The moon landing is arguably the single greatest achievement in all of human history. And, these days, Hollywood seems to be running out of ideas.
So why have we never seen a movie explicitly about the moon landing? Why is there still no sign of such a film being in production to this day?
Capeshits galore but still no moon landing movie. Why?
>>70870282
Funny thing.
It'd be cheaper to go to the moon again than to make another capeshit movie.
>Why?
The sad fact is there's really nothing there for humanity. Same goes for Mars. The best we can do is use those places to test out technology and develop it so we can do mining on ore rich celestial bodies and make O'Neill Cylinders to live on in the far future.
The moon landing itself was a movie. No point in making another, although I guess it is inevitable with all these remakes. But I guess the government is going to actually make it a Mars Landing this time
>>70870509
>It'd be cheaper to go to the moon again than to make another capeshit movie.
It was pretty uneventful. There were no complications, fucking everyone knows the outcome. There's nothing interesting on the moon. They already did Apollo 13. Ironically that's a way more interesting story
>>70870547
>>70870509
I think the reason they haven't/can't/won't make a moon landing movie might just be because they are afraid of what might happen -- they realize that if they made a moon landing movie, and it looked better than the actual moon landing footage, people would see that, and begin to question said footage. If they can fake it now, for how long could they have been able to fake it?
>>70870578
I see you've not been keeping up with space shit in >>>/sci/ we are going to Mars in the next 15 years or so.
>So why have we never seen a movie explicitly about the moon landing?
Apollo 18
>>70870647
You are an idiot.
>>70870282
They don't want to expose how easily faked a moon landing is. 'The moon landing' is a NASA exclusive and must remain so for propaganda reasons.
>>70870668
>Apollo 18
>Apollo 18 is a 2011 American-Canadian science fiction horror film
>>70870668
>The Current Year
>people persist in believing NASA's bullshit about space exploration
How long will this persist?
>>70870763
About landing on the moon.
>>70870282
1. Landing on the moon isn't the greatest human achievement.
2. The US never landed on the moon, those pictures were taken in a studio, the US government wants everyone to believe that they went to the moon to come out as a superpower. And they didn't want to stay behind the russians who went to space first. It's all propaganda.
>>70870763
who is this demon
who is coming for my semen
>>70870826
Well, allow me to clarify. What I meant was why they never made an honest account, a true, accurate portrayal of the greatest event in human history. That means no scifi B.S. allowed because the event was science fact, right? And no horror shit, either.
Why does not such a movie exist? And don't tell me because it's boring -- really? There must be plenty of talented directors in the world with the vision to take such a "boring" event and make a decent film out of it, especially with a millions-of-dollars budget. So why?
>>70870282
But anon they did a movie, Kubrick was the director.
>>70870932
The reason can only be the one already stated in this thread.>>70870669
>>70870647
>>70870547
Will it have an all female crew?
>>70870961
>>70870933
>>70870911
>>70870808
>>70870669
>>70870547
Well I must say I'm surprised how red pilled /tv/ already is. Then again in a certain sense maybe it makes sense that the most avid consumers of propaganda in general would be well aware of how it works? That's supposed to be a compliment, FWIW. How refreshing that some people have an open mind.
>>70870932
Old saying in the pilot community. Good pilots don't have good stories.
>we lifted off
>everything went as expected
>we landed
>everything went as expected
>we lifted off again
>everything went as expected
>we landed on earth
>everything went as expected.
>fin.
>>70870509
It would not be cheaper to go to the moon again because most of the infrastructure would have to be rebuilt, in large part from scratch.
Mars is within the habitable zone of the sun and has water and an atmosphere. It could conceivably be terraformed but that's way too lofty and far off a goal to get funding for.
Mining in space isn't remotely feasible at present. The cost of sending rockets to carry freight across interplanetary distances far outweighs the profit that would be made from any mineral found in quantity on other celestial bodies.
If NASA made it they would lose the film and only show a CAM version (again).
>>70871116
Most, if not all of the costs associated with the original moon landing mission were R&D, prototyping, testing, etc.
>>70871113
That's all well and good for pilots, but I think you're missing one key element which would be important in the astronaut's version of the story:
>we lifted off
>everything went as expected
>we landed
>ON THE FUCKING MOON
>everything went as expected
>we lifted off again
>everything went as expected
>we landed on earth
>everything went as expected.
>fin.
>>70871213
>we landed
>ON THE FUCKING MOON
>as expected, there's nothing here
>oh look, I can block off 99.99999% of humanity with my index finger
>kay, lets go home
>>70870282
you've seen footage of the moon landing haven't you? well there you go. unless you're one of the sheep that actually believes we've landed on the moon....
>>70870932
To be fair, calling Apollo 13 might qualify.even though they don't actually land
>>70870509
I really think you are wrong, they should make some sort of base that would be like foundation for making ultra clean nano CPUs(google about it), building parts of space stations/spaceships on moon would ease a lot of stuff( worst part in sending people to space is liftoff with live people inside, it would be much cheaper to send rockets that dont have to care about frail humans inside).
We need a foothold on moon,factories , labs, hotels etc...
Also, it would change the way engineers think about space travel(without needing to worry about breaking thru atmosphere they could think out of the box for Mars and beyond).
You did read about Space Lift? It's the real thing, probably not in next 100 years (but if whole world would invest into that instead into fighting with sand-people, we could have working ACME 0.10 version in 20 to 30 years)
>>70871586
So close, yet so far.
>>70871116
>Mars
>habitable
>terraformed
Not even in the slightest. You have no clue at all what you are talking about.
>>70871687
>Space Lift
Ignorant idiot.
