User reviews

Initially, this reminded me of one of those stories that might have been written by Enid Blyton and made by the Children's Film Foundation. It's starring children and it's, primarily, for children too. After the death of his father in the lunar mines, "Caleb" (Isaiah Russell-Bailey) is to be shipped to the ultimate "Omega" colony were he is to be fostered in luxury. He's not keen, and when chatting with his three friends they decide to pinch a rover vehicle and go for a joyride outside of their base. They need a code to open the doors though, and that's where "Addison" (Mckenna Grace) comes in - and off they go. At times the rest of this is quite entertaining - the kids get to be kids in space suits with oxygen tanks as propulsion units and foolery ensues. Sadly, though, the writers can't resist and the melodrama soon comes bounding over the crater and sinks the whole thing. It can't quite decide if it's an adventure film or a drama, and sadly falls between both stools. The actors are quite good, and I think had they been left to deliver an action film as they explore the Moon having fun and mishaps along the way, it would have been very much better. As it is, the soft-focus father/son reminiscences just clogged the whole thing up, dragged the pace down and left me a little bit bored. It's watchable though, just not memorable.

I was wondering if there is no friends of the people who were involved in this production. Why is it with a low evaluation. Its 4,7 when I write this.

It its a Disney production with a beautifull coming of age story. There are the elements of drama and comedy and a family like story, that can atract a public of young age and adults.

Some picky adults will complain about some sciency inacuracy in some sequences. But it serves the script.

I am not an English native, so, pardon my mispells or another errors. I could use some translation tools, but I chose not to.

Those were a light almost 90 minutes of leisure.

It's not a bad movie for the whole family, but i think my wife and I enjoyed it more then our ten and twelve year olds as they both were not glued to the tv and both lost interst at different times. I think adults would like a bit more backstory and kids would like it to be a little more fast paced. As a previous reviewer has said, stand by me and goonies on the moon is a pretty good comparison.. but is nice to see disney getting back to the basics..

After the death of his father, a boy growing up on a lunar mining colony takes a trip to explore a legendary crater, along with his four best friends, prior to being permanently relocated to another planet.

I have to admit that I was actually harboring some expectations to this 2023 Disney family sci-fi adventure titled "Crater" from writer John Griffin and director Kyle Patrick Alvarez. Sure, I had never heard about the movie prior to sitting down to watch it, but with it being a Disney movie, then I figured chances were good of it being an enjoyable movie.

Talk about a swing and a miss. I managed to endure close to an hour of the 105 minute runtime that "Crater" ran for, and then I gave up out of sheer and utter boredom. The storyline in "Crater", as written by John Griffin, had the appeal of wet cardboard. It was so difficult to get submerged into the storyline and finding anything to enjoy. And it didn't help one bit that the characters in the movie were every bit as bland and irrelevant as the storyline itself. In fact, my 13 year old son, whom I sat down to watch "Crater" with, he gave up on the movie not even 20 minutes into the ordeal.

I wasn't familiar with the cast ensemble in the movie, but it was a shame that the actors and actresses were literally given nothing worthwhile to work with and to bring to the screen. I am sure that there were some good talents among the cast ensemble, they just didn't get to shine on the screen at the hands of director Kyle Patrick Alvarez.

Visually then "Crater" was good. It being a Disney movie does have its perks, and a proper budget for proper effects is one of those things. And it shows, because the CGI effects and special effects in "Crater" were good, realistic and added something good to the movie. Ultimately, the special effects could only do so much to alleviate for the movie's shortcomings in every other department.

"Crater" came and went without leaving as much as a ripple. And believe you me, when I say that I have zero interest in returning to the movie and attempt finish watching it. I just simply cared nothing about the flaccid and nearly non-existing storyline, nor of the one-dimensional character gallery.

This was a big disappointment of a movie, I have to say that much.

My rating of "Crater" lands on a very generous three out of ten stars.

'Stand By Me' and 'The Goonies' meet on the Moon.

Directed by Kyle Patrick Alvarez, the director of the 2015 movie The Stanford Prison Experiment, this Disney Plus movie is a pleasant spectacle that you can watch with the whole family.

