User reviews

Visually, the special effects, the set itself, and overall film quality was pretty good on what I assume was probably quite a small budget.

In terms of physics I was far less convinced. The finale was wholly unconvincing and impossible, and it was amusing that the diagrams of the trajectory of slingshots were really passbys that would have added little momentum; and then the pointless burn; and that the sun seemed to be completely absent in any calculations or diagrams! Well, you can suspend disbelief, so it wasn't too much of a distraction.

However the writing about the state of mind of the astronaut wasn't very convincing at all, and neither were his decisions at the end of the film. Physically in terms of his body, his hair, his clothes there were no changes or deterioration over what we're to believe is three years. Psychologically there wasn't much in the way of change either. In short I didn't believe this man spent three years in a tiny tin can.

In the end I'd say this is a wholly worthy effort - it isn't dreadful or anything, and I didn't burst out laughing or shout at the screen. But in the end I was unconvinced, and insight into the human condition seems lacking. But I'll be interested to see what he does next.

An American sci-fi adventure. A story about an astronaut who has to make a three-year journey home to Earth, cutting short the first manned mission to explore the moons of Jupiter. This is a low-budget film that aims to create the sense of isolation, boredom, and mental wellbeing of an astronaut on a deep space mission on a theme about solitude; it produces a modicum of intrigue. To a degree it succeeds, but it dwells too much on the boredom of the astronaut with too many blank frames and scenes that feel like overkill. In fact, the inaction draws attention to some inaccuracies and inconsistencies of the staging, like the space capsule design and the conditions of habitation. Khary Payton does a reasonably good job portraying a man near breaking point, but the other performances are not so inspiring; the astronauts did not seem to be the type of personalities for deep space endurance; the contrast between the two personalities was not done with much subtlety, and the ground staff didn't seem to match up to the professionalism we might expect of highly technical aeronautical flight direction staff. Although the story is thought-provoking, it leaves some unanswered questions, and it ends with a weak excuse for a plot twist. But there is a spectacular scene showing Venus's atmosphere, and the sound effects and music add a lot to the story's mood and tone.

Watch this only if you have 90 minutes to kill, and nothing better to do than watch a free Amazon Prime movie. That alone should be a warning to you.

It's a fair attempt on an oft repeated theme, but the plot is so full of holes that you really don't want to think about it too hard.

After about 1/2 hour boredom set in and I found myself counting down to whatever 'surprise' conclusion was in store.

I liked the 1201 & 1202 alarms at the beginning (you have to watch closely) - a nice tribute to Apollo 11.

Otherwise it's very forgettable.

I don't want to put down the Star Trek genre, and anyone who is honest doesn't consider Star Wars true science fiction.

However, I want to say that it is truly wonderful to come across a movie like this that shows that "Sci-Fi" is not code for "Space Horror".

This movie is truly what science fiction should be. And exploration of the human condition in extraordinary circumstances of advanced technology.

Some may find this movie slow, but I thought it was beautiful. It is an excellent study of the human being in extraordinary circumstances, and one who retains his humanity. Movies like this are rare gems. It was a pleasure to see it and think about it. If you truly love real science fiction, then this is the movie for you.

Here's another movie you've seen before - if you're old enough to remember every iteration of the Robinson Crusoe mythology, or went to a high school film class. From Mr. Robinson Crusoe to Cast Away, and Robinson Crusoe on Mars, as well as 2001 and Silent Running, this story has been told many times before.

The plot? In a nutshell, isolated astronaut goes nuts. On the plus side, Khary Payton does an acceptable job of on-camera work. On the other hand, his voice-overs could use work. In the end, it's an OK movie for a hangover, since it's intellectually and emotionally undemanding. On the other hand, you could turn the channel to a bass fishing show.

ASTRONAUT: THE LAST PUSH is a semi-realistic science fiction drama about an astronaut who, after an accident, is left alone in space to make a three year journey back to Earth in real time. The viewer is given access to his mind and mental wellbeing through a series of voice overs and video logs as he receives messages from well-wishers and his superiors back on Earth...

