An artist fails a test and is required to direct traffic in New York City's Holland Tunnel. He winds up falling in love with a beautiful woman, after he takes a trip to the moon on a Lunar C... Read allAn artist fails a test and is required to direct traffic in New York City's Holland Tunnel. He winds up falling in love with a beautiful woman, after he takes a trip to the moon on a Lunar Cruiser.An artist fails a test and is required to direct traffic in New York City's Holland Tunnel. He winds up falling in love with a beautiful woman, after he takes a trip to the moon on a Lunar Cruiser.
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I had wanted to see this movie for years, but until just recently it was next to impossible to see, never getting an official release. But it finally popped on TV, and I made sure to record and watch it. After seeing it, I can only say, "Strange... very strange..." Note that I didn't say it's an *awful* movie. The production design is very good, managing to capture the look and feel of movies made forty or so years earlier. And it's so offbeat that you can't help but be curious enough to stick with it in order to see how things will work out. But the problem is that the movie concentrates more on being strange than working to have strong characters and a solid story. Eventually I got somewhat tired of the movie. But if you are a fan of strange major Hollywood studio movies, it is definitely a must see. And it's unlikely a movie like this would get made today by a major Hollywood studio, so you might want to grab the chance to see this rarity.
Many films which are hard/possible to see/find are more interesting in the stuff you hear about them. The actual film is a letdown.
Not so here.
This film (which stars people who I know, from the lead, on) is really quite good.
First, unlike the others who've commented, I'm not one who acts like viewing it is akin to attaining a 'power-up', or such from a video game, and in that beir, alone is worth seeing. The entertainment business if my bread and butter (who I am is irrelevant. Don't try to figure out from my name).
Saying this, even though I'm not impossibly old , I think the business has fine siren the toilet in the past couple of decades - how, why, I'm not here to discuss that, either - and I find watching films made from the beginning (yes, currently I'm studying early films), up to the early 80's is my forte.
I can't stand any films made based upon comic books (though I DO read and enjoy - primarily Neil Gaiman), or that are mostly dpendent upon effects.
The route of films I miss are adult oriented (not porn. Think anything from a Douglas Sirk, a Marcel Ophuls, etc)- they have a story, emotion, gravitas.
I'm a grown-up, and I want to be emotionally touched and moved - bit by whizz-bang b.s.
That sort of brings me back to why I really admire this film.
Yes, it is a gimmick, in that is a very good... recreation of a 1930-40's film (it includes hundreds of clips - primarily used as establishing shots - from genuine films of that period, and I think that to get clearance in them all is the rain it's not seen). There's several moments I even had to hit myself (metaphorically) to 'wake up', and realise I'm not watching a film from back then.
From the opening - a pre-code MGM logo - the fun really plays with you, time-wise. I never saw more than a tiny bit of Woody Allen's Zelig (made around this time), which also plays with tune (he is 'inserted'into old film, and remember; this was before digital effects, the end-result was really amazing looking. Same here).
The film's story you can read about anywhere. I'm amazed at how I was repeatedly 'lost' as to what I was watching ('wait; is this an old 40's film?'), and had to pinch myself.
If you can see it, do so.
Not so here.
This film (which stars people who I know, from the lead, on) is really quite good.
First, unlike the others who've commented, I'm not one who acts like viewing it is akin to attaining a 'power-up', or such from a video game, and in that beir, alone is worth seeing. The entertainment business if my bread and butter (who I am is irrelevant. Don't try to figure out from my name).
Saying this, even though I'm not impossibly old , I think the business has fine siren the toilet in the past couple of decades - how, why, I'm not here to discuss that, either - and I find watching films made from the beginning (yes, currently I'm studying early films), up to the early 80's is my forte.
I can't stand any films made based upon comic books (though I DO read and enjoy - primarily Neil Gaiman), or that are mostly dpendent upon effects.
