was never exactly known for his creativity as a director. Still, it might be of some usefulness to the very young who are unfamiliar with his historic career, though it would be better if they were to see something more honest. This does have a pretty impressive supporting cast playing an assortment of long ago people in the early days of filmmaking.

Jerry Maguire (1996)

Better than most rom-coms

[7/10 · 29 April 2024]

Funny how some very popular and acclaimed movies can become less thought of as time goes by. "Show me the money", You had me at hello" and especially "You complete me" were all such effective lines upon its initial release and now they are mostly used in jokes. However, these were very effective lines at the time and its still a good, though a bit manipulative, movie with Cruise giving one of his better performances and looking great. This put Renee Zellweger on the map and she is indeed quite touching and very good in this and Cuba Gooding Jr is a fun presence and owes an Oscar win to those four words "Show me the money." When one looks at the nominees that year in his category and sees the astonishing presence of Edward Norton's film debut in Primal Fear it shows us yet another of Oscar's many questionable choices. Anyway, despite the nitpicking, this sports/love story movie is an entertaining and slickly made film. There are a lot of appealing supporting actors in this as well. Its hard not to like, even if you try.

Late Night with the Devil (2023)

For the most part it's awkwardly poor

[3/10 · 21 April 2024]

Another found footage type of movie. Sort of. The tale of a night talk show host trying to hit it big and failing until one broadcast, when his show is on death's door, hits the bigtime with not only paranormal activity captured on film, but also shown on live TV back in the mid-70's. We get to see the tape of that telecast. It does have a somewhat strange finale, though I doubt it will be to every one's taste, but it is unusual and unpleasant. The host of this show is played by David Dastmalchian who is the only cast member who gives a somewhat realistic and/or quality performance. The rest all appear to be second rate type of actors unless their were directed to act like they were. Hard to tell with his. A lot of reviewers on here seem to think they have found some low budget gem, but I thought the first part a bore and the second simply an oddity with, again, a finale that is at least different.

The Gift (2000)

Interesting with a haunting Ribisi

[7/10 · 19 April 2024]

I saw this 24 years ago, but had absolutely no memory of it whatsoever beyond being impressed by Blanchette. My how time can change opinions. Yes, she does a good job, but she has grown immensely as an actor since this film about a psychic was filmed. It's more than just about a psychic involved with a murder, it is also a tad supernatural though that's slightly misleading. This has a fabulous cast, mostly good, and while Blanchette is fine, it is Giovanni Ribisi who steals this film. It was odd to see Keanu Reeves in such a nasty role, but he is strong in it. The film itself is a mixed bag. Always interesting, sometimes too melodramatic for it's own good and, of course, one has to swallow the premise, one that is not all that original. There are far worse ways to spend two hours though.

Milk (I) (2008)

ALL men ARE created equal

[9/10 · 14 April 2024]

Having lived through this period, this is a rather personal and emotional film to me. This film did not make a lot of money, which is a shame as this is a history of how gay men & women have progressed to where they are today. People like Harvey Milk are responsible for the evolution of civil rights and he deserves to be remembered for what he achieved during his short time. As a film, this is remarkably well written, though some things and characters are necessarily sketchy simply due to time constrictions. The archival footage is wonderful and harsh and to today's young LGBTQ people the footage of being dragged off to jail, being beaten, being crucified by the church must seem unbelievable, though the latter certainly is still going full steam, though ultimately it will be to no avail. If watching this film and then taking a look at where LGBTQ are people today does not show to the entire country how the advancement of these people's civil rights has been an ongoing growing achievement then they are both being seen through blind eyes. This is not a cinematic masterpiece, though Gus Van Sant's career is full of fascinating films, but it a very intelligent, extremely well made and mostly brilliantly acted film. I have never been a big fan of Sean Penn, but this is his ultimate triumph. He just simply morphs into this role and is a complete delight to behold. Josh Brolin is also excellent. He is never written or played as a villain, though he ultimately is. James Franco gives a warm, loving and sincere performance. This is an important as well as entertaining piece of civil rights history and while the most well known comment made by Milk has always been "My name is Harvey Milk and I am here to recruit you", the most important line in this movie is based on the Declaration of Independence. All men are created equal. No matter how hard you try, you can never erase those words.

