Why so much hype?

Best movie of this year hands down!

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

One should try to look at the movie with the eyes of a viewer from the year 1950, at least where the technical aspects of space exploration are concerned . If one doesn't make the effort, "Destination Moon" is sure to look home-spun, primitive or silly, where in fact it was a laudable attempt at scientific and technological accuracy. Its barren lunar landscapes, for instance, were based on observations by astronomers ; seen in retrospect, they aren't all that different from the real thing. Other details too ring true, such as the scenes where the astronauts experience the vast stresses of lift-off or float around in amazed weightlessness. However, I wasn't too fond of the story itself, which lacked depth and nuance. The four astronaut characters, too, could have used far more care and attention. As it now stands, the viewer gets 3 well-meaning but bland heroes plus 1 well-meaning hero of the "comic relief" variety - and the result, sadly, doesn't offer much in the way of surprise or dynamism. The dialogue too is far from scintillating. Still, I was delighted to see that the movie contained an early ancestor of all those tourist photographs, based on a trick of perspective, where a person is shown supporting the Leaning Tower of Pisa, touching the tip of an Egyptian pyramid, cradling the Brussels Atomium, and so on. Visit the Moon and return with a souvenir that will give your pals a chuckle !

So many of my friends and I were big fans of space ships and interplanetary travel. The movies of the time left something to be desired, i.e. real science. While there are mistake along the way, the producers of this film did try really hard to show us the way things might have been as humans began to explore space. Issues such as weightlessness, rocketry, and the ability to breathe are issues that a person striving for reality would not overlook. Of course, some films simply have the technology and we never get to see the foundations around it. While short of acting and a little thin on plot, we loved it..

The 1950s can be looked back upon as something of a golden age for science fiction films. Both large and low budget films dealt with everything from giant monsters to space exploration, in the latter's case years before it became a fact of life. With that in mind, it is often interesting to go back and look at films from that era to see what they got right as well as what they got wrong. Take this film for instance, released in the summer of 1950 and the brainchild of producer George Pal. Pal in turn drew on top talent such as the science fiction writer Robert Heinlein and artist Chesley Bonestell to help bring this tale of the first manned mission to the Moon to life nearly two decades before NASA's Apollo missions did so. Given that fact, it might be surprising the things the film gets right or predicts. From EVAs (extra-vehicular activities or spacewalks) to the landing itself with last minute corrections, the film has some intriguing pre-echoes of what was to come. There's even moments akin to iconic first words and though the film doesn't go quite as far as having the astronauts plant an American flag, they something not too dissimilar. The film even depicts zero gravity, a rarity for the time, while also making educated guesses about spacesuits and what foods could be eaten in space. Much like Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, the film presented a (for its time) plausible vision of space exploration in the not too distant future and as a result the film holds up pretty well in that regard.The film proved iconic in other ways as well. Take the large silver nuclear powered rocket at the heart of the film, so iconic that its influence can be felt throughout much of 1950s and 60s science fiction. The film's depiction of the Earth from space and the lunar surface, shown via a limited set and the paintings of Chesley Bonestell, show what was expected in the days before Sputnik let alone Apollo or the Space Shuttle. While not always accurate, the way the Moon is shown here can be felt on films throughout the era such as 1964's The First Men In The Moon and arguably even Kubrick's 2001. Not to mention the score by Leith Stevens, which would effectively set the standard by which other films in the genre would have to live up to (Stevens would go on to score Pal's When Worlds Collide and the iconic 1953 film of H.G. Wells' The War Of The Worlds). All of which is shown in glorious Technicolor which looks stunning even now, brought together under George Pal's vision with it being directed by Irving Pichel with the result being a film that stands heads and shoulders above much of what was made in the decades to follow.Yet, like all works of "art", the film is very much a product of the time it was created it. The film's special effects, impressive for the time and which appropriately won the Oscar in 1950, are what have perhaps dated the most though they have their moments of effectiveness even sixty odd years later. Where the film is most dated is in it is dialogue and performances, which can be described as at best functional and laughable at worst. The film's semi- documentary tone leaves a lot of room for speeches and exposition but for little else, especially characterization with only Dick Wesson's everyman radio operator Joe Sweeney really having any character. Given the film was released in 1950, Cold War fears are present throughout with the insinuation of the Soviets (unnamed throughout the film's opening third) sabotaging projects and trying to hold back the mission. It's also interesting to note that, given that NASA (a government agency) put men on the moon, the film makes quite a big deal in that same screen-time towards the notion that only private industry could pull off a Moon mission because "government doesn't make those kinds of appropriations in peace time," to paraphrase the General Thayer character. For all of its faults, Destination Moon remains watchable even after six decades. Its Technicolor look at the then not too distant future makes for intriguing viewing even with inaccuracies that we know today or the at times lackluster writing that's heavy on exposition. For its effects and presentation, its a classic in its own way. Not on the level of say 2001 but it is a film every bit as important to the science fiction film genre as Kubrick's. For that alone, it's well worth a watch.

*Spoiler/plot- Destination Moon 1950, Private companies pull together to build a spaceship to go to the moon to advance Man's technology and science knowledge.*Special Stars- Jim Archer, Warner Aderson, Tom Powers, Dick Wesson.*Theme- Taking chances with space travel makes for good drama.*Trivia/location/goofs- woody woodpecker cartoon used to explain space travel by rocket, This expensive G. Pal film confused with low budget film, Rocketship X-M released around the same time purposely. Watch for rocket acceleration facial distortion to be accomplished by small flesh colored adhesive strips placed on actors faces attached to clear fishing line and pulled of camera by film crew members. Watch for obvious studio set lights reflected in spacesuit helmet visors, and film crew shadow near open hatch door to help push cast onto the spaceship's outer surface.*Emotion- One of the earliest expensive classic space travel films made on the 50's. become the prototype for film space travel, ships, and knowledge of the public. George Pal's production tastes and films have been the hallmark of good films for decades. This film is not only a classic but is exciting to view no matter how the science of space travel has changed and become more sophisticated. This film is still a treat.