User Reviews

Matt Johnson is one of the most inspirational filmmakers today. Although i didn't love his first movie The Dirties, his directing style is really interesting. i liked the dirties but I thought it had a lot of problems. So I thought maybe with a bigger budget he could do a better movie so I was excited for Operation Avalanche. I saw the movie yesterday and I have mixed feelings about it. Some parts are awesome and incredible. Some parts are stupid and boring.

But let's talk first about the good parts. I liked the score and the soundtrack a lot it captured the time period very well. They also captured the sixties feeling in this movie. I was always looking for some time inconsistencies but I couldn't find anything. It had great cinematography some shots were amazing. The improvised scenes in Nasa felt real and genuine. And the scene with Stanley Kubrick was just mind blowing. But by far the best moment in the movie is the car chase near the end of the movie. This was the best car chase scene i've seen since Children of Men it was so amazing and I think it was filmed in one take, which makes it even more impressive.

But sadly the movie had it's negatives. On IMDb it is credited as a Thriller and for a thriller it is really boring. I don't mind slow-paced movies, but some scenes in this movie go on for far to long. It had one scene in the middle of the movie were they used special effects and it just looked fake and laughable. There was a fight scene that you couldn't take seriously, but it was meant to be. And you have the same problem like in all his movies: the acting.

It isn't usual that a movie has so many things it does well but also so many stupid moments. I really hope his next movie will be better because i like Matt Johnson as a person and I think he is very inspirational. I really wanted to love this movie. I can say that i at least liked it better then The Dirties so he has improved.

I would give this movie a 7/10

I've never been a huge fan of found footage movies. Sure there are a few that come to mind where it actually worked in favor of the story being told. But far too often the herky jerky motion of the camera being used works against the storytelling going on. The only times that works to the movies advantage is when it becomes a character in the film, a moving person holding a camera in an attempt to document what is happening with sincerity. Such is the case with OPERATION AVALANCHE.

One of the biggest conspiracy theories out there is the Apollo moon landing. Did we or didn't we land a man on the moon? If not, how was it that we sat enthralled as a nation, as a world, watching the images on TV? How could they have competently pulled this off and not a single person revealed what really happened? Much of that is answered in this film, a faux documentary about how it all took place. In the early sixties the CIA recruited a number of bright and gifted young men graduating in the top of their class from several outstanding universities. This group was put to use coming up with various operations that would put their talents to use.

When it comes up that there might be a Russian mole in the space program at NASA, agent Matt Johnson tries to convince his boss that sending agents in to pose as scientists won't work. He feels they'll be caught due to lack of knowledge. His suggestion instead is to send his team in posing as a documentary film crew shooting for public television. When he's told that no one would let themselves be filmed like this he points out that they've been shooting the discussion since it began. The team gets their chance.

Going to NASA in Houston they meet everyone and explain what they're there to do, at least on the surface. Everyone is willing to help them and be open with them all. Using this to their advantage they plant bugs in nearly every potential area they can which provides them with a possible lead. Rather than allow them to carry on they're told to return and let another team follow up.

Johnson, still ambitious to a fault, wants to be in charge of his own team. The secret they had learned was that NASA doesn't have the ability to land a man on the moon before the end of the decade, the promised time made by JFK in his famous speech. Johnson films a few things on his own and puts forth another potentiality: what if they staged the moon landing. The astronauts would be in on it, playing tapes made and put on the module before they left Earth. All of it would be shot by Johnson and his crew.

The plan is set in motion and they begin looking for ways to accomplish their goals. When location shooting comes up short of delivering believable footage they visit the set of director Stanley Kubrik who is in the process of making his own film that will include footage on the moon, 2001. Again posing as a documentary crew they learn techniques he is using and apply them to their own film.

But as with all good conspiracies it only works with the least amount of people knowing that it took place. Add to the mix the amount of paranoia that those involved would experience and before the movie ends more comes into question than just the moon landing.

I've seen some criticize the shaky hand held look of the film but in this instance I found that to be a plus. These would not be dolly shots and the Steadicam wasn't invented yet. Hand held would have been the way it was shot. The story may leave a bit to be desired but the whole point of the film is a "what if" scenario rather than a here are the facts and we can prove it type film. The acting is not great but then from what I've read a lot of it was improvised, another plus in my book here. What is particularly amazing to me is the look of the film in what is being shown, how they've captured the world of the sixties to perfection. Okay, I've heard there are a few glitches. But most shots of cars, people and cities on display here reek of that time period and fantastically so on the meager budget this film was granted.

Sure the movie will not be for everyone. It's not an action film or a Bond styled thriller from start to finish. But it does tell an interesting story and attempts to put forth the idea that this was what really happened. Is it? I'll leave that for you to decide.

