Benutzerrezensionen

An unashamedly old-fashioned adaptation of a lesser-known H. G. Wells novel, previously made into a movie (complete with Ray Harryhausen stop-motion aliens) back in 1964. Mark Gatiss should be applauded for bringing something less familiar to the screen, showing that there's still a market for small-screen science fiction and horror (he also made the retro horror anthology, CROOKED HOUSE).

Unfortunately, FIRST MEN IN THE MOON doesn't turn out to be the greatest film ever made. It's commendably old-fashioned, yes, featuring a great performance from none-other than Gatiss as a bizarre Edwardian mad scientist who creates a compound that will take his ship to the moon. Paired up with Gatiss is straight man Rory Kinnear, son of Roy and the spitting image of his father. Given that this production has an extremely low budget, much of the film is made up of dialogue as the pair fight, debate and argue, but of course the inevitable CGI effects eventually come when the twosome make their trip to the moon.

The good stuff: for once, the CGI aliens look pretty good, and on par with Harryhausen's own creations. There's plenty of humour to soften the story, and Gatiss and Kinnear work well together. The bad stuff: the story seems very twee in places and the plotting is stretched out to the extreme, with very little actual incident to fill the running time. It has the feel of a children's show, although bizarrely the BBC like to show this stuff on an obscure channel in the middle of the night. A shame, as the kids gorging themselves on the latest DOCTOR WHO would probably enjoy this – and it's something I myself would have loved if I'd seen it at an early age.

The First Men in the Moon is a low budget BBC4 adaptation of the HG Wells book. The film stars Mark Gatiss as Cavor and Rory Kinnear as Bedford. Gatiss also adapted the screenplay.

The setting is July 1969 on the eve of the first lunar landing as a 90 year old Julius Bedford tells a young lad the story of how two men made the first journey to the Moon back in 1909.

He recounts that when he was a young man, he met Professor Cavor who had invented 'Cavorite', a substance that blocked the force of gravity and they worked together to build a ship that would fly them to the moon and encounter the Selenites.

The film is an affectionate tribute to the HG Wells book but the pacing is uneven, the drama is low key and the special effects display its low budget origins.

Gatiss and Kinnear do their best to elevate the production values but the direction does not help too much to make it more memorable.

In 1969, everyone is looking to the moon for the Apollo landing. Young Jim gets lost at an English country fair and happens upon 90-year-old Julius Bedford who recounts his story as the first man on the moon. In 1909, struggling writer Bedford (Rory Kinnear) meets eccentric scientist Cavor (Mark Gatiss) who invented an anti-gravity substance.

The concept is a bit better than the execution. It's an adaptation of a H. G. Wells story. I'm fine with doing an alternate sci-fi. The designs are fine even if the CGI is lesser level. I don't find the characters that compelling. Bringing the present day to 1969 makes some sense but I wonder if bringing it to modern day wouldn't be better. It's a tall tale and that could fun. I really don't like popping off the heads and the story doesn't really have any great thrills. It's more interesting than compelling. It's slightly interesting.

Thomas and Gattis do a nice job here in what qualifies as a remake of an oft told tale.

It's an engaging H G story of a quaint innocent trip to the Moon with quaint, innocent individuals.

The "romance" part is missing here, and somevother changes are made. Instead, we get the "bromance", and it works pretty well. Both characters are lightly likable, credible, have human faults, and human compassion.

At times, I think our director and writer try to do too much, but that's their prerogative. There's a nice blend of comic relief, such as when one character returns to Earth and in a daze tells a rogue about Gold on his craft.

This is a successful remake, and I may be lenient because the bar has been so much lower in the 21st century, but I think this one holds up on its own and will remain a solid film for generations to come.

This adaptation seemed void of any dramatic tension and had very little comedy. It has it's moments, but I'm struggling to think of them having just watched the film. Far too often the characters would just ramble on and on, spouting exposition. Uncomfortably trying to shoehorn between Wells's original fantasy vision and the reality of science as we understand it today. Gatis wrote the screenplay and needed a strong editor. The direction and sets were equally uninspiring. Whereas the 1964 movie lives on in my memory - this version will be quickly forgotten. All in all it was like a bad episode of Dr Who. I also have to say the make up was appalling. Rory Kinnear's fake beard looked ridiculous.

