It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

SPOILERS - DON'T READ IF YOU INTEND TO WATCH ITBefore watching it I didn't know what exactly it was; opinions seemed to differ. But having watched it, I'd say this documentary is also a good test of how easily you can be fooled into believing anything you told that seems logical on the surface.Right from the start I couldn't believe what I was hearing from the narrator. That the Apollo program was to become Star Wars. That the moon landing was to cover up a money laundry agenda with funds going missing. That the public really needed some warm up with the help of Hollywood to greet the moon landing with enthusiasm. That NASA used lots of ideas from 2001 Odyssey. That Hollywood changed the spacesuits, changed the rocket, they even moved the launch pad to get better shot angle. By any stretch of imagination this was just a line of stupid suggestion, however convincingly told.Then come these interviews with top US officials who never mention the subject they are discussing, not a single word from the four people in the room about the Moon, or any names dropped, let alone mentioning faking the landing in a studio. That's why you don't hear the questions from the interviewer. You film a conversation on one subject and then use the words to make it look like they talk about another. You can then insert these bits of the interview into any narrative you want. They might as well all be talking about their fishing trips or some covert op in Korea in the 50's or a movie they watched.END OF SPOILERSOh, boy, they really did take the Mickey out of those Moon-hoax Kubrick-did-it-all theorists. Nice effort. Particularly was important to have Kubrick's wife on the screen. She must be tired of all this moon-hoax rubbish herself. Oh, and you do have to watch the film right through to the end of the credits.On a side note to those Moon-hoax believers. You really need to get out of the box and look at the bigger picture, and most importantly read about space exploration history. And here's freebie for you to get you going. If you know anything about the Russian space program of the 60's and the Moon race that Soviet Union was part of you must have heard of Alexei Leonov - the first person to walk in outer space back in March 1965. He was soon made the lead cosmonaut of a group of cosmonauts that were scheduled to walk on the Moon.When the Americans first walked on the Moon in July 1969, the Soviet deep space receiving station at Eupatoria (on the Black Sea) was receiving all transmissions from those Apollo flights including the surface of the Moon and they were specialists and they knew for a fact these were coming from the Moon and not Hollywood, California via some remote satellite. When the whole world was watching those live TV images from the Moon only two countries in the world were not televising them - Soviet Union and China. And so Alexei Leonov with other cosmonauts were sitting in a locked room in Ostankino television centre, Moscow, watching those live picture coming from the Moon surface as it was the only place where they could. Leonov, a smart man, trust me, confirmed it in his interviews and If there was even a shade of doubt this wasn't for real the Soviets would be the first to expose it as they would be the most interested party in it.And one the final note. When some years from now, and that time will come for sure, when astronauts land on the moon again, and we will see a flag waving again in 1/6 of Earth gravity and in zero air resistance where inertia is a lot higher than that on Earth, these moon-hoax theory supporters will feel incredibly stupid. Definitely worth watching.