The Day After Tomorrow (2004)

If nothing else, and there isn't, it's action packed

[4/10 · 11 April 2024]

Tells you something about how much this was appreciated at the time of its release when a movie that is basically nothing but non-stop special effects from beginning to end does not even get an Oscar nomination for it visual effects. The plot is completely preposterous, the acting is pretty weak by the vast majority of the cast and the whole thing is directed, well more like constructed than directed, by hatchet job master Roland Emmerich. Jake Gyllenhaal tries sincerely, but is too old for the role and the writing just overwhelms his attempts at this thankless role. Quaid is in his full ham mode and the rest, if not all, are just moving pieces. It's watchable as so much is going on, but the less you pay attention, the more you will like it.

A Fish Called Wanda (1988)

Fun comedy

[7/10 · 11 April 2024]

Fun little comedy about a jewel heist and a mostly doofus group who can't tell who is screwing who with all kinds of backstabbing, double crossing and a femme fatale playing them all. Or at least most of them. Jamie Lee Curtis has seldom been this much fun in any movie and she had never looked better. Kevin Kline is quite good and won a questionable Oscar for this, but for my money, Michael Palin is the funniest in this. It's a wacky story and everyone gets their comeuppance by the time it's over, some in gloriously original fashion. I don't think it a great comedy, but I do think it a good one.

Runaway Train (I) (1985)

Decent action film

[7/10 · 8 April 2024]

I saw this in 1985 and my memory of it was slim other than remembering being very surprised at the time by the Oscar nominations for the two lead scenery chewing actors. I'm still surprised though Voight's better than I had remembered as a mighty vicious criminal who has pretty much realized that he has lost all chance of having any kind of shot at having anything resembling a normal life though deep down, very deep, there is a slim glimpse of some humanity left in him. His sole goal as we see him is to do anything at all to stay out of prison from which he has escaped in the early part of this film. Not that he wants it, tagging along with him is a beyond dumb young fighter portrayed by Eric Roberts. The prison escape takes place in the Alaskan wilderness and is well done though one has to swallow the near cartoon like villain of a warden played by John P. Ryan who does all but twirl the ends of his moustache. These two escaped cons manage to get on a train and have some preposterous timing as the conductor immediately drops dead from an apparent heart attack leaving these two alone on a runaway train. The rest is all on this train with many attempts by the controllers to either stop it or keep it from causing even more damage with a crash. It holds up better than a lot of 80's action movies and it's pretty tense and action packed with a lot of moralizing speeches as we speed along. Rebecca DeMornay shows up eventually as the only other person on the train and she does okay with a limited role. The final scene is beautifully shot.

District 9 (2009)

Impressive feature film debuts of Copley & Blomkamp

[9/10 · 7 April 2024]

An original and very fast paced intelligent piece of science fiction. An alien spacecraft runs out of gas over Johannesburg, South Africa and sits there suspended for a few months before man breaks their way in. The rest is for you to find out if somehow you don't already know. The fact that this was relatively cheaply made makes it all the more impressive and its location is most unusual for this type of movie. On the surface, it may look like just another summer sci-fi alien extravaganza, but it is not. While it is quite exciting and fascinating much of the time, probably the most impressive thing about it is the lead performance of Sharlto Copley who carries much of this on his shoulders. It is rather unbelievable that this was his first feature film. He provides a very eye-catching debut and this is a fine thought provoking piece of entertainment made by Neill Blomkamp, though I can't say I've been very impressed by more recent endeavors. It ends leaving an important question left unanswered giving the impression that a sequel might be on the way, though that never occurred.

Don't Come Back from the Moon (2017)

This is not a science fiction movie

[4/10 · 6 April 2024]

The title sounds like a sci-fi movie. The poster for the film looks like a sci-fi movie. The early part of the film sorta seems like a sci-fi movie. However, this is not a sci-fi movie. It is a movie whose premise makes absolutely no sense. If you can get past the early nonsensical setup of numerous fathers all just simply walking out on their wives and/or children in the same teeny town around the same time you might find yourself involved with the plight of those abandoned, particularly the children. They all learn to live their new lives and eventually the fathers return, though there is no indication as to how long they have been gone, only to find themselves shunned because of what they did. They all have reasons, but why they all just simply walked away around the same time is never explained. Perhaps it is just bad filmmaking that presents its setup incorrectly?! Beyond the structure being a mess, there are some touching scenes among these abandoned young people with the focal point well played by Jeff Wahlberg. Rashida Jones does pretty well too as a lonely wife. It has a gritty realistic look to it, but it is a film that is pretty much ruined by either poor writing, poor direction or poor editing or perhaps all three.