Story isn't the strong point of this film, but it does get across the boredom of space travel because ASRONAUT: THE LAST PUSH is a very boring film. Very little happens in terms of plotting and some pretty CGI visuals of spaceships and the like aren't going to distract us from the obvious flaws and limitations of the budget.

The only thing this has going for it is the acting of Khary Payton, who plays the main astronaut. He underplays it for the most part and does a pretty good job as a man just bored of his whole existence. Things only get dramatic in the last stages, but it's a long, long journey until then and a couple of tacked-on scenes of Lance Henriksen sitting in front of a green screen don't really help.

One small (cryo-)sleep for a man, one giant yawn for mankind.

Drab, boring, depressing and completely pointless. It barely had anything to do with space flight/exploration; it might as well have been set in a prison, where a long-serving inmate very laboriously comes to an insignificant conclusion.

Just say no to this turkey.

No. This film does not suck. It. Does. Not. Suck. Trust me. It's thoughtful, well acted, well written. And if you think it's boring, I implore you to never ever watch any Godard film, and to unfriend anyone who asks you to see one. Like "Alphaville".

That being said, no. This film isn't genius, or "2001", or even "Forbidden Planet". It's not a classic. It's introspective, yes, but it's not "deep" (I reserve that for something like Dostoevsky, which this isn't). But that's okay. Minor art is still art.

And I'm sorry, to all those who said that the ending is "illogical": You're wrong. Dead wrong. Given the main character's thoughts, it fits perfectly into what was foreshadowed in the plot.

Finally, ANY movie that includes T. S. Elliot in an important scene in an intelligent way is one that at least deserves a look.

Honestly, I don't understand why people who like the typical Hollywood film, or the typical Sundance film, or even the typical Cannes film (these days) bother watching movies like this and insisting on writing negative reviews. Obviously, movies such as this one won't appeal to their esthetic, or even their idea of what "narrative" means. And by doing so, they unfairly distort the perception of the film, discounting or ignoring its potential merits.

This is a low-budget sci-fi film that tries to play with the big boys and falls short. The story about an aborted space exploration of a moon of Jupiter is an interesting premise, but what we really get is a pretty boring mess. The lead actor tries to take a leaden script and bring it to life; but it is dead on arrival. There is little tension in the film, and the ideas you can come up with for filming in one room for over an hour are quite limited. Outside of the first ten minutes, there is no action. The "surprise" ending is idiotic. To be viewed only by the most addicted space film addicts.

I like this kind of movie, even those with low budget, they are often good ideas, and the acting, if is good, make you forget the money. I've seen a lot of Space movies, in fact i think almost all to 60's to now. Here we've got a film with no budget. You can see it in EVERY scene. Except for the exteriors, made in CGI. We have here one and only one room, or you can see it's fake, with ordinary light (just add some science-fiction sound effects). In "MOON" there one set of room, but it was far better used. They even use some Sparklers light in one (bad) shaky scene... The camera man fast move the camera, in one the worst 'tragic' scene i've ever seen.. It's was bad...

The actor has one expression, and only one. he is not bad, but not good too.The scenario is the usual, nothing new, pale copy of many film. With a unnecessary ending. Here, there is no problem of food, water, oxygen, Dumb, very dumb.

So, this is not a correct movie, all is lazy here, the actor, the scenario, the decor. The film have no budget, you can see every minutes, no budget and no ideas, and, i'm sorry, no talent. It's flat, boring like i rarely seen in sci-fi movie. Cheap,cheap cheap, don't see it !!

This will only really have appeal to fans of the sci-fi genre. And for those people, it has something worthwhile to offer.

There are times that the movie lacks pace and interest, but that's a hard one to get right with this storyline and its confines. The director did the best he could.

The scenario is very realistic and there's plenty of food for thought for those of us who want it.

Personally I love anything to do with space and exploration whether real or fiction. With fiction it should be done intelligently - as this is. If you're not a fan of sci-fi, then I doubt it will have any interest for you. Despite a few minor faults, I liked it and found it interesting.