This movie serves as a classic ploy to "poison the well" of information ( though it may not have been created for that purpose, this does explain the peculiar high-level cooperation... ) questioning whether NASA successfully landed on the moon or merely orbited Earth and faked the rest. This question won't go away until NASA releases proof of the lunar missions, which they have not only not done - they in fact have behaved in a most guilty manner by covering up and hiding and recently "losing" audio tapes of the missions.... as well as the boast by ESA that they would end the controversial questions by releasing new images of the landing site of Apollo:esamultimedia.esa.int/images/smart_1/1888_40L_Hi.jpg...guess that ends that, eh? You do SEE the landing site, don't you?.... hello?..... ESA?.... NASA?... Hubble telescope? Can someone simply point a large telescope at the moon and snap a few photos showing some residue of the Apollo missions? Ask yourself WHY hasn't this simple action occurred in nearly 40 years hence? After all - there's a lunar rover parked up there somewhere, right? ... tire tracks all over the place, left-behind equipment... Imagine how simple it would be for NASA to put this all to rest for good... it really makes you wonder....The technique used by intelligence agency disinformation pros is called "poison well": ... adding a little false information among factual information.... later the planted inaccuracy is pointed to, the "conspiracy theorists" ridiculed, and for most of the huddled masses this instantly "de-bunks" the entire subject. This tendency results from "cognitive dissonance" and of course from most people's mistaken belief that the corporate news media is telling the truth.... which they are most definitely NOT doing. NASA cancels book rebutting moon hoax: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/ 2424927.stmNASA rebuttal of the alleged 'hoax": liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/News/2001/News- MoonLanding.asp ... having first watched "Operation Lune"... ( "Dark Side of the Moon" - video.google.com/videoplay? docid=3288261061829859642&q ) ...is this de-bunking satisfactory? It may seem to be a first glance, but are you truly thinking? Or are you being told what to think? Most importantly as always: what is being left out?en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Moon_Landing_hoax_accusationsxenophilia.com/zb0003.htmMoon rocks: the alleged existence of 842 lbs. of moon rocks seems to be a sacred piece of information that few challenge. Is this "fact" beyond question? Are any of these "facts" beyond question? Is it wise to place ANYTHING "beyond question"?Fake moon dust: science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/28dec_truefake.htm( keep in mind that it doesn't require a MANNED mission to retrieve lunar rocks and dust ... )NASA plans to return to the moon... perhaps by 2020... space.com/news/061204_nasa_moon.html... they admit overcoming the damaging effects of gamma rays beyond the Van Allen Belt will be the greatest challenge... Was light-weight foil enough to protect astronauts in 1969? How did they have enough fuel for the return trip? Where are the blueprints? Why did so many program insiders die a series of strange deaths afterwards? Why have all audio recordings disappeared? Why no picture showing the Lunar Rover on the moon in almost forty years? Why do the astronauts' photos look as if they were lit by huge spotlights in a studio? Why the tremendous secrecy in all aspects when a few strategic de-classified documents or a single Hubble photo could lay this whole thing to rest?The existence of a cover-up is the most damming evidence of all... I give this movie ten stars due to it's mind-expanding potential. I'd also ask each and every one of the readers to "think for yourself and question authority!".

When i first saw this documentary I was appalled - i was very angry with the American government (under Richard Nixon). In popular culture it is many times suggested that the Americans faked the lunar-missions. Many people believed that the Apollo-missions were filmed in a studio in area 51. And when i saw this documentary i was fully convinced. In the doc Kubricks widow Christiana Kubrick, astronaut Buzz Aldrin, Alexander Haig, Richard Helms, Henry Kissinger and even Donald Rumsfeld all admit more or less that the moon-landings were a hoax. But when saw it a second time I wasn't so sure about the doc was a real doc or not. In the end of the doc - when the credits are shown - we are shown outtakes of the doc. In the outtakes there are scenes were you easy can see that the people are not taking this seriously. There is one scene were Donald Rumsfeld laughs and ask the film crew: "I thought you were a real documentary". And it is also revealed that many of the men, who in the documentary are portrayed as experts and witnesses, are in fact actors. The truth came to me a year or two later, when I in a science magazine read that the documentary was made merely to show how easy it is to manipulate and fool people to think certain things. I once also believed that the Americans did not land on the moon.Partly because of this documentary.Much footage from the moon can very well be fake. That is because the could not film there, supposedly, because there was too hot and too cold.And then there is the thing about the wind on the flag.....But then there is the big problem: The Astronauts took home hundreds of kilos of rocks from the moon - KILOS. And the rocks ARE FROM THE MOON. The rocks have been spread around the world to all countries to further science. And there are for a fact from the moon, all laboratories from around the world has confirmed it: The isotopes of the basic elements of the rock could never have come from earth - only the moon.How do all you crack-put-theorists explain that?How come that many professors and astronomers from around all believe that USA did go to the moon??? Can you explain that (the only ones who disbelieve all this are all out off a job, and needs money)At first when I heard that I was enraged. I was angry that the doc fooled me so easily. But when i cooled down I began to think. This is a very good doc to show to people and then tell them later it is a hoax. Because then they will learn not to trust everything they hear. The doc is very good made - and everyone deserves to see

* * * CAUTION the following comment may or may not contain SPOILERS * * * Hahaha, never thought the man responsible for tens of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians (oops, collateral damage) could be so charming when being interviewed.It's amazing that such a busy man as Rumsfeld could find the time to cooperate in this documentary.Another person who seems so much more human after viewing this product, is of course Henry Kissinger.Then there's some more big wigs who graciously gave their full support to this humorist documentary. Among them: Buzz Aldrin, Alexander Haig and Stanley Kubrick's widow.I never heard of this documentary maker before but he must be reallyreally famous: why else would all these powerful and famous people willingly give their sparse free time to make this product the thing it has become?