Making Love (1982)

Has a small place in history, but it's not really very good

[4/10 · 3 April 2024]

A movie of some historical importance due to its then daring subject matter of a young, married doctor falling in love with another man. I understand that the three main roles were offered to just about everyone in Hollywood and no major performers in the early 80's would touch them fearing what it would do to their careers (how times have agreeably changed!), so they finally went with some TV actors who were hungry for film careers, though Harry Hamlin had made some movies, but apparently was eager to make a good one (Clash of the Titans, anyone?). However, while this is a bit historic, it is also pretty poor with some terrible writing and lackluster performances. Ontkean as the coming out doctor comes off best simply because he is sincerely sweet, but Hamlin gives an insincere awkward performance and Kate Jackson as the jilted wife is quite average. She was just not a good enough actress to carry the lead in this or any other film and her film career, or lack of one, confirms that. This was a great opportunity at the time that they blew because everything about it is mostly no better than mediocre and for this to succeed in any way (critically or commercially), which it didn't, it needed to be excellent to overcome the backlash it would receive, but alas, they didn't even come close. I originally saw this in a theater in NYC and it was a terrible experience. Every time the two males kissed, the rather ignorant audience went into hysterical laughter with insulting hoots and hollering and I found myself feeling bad for the actors, the characters on the screen, myself, gay people and how ignorant the general public can be. This was not a good day at the movies and the film itself has not gotten any better with time. It is a slight curiosity though, I guess.

Primal Fear (1996)

Norton, Norton, Norton

[8/10 · 3 April 2024]

This interesting mystery about the murder of a priest starring Richard Gere and Laura Linney contains one of the most impressive film debuts I have ever been privileged to witness. Edward Norton's performance at first touches and moves one until it eventually stuns and shocks. The first time I saw this I cannot express how taken back I was with this performance, but it helps that he was a complete unknown at the time. He has since become a consistently excellent actor, but this is 28 years later and I'm not so sure that he has ever been better than here and the fact that Cuba Gooding Jr. Beat him for the best supporting actor Oscar of 1996 is about as stunning and shocking as Norton's performance. Despite the strong presence of Gere with a terrific cast including Laura Linney, Alfre Woodard, Frances McDormand, John Mahoney, Andre Braugher, Terry O'Quinn and others, Norton simply blows them all out of the water. This is a 7 star movie with a 10 star performance from Norton. Sadly, he has become so well known I doubt the performance can have the same effect on newbies, but they should still enjoy some impressive acting.

Robinson Crusoe on Mars (1964)

Nostalgic

[6/10 · 29 March 2024]

Given my interest in science fiction it's no wonder that I saw this I don't know how many times when I was a kid. This is the first time I've seen it in many decades and it is an antique, no doubt, but it was also way ahead of its time. The title kind of tells you the entire plot unless you're not familiar with Robinson Crusoe and his Man Friday. Some of the special effects are not too bad, but some are terrible and the production design couldn't be more cheap looking if you tried, but hey, this is 60 years old as of this writing and it was probably low budget then. The so called Robinson Crusoe here is played by Paul Mantee and he is actually pretty good, but the film is kind of laughable sometimes. After landing on Mars it takes little time to find oxygen, water, food, shelter and quite a few other improbable things. I don't think kids today would like it at all, so this has pretty much just become a nostalgic piece for older people to view again.

Queers (2017)

A mixed bag, but mostly good

[7/10 · 29 March 2024]

I never knew that this existed until about a week ago. It's a great idea and concept, but unfortunately the content is mixed. The first three episodes, "The Man on the Platform" with the always excellent Ben Whishaw, "A Grand Day Out" with a mesmerizing Fionn Whitehead and "More Anger" with the, as usual, terrific Russell Tovey are great television and offer important and historic messages, but of the final five only number eight works well, that one with an entertaining Alan Cummings entitled "Something Borrowed", though it's a tad similar to the excellent film "A Single Man." The other five all offer solid performances, but I found their stories not as effective, though none are bad. They are, of course all kind of sad. Coming out, racism, gender issues, longing for lost youth, equality, AIDS, etc. All eight are in different time periods ranging from 1917 to 2016, but they all take place in the same pub. Despite my criticisms, this is recommended.