Conspiracy theorists will live it, believers won't.

I'm still torn. I was inspired as a child by the Apollo programme, was laughed at in my face by teachers and classmates for wanting to be an astronaut or work on the space programme. After college my first job was in satellite communications, I worked on writing software for ground stations, as part of that I had to develop simulation software. It had to be good enough to plug into a ground station and mimic perfectly a satellite, or vice versa. The point being nobody would be able to tell the difference between the two.

I talked with some of the rocket engineers about Apollo, when they laughing stopped they'd suggest we got back to work and the real world.

This comes close to what I think they did, we went but the footage is all fake.

I've rated all movies I watch for years now, but this movie compelled me to write my first review. Mainly because of the disturbing amount of reviews of people who just don't seem to understand what they've been watching. Before watching this movie I knew nothing about it, just found it on the new releases on Netflix.

Operation Avalanche is a low-budged retro styled (late sixties) found footage movie by Matt Johnson. Though it is a mystery-thriller movie, it also has elements of a documentary and even some comedy. The film aims to build a realistic, lively background story for the alleged filming of the fake moon landing footage. It incorporates some of the moon landing skeptics' (or conspiracy thinkers) most cherished arguments and theories. Like for instance the link with Stanley Kubrick. The use of stock footage from his sets of 2001: A Space Odyssey was one of my favorite moments in the movie.

From Wikipedia: 'The NASA scenes were shot on location. To get permission, Johnson told them he was making a student documentary. Additional scenes were accomplished through liberal application of newly-permissive fair use laws.' That's what I call brave.

Though I found Johnson's vision wild, yet well established - many have mocked this movie for basically not understanding it. This is not a conspiracy movie. This is not simple entertainment. It's a piece of art, historical poetry - albeit the history of the greatest conspiracy of all. Furthermore the movie uses all cinematographic tricks to warn us of those very same tricks. It distorts reality with realistic looking (historical) footage as a way to educate us on how we could actually be manipulated by films. Even halve a century later.

Some blame the movie for being badly filmed. Or even amateurish. The handling of the camera is some of the best I've ever seen! That car chase scene must surely be one of the best in cinematic history. All in one single shot. The Cinematography by Raab and Apelle is one of the most noteworthy of everything I've seen in the last years. Showing how photographic images can be faked – in mere seconds. Showing us Kubrick's front screen projection technology and its use; just a background scene in this movie. Outstanding! The sets on which the fake moon landing footage is made in the movie are great as well. Everyone knows these classic shots from the original NASA moon landing footage. Lovely to see these shots recreated within the framework of found footage thriller.

The acting, which is said to be the result of improvisation, of the directer himself and a small cast of unknown actors is lively. Standout in the found footage genre I'd say. It doesn't even look like acting, just like actual historical footage.

Conclusion. By far the best and most relevant found footage movie ever made. Entertaining, educational and exciting – especially for those who really like the profession and technology of film making. It is also the best ode to the work of Stanley Kubrick in any film – and mind you, there are many such examples.

Normally the "we faked the moon landings!" conspiracy theory makes my blood boil. That is even more true when people go out and make 'documentaries' trying to prove it to actually be the case. That said, the idea had produced some good fiction in its time including the 1970s conspiracy thriller classic Capricorn One. Added onto that list as well is this film, a indie made period thriller with a neat twist.

That neat twist is that it looks and feels like a documentary being made in the 1960s. Operation Avalanche which claims to be a documentary following a group of CIA recruited filmmakers led by Matt Johnson (playing a fictional 1960s version of himself) whom, upon discovering NASA is behind schedule, convinces his bosses to let him and his team stage the Apollo 11 moon landing. If nothing else, it is a great way to bring to life an old idea.

In fact, it is the documentary style nature of it that is what make this film. Johnson and many of his lead actors are playing fictional versions of themselves and (as the DVD extras reveal) there was a large amount of improvisation of dialogue going on, something which is evident. Evident not in a bad way but in that it means that there is always the sense that these are people in the heat of the moment. The reactions to things are never over the top but range from the comedic to the panicked, all of which are believable as the events taken on an increasingly darker tone.

Yet the film has more going for it than just a good idea. Despite being indie made, the film features some of the finest period production values for a film set in the 1960s that I can recall seeing in recent memory. There are cars, clothes and yes even sets. It is sets that are among the most impressive elements of the film including the construction of the one that represents the Eagle lunar module on the Sea of Tranquility. As a NASA buff, I was impressed by the level of detail put into the film's NASA focused elements right down to recreating moments from a couple of later Apollo landings. It's impressive to say the least.

