What makes it different from others?

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

This was made in 1989 but seems like an early-50s movie:2 Astronauts find some alien stuff in damaged spaceship.It's exactly 14000 years old.They bring it back to earth. It becomes a robot. They kill it.They go to the moon where it came from andFind an alien base and a cryo alien woman 14K years oldWho thaws to look like us (and has incredible breasts),And engages in sex exactly as humans doIncluding touching and hugging afterAll this would be hilarious if it were John Agar and some of his pals. The robots are better than stunt men in shrimp-creature suits. But the dialogue is weak.As a kid I was amazed that so many aliens had humanoid form. I hadn't yet learned about "the production costs for a getup like that? Not in this budget. Make her a human girl and get her blouse off ..."Koenig thinks out loud in a deadpan and sarcastic tone. This was great on the bridge when they were boldly going, but here he just seems like a bored and tired TV actor.Some OK special effects. Worth a watch if you can FF and skip ahead.

Although the Romans already stated "de gustibus non disputandum" (you cannot argue about taste), I liked this movie very much! It has the kind of atmosphere I am longing for in a SciFi movie! A lot of mysteries (we are fully kept in the dark about the origins of the moon base and the mysterious old spaceship, which the space shuttles encounters in orbit) and presented as such in a way, that my fantasy can jump with giant leaps during the entire movie! I even don't WANT to know where they came from!!! The "human slashing" is a bit overdone for my taste, but then again...it depends on what you are looking for - I guess. The special effects could be better, but they don't disturb me at all: as a matter of fact they are indeed more accurate than in other comparable movies! At the time it really was timed perfectly: a lot of conspiracy theories were posted about Apollo astronauts hiding secrets from us (secret alien moon bases, UFOs, etc.), which made this film even more believable than normal.It really is the kind of movie, which deserves a sequel: maybe we can then get more insight into the origins of the unknown people - or even better: run into new mysteries. Of course Walter Koenig is now a bit too old, but a SERIOUS remake of Moontrap - followed by an equally SERIOUS sequel! - would make me very happy indeed!

What we have here is a film without the budget, and enough talent within the cast and crew, to make its ambitious premise work. Even though Moontrap is a silly and ultimately forgettable film, it does have a handful of unique elements. Chief among them is the fact that most Sci-Fi films take place in the future - whereas this one sets it's scene in 1969 - twenty years BEFORE the film was made! Furthermore, the film takes place mostly on the moon, which even though it's the closest celestial body to Earth, doesn't often feature too much in films. But other than that, this is a cheesy throwaway movie with more bad ideas than good ones. The plot follows a mission to the space surrounding the moon, where two veteran pilots stumble upon an alien spaceship. One of them goes to investigate, and ends up bringing back something that looks like a rugby ball, and a decaying human corpse. It turns out that the rugby ball is some kind of robot alien and it soon grows in size and uses some of the corpse in its own body. After that, the pair returns to the moon...Of course, my main reason for seeing this film was because of the fact that Bruce Campbell is in it; I wouldn't even have considered it otherwise. Campbell proved in Evil Dead II that he is capable of an amazingly entertaining and truly over the top performance; but unfortunately, director Robert Dyke has seen fit to have Bruce in a role that is more reminiscent of his subdued part in Maniac Cop. Also, Campbell isn't the lead actor - and that accolade falls to Walter Koenig. The problem with both of these performances is not that they're not bad - just that they're not very good, and the pair has absolutely zero chemistry. Of course, you can't expect great acting from a B-movie, but one thing you can expect is fun and this movie doesn't have much of that either. The special effects are amazingly crappy, even for a film like this, as the models used look really poor. The locations are no better, as you'd have to be a complete moron to even slightly believe the scenes set on the moon. But even so, there are a lot worse films than this out there (many featuring a big budget and coming from Hollywood), and despite its many, many flaws; fans of trash cinema may get a kick out of this trash.

SPOILER: i loved this movie and not for a post ST Koenig or evil dead Campbell, but because it had a strange twist on what may have happened to earth in the past, they were prob the legends of Atlantis and shows us a idea of why we should not let our toys get smarter then the ones who build them. yes there are a lot of poor cheesy jokes and the plot was lame in places but over all it was a good flick if a bit gory in the reuse of humans for parts. It does have a lot in common with terminator, aliens and virus but sci-fi does have a tend to copy it self, but if you want to see a good film with some good ideas then this one is for you, it is a thrill ride if you don't think to hard