Simply Perfect

Nice effects though.

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

The 2017 United States Presidential election will be remembered as one of the most controversial in history.Very few saw it coming... the dawn of a completely new era...This film will be an instrumental segue for the new generation... from industrialization to the age of information...It's been inching its way in... first it was ridiculed, silenced with money... and now, the turn in history.I see the historical value of this film and truly appreciate it. I also embrace its excellent portrayal of man's passion to improve the world.Thank you.Helene Shaw (aka Madeleine de Vercheres) Victoria BC CanadaFeb. 26/2007

Sure enough Eugene Cernan did a very unique thing...but mainly for himself: Let's be honest: He didn't exactly make headlines the way Armstrong did. Nor did he invent a cure to cancer. Of course space travel has it's romantic side and during 'Last Man on the Moon' there's plenty of impressive footage from the Apollo program (and some less impressive home video's from Cernan's personal collection with endless narration). This documentary however claims to be centered around Cernan, and I expected the same character study as the one I once saw of Neill Armstrong, a recluse who simply couldn't cope with the fame and a very interesting man. Cernan however seemed to have embraced fame a bit too eagerly thus loosing himself in his ego: He still travels across the globe to tell his story to anyone who cares and in my case: to someone who stopped caring halfway the documentary. There was so much 'hero talk' by Cernan himself it became a bit annoying. That's when I just wanted to watch more impressive NASA footage. Alas, I was treated to more Cernan talking and less Cernan 'moonwalking'. Just watch any NASA sponsored IMAX 3D docu and you'll be way more impressed.

I've been a space junkie since 1968, even applied to be an astronaut--I've seen just about every documentary on the space program and read many books. I was really impressed by the way this documentary was produced. Cernan comes across as a genuine, no-nonsense, sensitive, big- perspective kind of guy. The footage montage is creative, not staid, and it doesn't dominate the documentary. The photography is excellent. I saw this as the best visual story of an astronaut, not just a moon-walker--or even the last moon-walker--that is available right now. Every person under 50 should watch this--especially the youngsters.

One of the big reasons that NASA got their funding cut is that they never took full advantage of their own exclusive access to stunning space visuals to engage the American public, and keep them engaged. Sadly, like most inferior documentaries, "The Last Man on the Moon" relies far much too much on "talking heads," and it contains only a miserly few minutes of actual footage of Moon or even actual space exploration. I couldn't stand any more close-ups of old guys reminiscing about the good old days. I wanted to see more action footage of what they astronauts did, not hear about it. Also, the mawkish, nauseating sentimentality of pic forced me to turn it off fifteen minutes before it was over. MEMO TO THE PRODUCERS: HELLO?! IT'S A MOTION PICTURE! DON'T JUST TELL US. SHOW US!**You turned what could have been a spectacular visual odyssey into a saccharine soap opera. I couldn't care less what became of Mr. Cernan's marriage. I know that the astronauts were heroic, but you deprived us all of much of the priceless visual footage available showing exactly what made them heroes. You failed to exploit what must be an untapped veritable treasure chest of unseen space travel footage at NASA, and relied instead on the cliché of talking heads for filler. Boring.NASA has always been clueless about the value of providing comprehensive visuals to the public. We the public want to see NASA's stellar accomplishments. Had they understood the political and economic realities of governmental funding, NASA from the get-go would have created an entire division devoted exclusively to producing space exploration films for schools, TV, theaters, and yes, even for Congress, using breathtaking space exploration footage. This would have kept the program literally in the public eye with spectacular visuals of our nation's bold adventures, and it would doubtless have excited public support and fully justified with nonverbal eloquence the need for space exploration. Most people don't understand or care about tech-talk, but they fully appreciate breathtaking photos and true adventure motion pictures. NASA had a monopoly on the space exploration genre, but sat on the images instead of sharing them, say, in creating an ongoing series visually chronicling the heroic exploits of our space programs. No documentary has never have been successful relying on talking heads. It's a lazy, artless way to pad a treatment of an otherwise interesting and film-worthy idea. Walt Disney understood this and executed his timeless visual masterpieces in his marvelous "Disneyland" TV nature documentaries and theater productions as far back as the 1950s! Walt didn't lecture us; he showed us in stunning 35mm color motion pictures. You know, like NASA should have been dong for decades.In short, producers, YOU FAILED TO MAKE SPACE TRAVEL ITSELF THE STAR. Cosmically disappointing, and infinitely boring and overripe.**For an example of what I'm writing about, see my short nature documentary "The Underwater Wildlife of Big Sur" that I personally shot and produced at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtN0QCi2G2M