When you see a movie like Moontrap, then look at the date it was made, you gotta wonder sometimes if some movies aren't just holdovers from years and years gone by when they might have actually been good. Coming out in the late 80's, Moontrap smacks of a bad 50's sci fi movie.
Moontrap stars Walter Koenig from Star Trek (How do I know, cause it says so right on the box!) as an astronaut who on his way home from the moon in a shuttle comes arcoss a large and ancient space ship that holds a cybornetic creature onboard who sneaks onto the shuttle and gets taken back to Earth where we find it's a resourceful little brat and begins scavenging for whatever metal he can find and attacks the technictions and other Astronauts. After the creature is defeated, a mission is put together with Koenig and....Bruce Campbell (of course) to investigate the remains of the ship and potentially kill any other hostiles they come across.
Now, I'm not a man of science but I can put together some pretty glaring holes in logic and even physics that this movie glosses over. The creature even though it's put together from various pieces of utincils, computer parts and other common everyday Earth metals is able to survive ludicrous amounts of gunfire before Koenig busts some shotgun caps in it's head and downs the creature. I'm pretty sure handguns can shoot through computer casings and help stop this creature. Later in space, Koenig is armed with an uzi. I'm almost positive that you need oxygen for the chemical reaction for firing bullets not to mention the uzi has one of those bottomless magazines that you never see anyone change clips. Where the movie has action, it distracts you by being dumb. I know that the "realism" of doing something like changing clips even in one of my favorite dumb movies Commando is ignored, but I think we all know that those puny uzi's would need SOME kind of change after 100 bullets.
I know that this is supposed to be a "B" movie and it could be "meant" to be bad, but that wouldn't bug me so much if the movie was taking things as serious as it does. The feeling I got was that the movie made a 180, it went so far out to be corny and goofy that it went back on itself and started acting serious again after it's lameness set in. No I've seen worse movies but this reaches so bad it's only worth watching once. Koenigs other appearance in 89 was much better, that movie? STAR TREK V! Yes, what is seen as the worst Trek movie (not to me but I'm in the minority) is BETTER then this.
Born in Wausau Wisconsin. Move at an early age to Ventura California and lived for 8 years. Growing up in a big city landscape didn't prepare me for my next move: Archbold Ohio with a population of … more
Consider the Source
Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.