Moonfall

By Jonah Naplan

February 4, 2022

I’m not entirely sure what I think of Roland Emmerich’s newest disaster movie, “Moonfall.” It’s fun to an extent, occasionally boring, and has plotlines so thin and inane that I wondered at times whether or not I could have been doing anything more worthwhile instead of sitting in that theater. All I expect from a decent disaster movie is realistic special effects, acceptable characters, and enough fun to pass the two hours. That’s the golden trio. That’s all I expect and all I need. Why must a disaster movie go above and beyond? It shouldn’t have to. But to my dismay, “Moonfall” only checks about one of those boxes.

It’s difficult for me not to compare “Moonfall” to “Independence Day,” another film by Emmerich. “Independence Day” may have been a solid twenty minutes longer than “Moonfall,” but it was about seven times more fun. The film had charming characters, thrilling action, and most importantly, it wasn’t a chore to sit through. Yes, this year has already provided us with such a disaster film that’s best described as a chore. And it’s only February. I never thought that “chore” would ever be a proper word choice to describe a movie in the usually fun disaster genre, but yet, here we are. I guess that’s just 2022 for you.

The big problem with “Moonfall” is that Roland Emmerich seems much more interested in the scenes involving the humans, rather than pleasing the audience with the expected “Boom!” sound effects and the destruction of Earth. Obviously, you couldn’t make an entire sufficient movie with just mayhem, as there needs to be some real substance to it. But Emmerich oddly chooses to pad his runtime with many more human plotlines than I found myself to be comfortable with, let alone invested in. In other words, there was not enough “disaster” in this disaster movie.

As for the plot, we kind of understand that Brian Harper (Patrick Wilson) formerly worked for NASA but they aren’t currently on speaking terms. He has a recently convicted son, (Charlie Plummer) who he clearly has a faded relationship with, and it’s obvious that Brian hasn’t been the same man in many years. He has a former partner played by Halle Berry, and he sort of has a connection with Michael Pena, and kind of, somehow, maybe is somewhat attached to a Donald Sutherland character who was only in one scene for marketing purposes. 

As you can see, none of the plotlines really stood out to me in any way, as when they all occurred, I was distracted, just anxiously waiting for the fun action scenes. I left the movie utterly disappointed.

I realized going in that “Moonfall” would be dumb. I had low expectations, and just hoped to have a good time. It is a big blockbuster afterall. Unfortunately, “Moonfall” isn’t that fun. Partly because of the aforementioned human plotlines, but also because so much of the film’s structure is clunky. Like I said, it’s a bore at times, and goes on for way too long. Why is it necessary for the audience to sit through another Halle Berry monologue, when we could be watching New York be blown to smithereens? Why should we buy into the insanity of this plot? And why should we even care? All of these are unclear.

Almost everything about “Moonfall” isn’t enough. It isn’t amusing enough. The explosions aren’t thrilling enough. And John Bradley as K.C. isn’t quite charming enough. I would rather stare at a wall for an hour than watch more scenes of these undeveloped characters bickering back and forth. None of them are charismatic, so we can’t root for anyone.

The over-dramatic performances get tiring after a while, the cinematography is choppy and aggressive, and the attempts at humor fall almost entirely flat. Even though nothing in this movie was intended to be realistic, each character doesn’t feel like a real person, as they probably should. 2020’s “Greenland,” for example, was a significantly better disaster movie, because it wisely spent its time developing its characters, so when the stressors of the disaster hit, we cared about the outcome. My theater didn’t seem to be enjoying or having that much fun with the movie either. As the film ended, we all just kind of silently shuffled out of the theater. It left no impact.

I won’t spoil the third act of this movie, but it gives the audience a bizarre twist that feels oddly reminiscent of better movies. I think only perspective will tell whether or not it makes sense. However, when I think about it, the pieces of the new revelation do fit together correctly, but the logistics of it all are incompetent. It makes you wonder what it all meant, and why we had to sit through that entire two-hour movie just to get to the point.

A better movie would have had more engaging action sequences, whilst cleverly intertwining manageable human moments. Therefore, when certain characters die, we care. When a plot device is put in the wrong hands, we care. And when it seems that all hope is lost for Earth, we care. At the bare minimum, a disaster movie must contain at least one of those “care-driven” plot threads, but when Roland Emmerich filled out a plot organizer for “Moonfall,” he must have gone with D, “None of the Above.”

However, if you still feel so inclined to see “Moonfall,” I would like to give some advice. Don’t. But rather go outside at around 6-7 pm, and look up at the night sky. I’m near positive that the sights you’ll find will be far more wondrous and eye-opening than anything “Moonfall” could ever have to offer. The world around us is already crazy and fascinating enough. And we don’t need Halle Berry to give us a dramatic reminder.