It's only been on for 15 minutes and I love it! Thankyou Mark Gatiss for finding this brilliant novel, and presumably the previous film version, and remaking it for today. Clever and funny and hopefully immensely sad ( haven't got to that bit yet.....)it tells of before we knew more than that the stars twinkled and other worlds existed, and chances were that aliens lived in darkest Africa. If you've ever loved Edwardian schoolboy stories, or looked for adventure in everyday happenings - or imagined yourself living in a time when there was no cynicism, Science was King, and literally ANYTHING was possible - then enjoy this. The acting is good too - it's like tome travel....

This is a forgettable experience with too much emphasis on emotion, not enough science and bad special effects. Mark Gatiss is playing the part of Mickey in the 'League of Gentlemen' and Iris Krell. Rory Kinnear is never going to match his father in acting ability. The poor special effects remind you of a bad episode from Doctor Who.

This was an interesting sort of a remake,, I couldnt decide if it was a genuine remake or an attempt to turn out a brand new film for very very few dollars. I would strongly advise anyone to go find the original and watch it instead. Its so close in places that i watched to see if they had slotted new actors into old scenes , if thats the case it was quite clever , if it was all new ,, it was quite sad.

Yet another pointless remake, and not by Hollywood this time.

This film is an obviously low-budget, otherwise poor adaptation of the H.G. Wells novel, which demonstrates poor production values, laughable special effects, dubious sets, wooden acting, and uninspired directing.

Most of the film seems to consist of pointless rambling exposition by either Gatiss (Cavor) or Kinnear (Bedford), with none of the inherent charm, drama, or comedy of the original film.

This film is so much worst than the 1964 classic starring Lionel Jeffries that I'd recommend that you find a copy of that version instead of wasting your time with this one, which is merely another example of something the entire movie industry should learn about remakes:

'If you can't make it better, Don't make it at all.'

I never read the book but this is vastly different than the original movie. I didn't notice that it was made for TV until now but that explains the extremely low budget. Even with a low budget, the special effects were better than in the original. The story itself though is equally bad. At one point a guy dreams that he is in a silent movie and it's very bizarre. It's clearly just an excuse to shoehorn Reece Shearsmith and Steve Pemberton into the movie. The end doesn't even make any sense. Mark Gatiss does have an interesting take on the story though. This is definitely worth watching if you have seen the original movie, just to see that time couldn't make it any better.

Because this is a remake of the 1964 film of the same title, that one had Edward Judd and Lionel Jeffries, both passed away now, this one has Rory Kinnear and Mark Gatiss in the same roles.

Its pretty much similar to the original, but with a newer look, the scenery on Earth (Hertfordshire) is not as good, but the acting is well up there, both actors bouncing off each other to make a better performance.

Again its the original HG Wells story that creates the quality. The special effects are better than the original but the images are a bit harsher, but nevertheless a good film, I would say that the original is slightly better than this but not much, I give this an 8, same as I did for the original, but this is an 8.0 where the original would have been an 8.5. Its that close, making this a successful re-make.

If you're expecting an action-packed movie of aliens vs. humans like the Alien franchise or the Predator franchise then forget about watching this. This is a family-friendly movie to watch with the family during a lazy afternoon. It was relatively loyal to the novel written by H. G. Wells. It discusses the dangers of imperialism and greed of the era and the pursuit of knowledge at any cost.

You have to give credit to Mark Gatiss who despite being in an obviously low-budget movie is able to entertain the viewer. I'm not too familiar with Rory Kinnear's work except that he played a great villain in iBoy and I like his work on the Bond franchise, but he played a great role in this movie too.

I have seen Sci-fi movies that have made me nauseous to watch them. However, this movie I believe paid a genuine homage to the 1950-60's science fiction movies. The one thing that I didn't like was the alien's appearance, which was a bit weak and could have used a bit more work.