Ever since the NASA Cooperation with the making of 1968 Movie 2001: A Space Odyssey based on Scientist Arthur C. Clarke's 1951 story "The Sentinel", the advanced (even now 2020) NASA science required to get to Jupiter and return to Earth became common knowledge.

A self learning Artificial Intelligence Computer, to decrease the numbers of crew, and decrease the required Resources of a large crew. Mandatory inclusion of Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics"

Primary, Secondary, Tertiary aerospace, Propulsion and avionics, are and have been a NASA minimum requirement.

Hibernation to minimize the resources (oxygen, water, food, electricity, waste disposal and recycling) required.

Nuclear Impulse engines, to attain near light speed, without having to have lots of fuel, as huge spacecraft fuel tanks, that would make the construction costs too expensive for anybody any Nation. 1982 Novel 2010: Odyssey Two as 1984 Movie 2010: The Year We Make Contact has a Multi National Funded spacecraft going to find out what happened to the U.S.S. (United States Spacecraft) Discovery One and Crew in orbit Jupiter.

Artificial Man Made Gravity. The requirement not as depicted, as that design is only for a shorter distance and time of flight Earth To Mars Spacecraft. Not enough space for Resources, and radiation shielding for that amount of time.

Hey anyone that goes up in a ship today is taking a chance.You must put your trust in hundreds of other people.The building of the craft the mission planners,the ground tech's.Understand this the first-week you go up everyone is excited but what happens after your novelty wears off.You may as well be another piece of floating space junk.On a 3 year mission I would try to come home a hero but honestly Who can tell us what happens to brain function after 12 months.Its a film that allows you to look at yourself and ask the Question I'm i strong enough to overcome simply being alone.We all know that in our nations prison system being alone is the Ultra punishment.Imagine grown up adults afraid to be alone......What are we cowards.

The first 45 was just the same thing happening over and over. The camera shots were amateur and the editing was sloppy

Perhaps the most boring low budget Sci-Fi trek film ever. Basically nothing happens here. A couple of guys sitting in a room talking to themselves or having a poop. You actually are forced to edure this nonsense for 90 minutes. No story. No action. No special effects. Be fascinated watching an astronaut brush his teeth. Be amazed at an astronaut discussing how he poops in space on a zero gravity toilet. You can literally go mad watching the mundane tedium that is this mess made with a 500 dollar budget. You can fast firward this film and it still feels like it's in slow motion. God this is painful. But I digress. Avoid this garbage.

No megazillion budget. No zombies. No stupid romantic couples. No bathroom jokes. No unbelievable monsters, situations, technologies. No ultra stars. No social commentary.

No problem!

And still this is pretty darn good film.

OK, it is a retelling of Robinson Crusoe and deals with human loneliness and the price we as humans have to pay for exploration, but it was a well made film, with a good actor and a character one roots for and wishes a g and save trip home.

Probably it will appeal mostly to science fiction fans, but I would recommend it.

Worst movie ever........................... Worst movie ever........................... Worst movie ever...........................

Why? Because, nearly everything is wrong! Physics, script, directed poorly, actors are poor (partly because of the poor direction). There is not much else to tell you. I can only wonder what kind of people would like this miserably poor film.. Over and out.

Not for everyone and not for every occasion. If you're looking for action, save this for later. If you want to see a realistic take on space exploration and its mental implications, it's time to watch this.

Realism is the keyword for this film. It doesn't try to convince the viewers with effects or stunts but rather in the way that you could for a brief while really feel you're in space. The director, Eric Hayden's father has been working on the Galileo probe that went to Jupiter which probably had its contribution to this film's script. The whole design of the ship and the mission is very realistic and it'd be quite close to the actual way we would go to Europa if we ever would.

Without going into spoilers, there is another level going on in the film. More human. Again the characters are realistic and they act like a well trained astronauts would. But as the events unfold, the mental evolution of the main character becomes analogous with the craft's journey both in space and fate.

There's a hint of third level on the movie which probably means I have to watch this movie again. It's not just the craft or the man inside who's making the journey but us, as human beings collectively.