Pet Sematary (1989)

Typical second rate King filmization

[5/10 · 29 March 2024]

As I recall I liked the book, but it's been a long, long time and I've no idea how much of this has been altered. This doesn't work very well as many King filmizations don't .I haven't read anything of his in recent years, but I used to be a devoted follower, so I don't know if his writing has changed in anyway, but most of the things I've read are full of bizarre imagery that play well on the page and in our imagination, but on the screen many scenes are just nonsensical as his works need his narrative to fill in the blanks, something the films versions usually cannot do. This film has that problem, but it also has the problem with a cast of mediocre actors, though Fred Gwynn seems to be having fun chewing up the scenery and Brad Greenquist is pretty creepy as Victor Pascow. Everyone knows that this is about bringing the dead back to life. Sort of. It has a few creepy moments, especially the final scene.

Last and First Men (2020)

But listen patiently

[6/10 · 24 March 2024]

I know a few people who just might slice their wrists if I made them watch this! Lol. As intriguing as much of this is, there is probably not a slower movie ever made. Slow movies are not a problem for me. Many slow sequences in films just increase their intensity whatever it may be. This however is about the future of mankind two billion years in the future. What's left of humanity two billion years from now are many odd and interesting looking structures and some sort of mankind that is now telepathic and only allows group thinking, though we never actually get to see them. This is about mankind on its last legs sending out signals everywhere imaginable with technology that we have that far in the future. The imagery here is beautiful as is some of the music. It's an interesting piece for the curious film buff, but if ever there were a film that was not meant for everyone, this just might be it! It is completely narrated by Tilda Swinton and she does an excellent job. Slowly.

All of Us Strangers (2023)

I came to find you

[10/10 · 23 March 2024]

I am really at a loss how to accurately review this film. I'm not really sure that there is an accurate way. I can say one thing assuredly. It's not what I expected. I'm also sure that the acting is wonderful especially by Andrew Scott in the lead followed closely by Paul Mescal. It is also beautifully made and photographed, but just exactly what is it?! This is a four character film and it is some sort of ghost story, but who is alive and who is not? Clearly Scott's parents (beautifully portrayed by Jamie Bell and Claire Foy) are deceased as they were killed in a car crash when Scott's "Adam" was 12. That does not prevent these two from being a part of Adam's current existence. The question I ponder is whether Adam is alive, deceased or in the process of dying, but no matter what scenario I can come up with, I find logistical flaws. So many oddities and peculiarities. The credits begin with the London skyline completely dark except for one large building that increasingly glows brighter and brighter until there is a gigantic explosion. It is possible that this may be either the beginning or the end of this story. Shortly after the film begins Adam & Harry's (Mescal) building's fire alarm goes off for reasons unknown and they seem to be the only two occupants in this enormous property and it is how they meet. Just prior, we first see Adam alone as he is beginning to write a screenplay about his early life in 1987. We then find him on a train to his childhood home and meets his deceased parents who are no different in any way than when he last saw them and doesn't seem terribly shocked or even ask them how this is possible. They don't seem to have any memory of their own deaths, though they know they did die. Neither Adam or Harry have friends. One has deceased parents, the other is alienated from his. The tragic strangeness and pain surrounding Harry later in the film is too revealing to write about even with a spoiler alert. So many questions that are never answered, but I'm not sure answers are part of the game plan here. Again, this is a ghost story of some sort, but it is also a heartbreaking love story between these two men. The relationship between Adam and his parents is fascinating. The relationship between Adam and Harry is as well. There is so much here I that I have to force myself to stop writing. I've seen it twice now and it affected me more the second time. As draining as some of it is, I'm sure there will be more times. It is mesmerizing and unlike any other film I can think of. Bravo also to the established music effectively used.

