Chinese tutor used to appease Chinese audiences.
Michael Pena just not needed.
55 year old Halle Berry having a 5 year old boy seemed odd given her age.
Patrick Wilson's son was also an unnecessary character.
For a movie about stopping the moon from falling, I don't need a big ensemble.
Agreed. This movie had a lot of odd things.
I think you could have cut Pena, Patricks son, Halle's son and their entire sub plot and characters involved. You would have a 40 minute shorter and better movie. It was like the producers threw in a bunch of junk and characters so it wouldn't be a movie just about the moon falling.
The writing was so bland and bad. I felt like the screenplay was just copied and pasted from previous movies. A teenager could have written a better script in a couple of weeks. And yet somehow this received a 200M of funding.
It was like Roland wanted to make a movie about Moon conspiracies being true but the financial backers wanted a more traditional disaster movie similar to 2012 and day after tomorrow. So they added a bunch of garbage side characters to fill in space and time.
Yeah I agree. Add Donald Sutherland to this list too.
I really liked the British guy, John Bradley, and it's good to hear non-typical accents. Hollywood seems to only like one type of British accent, which is the upperclass type.
I like the Manchester accent.
I'd say Bradley's character was the only likeable one. Even if he was just playing Samwell Tarley in space.
There we go, can't have a Chinese character unless it's to appeal to the Chinese. God forbid.
TBH Halle doesn't look 55 to me. But even if so, plenty of people have kids way later on in life. Especially their careers demand of it.
They all played a part in the movie. Jesus, people are fucked.
dying up on a hill defending a piece of shit movie
share"I don't need a big ensemble."
Thats the formula for all disaster movies , multiple character building
Ironically I was thinking there aren't enough characters. I rewatched 2012 (which I don't actually like that much) and wondered if it succeeded because a bigger cast and more storylines worked better for a disaster film. I prefer Moonfall but it is a simpler story but I appear to be in the minority.
shareI rewatched 2012 (which I don't actually like that much)
I've always thought 2012 overblown and a bit silly - especially with the level of destruction shown. In particular the great slabs of ground cracking and tilting reminded me of old style physical film effects just on a very big scale. Moonfall by comparison was straight forward science fiction with a familiar trope that I found easier to accept.
I also think a lot of the arguments against Moonfall are anti-woke nonsense and these days would be made against 2012 if it was released now.
But, as I said, I'm in the minority here. 2012 was a huge success and Moonfall apparently an abject failure - so what do I know.