The highlight of this film though might be in its cinematography and effects. The film has the look and feel of 16mm 1960s film in its look, containing the right amount of grain and an occasional washed out look to it. The camera-work as well plays well with the found footage format but also manages to avoid much of the shakiness that has become an all too frequent part of the genre. Indeed, it is to the credit of the filmmakers that they find just the right balance to make it believable but also not a frustrating (and for some even nausea inducing experience). The effects meanwhile are subtle and impressive, often finding ways to put the actors into real-life NASA footage including an impressive sequence in Mission Control where the footage works brilliantly with the scene playing out. The most impressive sequence of the entire film might well be the CIA filmmakers visit the set of Kubrick's 2001 in the UK complete with Stanley Kubrick himself. It's something that sets this film apart from both many indie films but conspiracy thrillers as well.

All of which makes Operation Avalanche an impressive piece of work. It's an incredibly well made piece of work combining a period film with a thriller plot told in a documentary style. That also helps make the outrageous premise believable, presenting an (on the surface at least) idea of how it might have happened. If you enjoy conspiracy theories or the found footage genre, this is well worth a watch.

Just remember, it ain't real...

Matt Johnson previously directed The Dirties which was shot for less than $10,000, blew away audiences at Sundance and nabbed an exclusive distribution from Kevin Smith's company. I personally was very impressed with the gritty independent style of the film, and it left me wanting more from the filmmakers.

With Operation Avalanche, Johnson is 2 for 2, delivering another solid film through his directorial style and performance. I'm not sure whether the film was shot digitally or on 16mm, but the cinematography throughout the film thoroughly immersed me in that 1960s environment. The other actors, Owen Williams and Josh Boles deliver authentic performances as CIA agents faking the moon landing.

The film's dramatic tension is key here; scenes which are otherwise simple moments in an operation are brought to life by the film's unique staging and editing methods. In terms of historical accuracy, it's obvious that the film is merely faction, that is, taking archive footage of real people working at NASA in the 60s and seamlessly blending them into the narrative while still maintaining many details from the moon landing conspiracies. The script is structured in such a unique way that it's apparent how powerful editing can negate a bigger budget.

Johnson has proved again that he knows the mockumentary format and how to keep a viewer on edge throughout a film. Even though the dialogue in the movie was mostly improvised, it feels completely organic. The film's real strength is in its tension, specifically the car chase at the climax of the film. Its staging and execution solidified it as one of my favorite all time chase scenes in a movie, without a doubt. I can't wait to see what Johnson and co. make next!

I gave it 3 stars for the premise. The acting, directing & writing is horrible. Namely Matt Johnson. He ruined the movie in every way possible. It was like watching a bunch of 12 year olds trying to make a movie in their garage at home. Both on screen & the crew behind the scenes were clueless Jr high school mentality & totally unaware just how clueless they truly are.

IRL, the real moon photos prove the scenes were falsified. I'm an engineer, scientist & photo expert. This movie was just moronic. It made me nauseous to watch these morons. Save your money. This movie has no redeeming qualities. It is so bad, I couldn't bear to watch the deleted scenes.

Capricorn One is much better. Great actors, excellent story & wonderful filmography. Everything this movie is missing. Matt Johnson needs to get out of the film business & never show his face on the screen again, much less write or direct. He bombed out on every aspect he touched. The movie is so bad, it is painful to watch. Even their personal assumptions are clueless on every issue.

This is a subject which is of interest to me. It could have been a good movie if properly written with a good crew, good director & decent actors. All of which this film was missing. These actors weren't just bad. They were offensive with Matt Johnson as the worst. It certainly is no thriller. The reviewer who said it was Bill & Ted meeting Dumb & Dumber hit the nail on the head. The entire crew who created this film were a bunch of clueless morons. You can see this by watching them on the special features if you can tolerate it after suffering through the movie.

Boring, disappointing, moronic, bad acting, bad directing, bad writing, clueless crew and a waste of money.

in case you haven't heard, mankind landed on the moon. several times. internet douches tried to claim it was faked. they were debunked by nasa when they redid a laser light experiment involving equipment left on the moon. by mankind. because so many people are stupid sometimes lame concepts are funded and acted upon. this is one of them. did you even stop to think [ no you didn't because you're looking at reviews of this garbage ] that men didn't land on the moon in 1967? the cia doesn't send 'young' anybody to do anything unless its using copiers or getting coffee? neil armstrong is a very famous astronaut for a reason? the russians were trying and failing to land men on the moon? as a friend said to me today, 'man people are stupid'. he is right. and you are stupid if you watch this movie