The Odd Couple (1968)

This movie is timeless

[8/10 · 21 March 2024]

Since it's been around 60 years since this was a smash hit on Broadway with Walter Matthau & Art Carney, 56 years since this film with Walther Matthau & Jack Lemmon was released and another 49 years since the excellent hit TV series with Jack Klugman & Tony Randall came to an end, not to mention a mediocre remake since then, I assume everyone knows that this is about 2 divorced men trying to share an apartment together. It's still a very funny piece though it's not quite as humorous as I remembered it to be but I think my memories of this piece have become a tad combined with the humor of the Klugman/Randall series. Nevertheless, it's a very good time. Matthau shines in his first of many films with Lemmon, but I think this is one of the rare performances in which in brilliant Lemmon is not at this best. He's not bad. He's just not all that funny. I didn't see Carney, but I think Randall was a better Unger than Lemmon. I hadn't seen this in who knows how many decades and was surprised at just how simple it is, but that's typical of the great Neil Simon's best plays. The supporting cast here is a true delight from the Poker players to the Pidgeon sisters. If you've never seen it, despite the years, it really doesn't date much at all. Enjoy.

The Sunday Sessions (2019)

Homosexuality and religion

[5/10 · 21 March 2024]

I can't really say that I cared for this all that much. It's a documentary about a gay man who was trying so hard not to be one and who spends three years dealing with a conversion therapist. As is well known, conversion therapy for gay men is not well accepted in almost any medical, therapeutic or scientific area. The young man here conflicted by his religious beliefs, and to me that is the primary source of where his pain and confusion comes from, destroys a friendship with the only person I saw in this film to make any sense at all. Most others in this seemed to be suffering due to his homosexuality and it seems to me that the difficulty of acceptance would have been a lot easier on everyone than dealing with his conversion therapy. The fact that the ending did not clearly answer any questions that I had was very annoying as were the therapist's comments about himself who admits that the homosexual part of him will never be completely gone, but he has learned how to have a life with a woman and is encouraging this young man to do the same knowing that that's not exactly where they're real and true desires lie. I don't see how that's fair to a wife. I'm all over the place on this, though I don't doubt the therapist's sincerity, but I have very mixed feelings on what I witnessed and I can't say I found it illuminating in any way and it did not budge my needle on my strong disapproval with this kind of therapy. I feel sort of sad for this young man, but I also question why he would want and/or agree to put this terribly personal major facet of his life on film.

The Parallax View (1974)

Ah, the 70's. Full of conspiracy theories and paranoia

[7/10 · 20 March 2024]

The 1970s was the era of conspiracy theory movies, though considering what we're living through in the 2020's I'm kind of surprised they haven't sprung up in more popularity once again. This is not the best one, but it's a very good one with a strong lead performance by Warren Beatty and excellent supporting cast particularly by Paul Prentiss in a small role, but she is very effective. Mostly known for comedies she proved here she could do drama quite well. Shame the role is near miniscule. A politician is shot and over the next three years various reporters who were at the scene at the time keep dying in common and or unexplained ways. Beatty was one of those reporters and as he investigates the deeper in trouble he gets. This involves an organization that indoctrinates individuals who have the potential to turn into professional killers and this is like flies to you know what and this reporter just cannot resist joining to learn more. It's also where the film temporarily gets weakest as the initial indoctrination scenes are not very believable to me. This wasn't a great movie in 1974 and it's not a great movie in 2024, but it's the solid one and it will keep you in suspense.

Rubikon (2022)

Not bad, but if you're looking for excitement look elsewhere

[6/10 · 18 March 2024]

This is a very serious no nonsense science fiction movie which is how I like them. It also doesn't waste any time initially and it has good visuals. For the most part it is only a three person cast and I believe that all three do rather well. These three are on a space station circling the earth when some sort of fog slowly encompasses the planet ending all communication and from what they can see, perhaps the end of humanity. Just prior to this there were more people on this space station who traveled back to our planet only to have their vessel burn up before it could get there for reasons unknown. This leaves the remaining three with the thought processing of what to do if they are the last three humans alive. The film's problem is that the rest of the movie is mostly talking about just that and that's not really all that compelling despite the various pluses I've mentioned. It's not a bad movie and if you like films in outer space as much as I do, you might want to take a look at this.