The route of films I miss are adult oriented (not porn. Think anything from a Douglas Sirk, a Marcel Ophuls, etc)- they have a story, emotion, gravitas.
I'm a grown-up, and I want to be emotionally touched and moved - bit by whizz-bang b.s.
That sort of brings me back to why I really admire this film.
Yes, it is a gimmick, in that is a very good... recreation of a 1930-40's film (it includes hundreds of clips - primarily used as establishing shots - from genuine films of that period, and I think that to get clearance in them all is the rain it's not seen). There's several moments I even had to hit myself (metaphorically) to 'wake up', and realise I'm not watching a film from back then.
From the opening - a pre-code MGM logo - the fun really plays with you, time-wise. I never saw more than a tiny bit of Woody Allen's Zelig (made around this time), which also plays with tune (he is 'inserted'into old film, and remember; this was before digital effects, the end-result was really amazing looking. Same here).
The film's story you can read about anywhere. I'm amazed at how I was repeatedly 'lost' as to what I was watching ('wait; is this an old 40's film?'), and had to pinch myself.
If you can see it, do so.
A truly bizarre film, but all the more entertaining because of it. Starts off in the style of a 1930s science fiction, and just seems to get stranger and stranger. I particularly liked the guided tour of the lunar surface for the paying tourists who laughed when their guide made a comment on the crashed Soviet probe she drew their attention to. The idea of native "moon people" (who look like native Hawaiians), also being another nice touch. Obviously, there was a very creative mind at work here.
This movie shares some similarities with Terry Gilliam's "Brazil". The mixing of 1930's and 1980's, the totalitarian state that pretends to be caring, a mix of freaky supporting characters and subtext behind every shot and concept. But Nothing Lasts Forever is lighter and more optimistic in tone and a modern (ish) fairy tale of searching for one's talent and purpose. The concepts of the Manhattan Port Authority taking control of New York, underground Angels, going shopping on the Moon in a bus and Bauhaus German techno artists in a mock 30's setting all show great creativity and originality; often missing in a lot of American comedies. And it also works the soundtrack (a mix of original and classical music) into the story extremely well.
10barfly99
It is rare that you find a film that is truly unique, but NOTHING LASTS FOREVER is one of those films. It looks at times like a 'thirties romance, at others like a 'fifties B-movie, but plays like neither. Clever, witty dialogue is spiced up with pretty songs, and Zach Galligan is surprisingly likeable as the aspiring artist in a surreal New York. Although in many ways a slight and insubstantial film, its gentle, off-the-wall charm makes it a quite unforgettable viewing experience. After all, how many other films have you seen recently featuring an Hawaiian dance routine set on the moon?
Did you know
- TriviaProduced in 1982, the film was shelved by MGM after poor reception at advance screenings. It's had rare airings on European television, and later aired on American TV. Its most recent airing was January 2015, as part of Turner Classic Movies' TCM Underground (2006) series.
- GoofsAfter the bus changes its destination sign to "The Moon", in the next shot when it starts to drive off, the sign has reverted back to "New York City".
- Quotes
Eddie Fisher: How the hell did I wind up singing on a bus to the moon?
Alphacruiser Steward: Musta been all them women, Mr. Fisher.
- Alternate versionsOne print of the film omits the nude scene at the Port Authority Testing Center. However, this same print does contain two scenes that MGM forced the director to remove from the final film:
- 1. An extension of the opening newsreel, in which narrator Paul Frees announces that the state of California has been destroyed in an earthquake.
- 2. After speaking with the Swedish architect in the train, Adam runs to the window and says "I hereby end my staying here for my return to the United States. I pray to God, the Buddha, James Joyce, Ramakrishna and Jesus the Christ that I will become an artist, no matter what."
- ConnectionsFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 Movies That Are Incredibly Hard to Find (2018)
- How long is Nothing Lasts Forever?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $3,000,000 (estimated)
- Runtime1 hour 22 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content