Apollo 18 – It’s Better than the Critics Say!
Matt Molgaard
|
Reading your thoughts on Doom proved very interesting. Interesting enough to validate the belief that “Better than the Critics Say” could be a fine column to move forward with. After all, there will never be a shortage of quality films that adopt an unnecessarily negative reputation.
Sometimes it seems audiences pick up on a few negative reviews and adopt those thoughts before they’ve even seen the film for themselves. Understanding that strange trend doesn’t seem so outlandish. We’re humans, and some of us tend to instinctively join the flock, whether the flock truly represents our own opinions or not.
One of the victims of the Flock Movement (yeah, I’m coining that, right here and now) was the 2011 found footage feature Apollo 18. The moment the Boston Herald deemed it a terrible flick, it seemed every major media outlet was eager to follow. The film has been called boring, trite, uninspired, unoriginal and… well, you get the gist. Critics were in a hurry to bury this one, and that seemed to influence everyone and their mothers. It even influenced me, a guy eager to see something different from a found footage flick.
In the lead up to the movie’s release, I recall being quite excited about the film. “Space flicks” tend to entertain me, and while I rarely enjoy found footage films, I always find myself wanting to enjoy them. The pic looked claustrophobic and creepy, and those two things typically work to leave me unsettled.
And then I started reading reviews, and my interest plummeted.
The film tanked at the box office, opening to just over $8 million after landing on more than 3,300 screens. When those figures were released, I knew I had a limited opportunity to see this one on the big screen. Movies that bomb like this don’t stick around for more than a few weeks. So I reluctantly headed to the local cinema during the film’s second week of release, expecting next to nothing, hoping I may get just a little bit more than I believed wait in store.
There were four people in the theater, including my wife and me.
Things didn’t look too good, but I had a massive load of buttery popcorn, an order of nachos with a heaping pile of jalapenos on the side, a warm hot dog, a box of Sour Patch Kids, and a large Coke (I’m not going to claim that I was free of any herbal influence… because, well, I don’t like to lie any more than I absolutely have to) to keep me entertained if the movie failed to do so.
But the movie didn’t fail to do so. In fact, I found myself (as did my wife) deeply engrossed in what was a surprisingly unique found footage film. I wasn’t subjected to foolish 20-somethings running through the woods, a picture so shaky it induces migraines, or hokey CGI that looks as realistic as my toddler’s “artwork.” I wasn’t subjected to levitating, possessed individuals or forced dialogue. I wasn’t subjected to nonexistent lighting designed to mask special effects that are anything but special. In short, I didn’t get anything I actually expected.
What I did get was a pretty well-written feature about two astronauts who run into an alien lifeform that looked and felt different than just about any other alien lifeform I’d seen on celluloid. These weren’t gangly beasts with acid blood or overgrown creatures with a built-in yearning for human flesh or mutated humanoids or predatory monsters only out to collect skeletal trophies. No, these were simple creatures that had adapted to their environment, capable of camouflaging themselves in order to blend in with their surroundings. You know, like so many other factual creatures indigenous to planet earth.
It was a “less is more” approach to the role of the antagonist (which was really just an inhabitant doing its thing), and it really worked well. Director Gonzalo López-Gallego and writer Brian Miller didn’t reach for shock value; they looked to respect the intelligent audience and extended their minds in the direction of subtle horror. That was not only against the grain, it was genius.
It was also labeled lazy; so much for the days of realism (as close as we’ll get from a film about a couple men running into life on the moon) holding weight with critical minds.
The bulk of scathing reviews that showered the film seemed to target the “lame moon rocks,” and if you weren’t paying much attention to the film, I suppose I can see the complaint. But how on earth is a clever alien lifeform, capable of infecting those who impose on their turf as a means of defense, “lame”? How does that earn a “meh” response from film fans?
I can’t see it.
Another thing I cannot bring myself to see is the ire that Warren Christie and Lloyd Owen’s performances garnered. These two (with a select few bit players) are entirely responsible for carrying the film on their shoulders. There’s no mass ensemble to mask any missteps. If these two screw up on screen, there’s no one that can accept the inevitable blame but them. And they don’t screw up. They juggle a variety of emotions in convincing fashion, and the chemistry between the two is excellent.
They feel like isolated moon travelers, sometimes excited to be on this mission, sometimes frustrated by seclusion, sometimes panicked, sometimes calm, and sometimes terrified by the complete unknown. They sell these emotions in near flawless fashion.
How in the world can fans and critics bash these two, who clearly give everything they’ve got with a great deal of success? There isn’t a lazy exchange between the two, and as things really heat up in the final act and the terror reaches startling degrees, they respond exactly as we’d expect from travelers uncovering a potentially fatal foe.
For years fans have been calling for original, or at least refreshing, found footage features. We’ve seen a few come along: Cannibal Holocaust, The Blair Witch Project, Trollhunter, [REC], Exists. These were pictures that felt different. They stood out from the pack because they offered us something we felt as though we hadn’t quite seen yet. Apollo 18 did the very same thing. Sadly, unlike the aforementioned films, it received virtually no love and was written off before it was given a fair shake.
I implore you: Give the movie the fair shake it deserves. It’s different. It’s intelligent. It’s technically well assembled. And if you watch it alone, at night with the lights low, it’s even a little bit disconcerting.
You bet your ass it’s better than the critics say!
Categorized:Editorials News