The fact that it takes place on the Moon does not make this movie a Science Fiction movie, so the criticisms made here are very absurd.

A true Coming Of Age/Road movie.

Leading musician/actor Billy Barratt, who has previously met with the audience in 2019's A Christmas Carol and 2019's Responsible Child, has done a good job.

He had already won an Emmy from Haluk Bilginer before.

I am concerned that today's CGI-fed adrenaline crowd is losing appreciation for good story-telling. I find it difficult to believe this film only has a 5.6 average rating as of this posting. Then there's the ever-present attitude-laden 1-star "worst movie ever" ratings, which are nonsense. Fair-notice: In this review I'm gonna de-bunk some of the criticisms. ; )

This is simply good science fiction, not from the standpoint of space battles or giant robots, but from the standpoint of five friends who go through a significant time in their lives.

The characters are diverse and well-acted. The directing is excellent, the script well-written (for the most part), music appropriate. No there aren't any giant space ships or Kaiju here. This is simply a heart warming story about friendship... and the movie has an appropriate ending.

The debunking: We have to remember this story is viewed through the eyes of young teenagers-- not adults-- and the majority of those teens have been raised in an enclosed, very limited environment. Their viewpoint won't be the same as ours. In addition it's a youth movie. It will appeal to many adults as it did to me... but it's still produced as youth entertainment. We shouldn't judge this from a demanding-adult perspective.

"IT'S NOT SCIENCE FICTION". Nonsense. It's about teenagers raised in a mining facility on the Moon, who take a Moon rover across the surface of the Moon, engage in activities that could only occur on the Moon (and would not work on Earth), and face dangers found only on the Moon. That is science fiction. Yes, it is a road-trip coming-of-age film as well, but it is still science fiction. Almost the entire film is set on the MOON, under Moon-specific conditions.

GRAVITY: Many science fiction movies and shows-- whether they mention it or not-- employ the concept of artificial gravity. It was introduced in 1966 with Star Trek (if not earlier) and has continued ever since. So yes... when someone is indoors or in a vehicle, the gravity is different than it is on the surface of the moon. The characters don't need to look at each another and blatantly point out, "Wow, isn't this artificial gravity great?". It's kind of a given. Artificial gravity has become a standard trope of scifi films. So if we see characters exhibiting normal gravity conditions, we just take it for granted artificial gravity is being employed.

"MAGICAL CURE": One user complained about one of the kids with a heart condition "magically cured" when he was in the Rover. No... he was very visibly given his medicine, specifically intended for just that purpose. They did emphasize that same medicine several times during the movie.

"NOT SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE": That is why they call this science fiction... a concept which often stretches and bends science to fit the story. For the purposes of this movie the science was accurate enough. If you're one of those people that absolutely demands 100% scientific accuracy, you might stick to documentaries and avoid science fiction entirely. But a caution: even documentaries probably won't meet your demand of scientific perfection. Science is kind of an ongoing study.

AIRLOCKS: Space vehicles and buildings do not always require airlocks. The Rover was a prime example. Instead of an airlock, the vehicle stores all the internal oxygen in tanks until a vacuum is created, then opens the rear hatch. Once the passengers return, are inside and the hatch closed, the oxygen restoration system is triggered. Same holds true with building entry-ways. Systems of the future aren't all 2001 A Space Odyssey. Even today underwater habitats are entered through an open hole in the floor, and water is kept out by the internal air pressure of the habitat. There's more than one way to enter and exit differing atmospheres and environments than using complex airlock systems.

Etc. Etc.

I give this movie only 7 stars for good reasons: The concept of the kids stealing a rover during a dangerous meteor shower warning, overriding station security during said shutdown, and the destructive display later in the movie (no spoilers)... as if that's all okay. Poor lessons to teach younger viewers. I'm sure they get a kick out of it entertainment-wise, but it would be nice if Disney could figure out less-criminal methods to accomplish their morality plays.

Given the environment those kids were in, they quite likely could have all died and endangered others in the process. Kids do crazy things and do get in trouble, but they also often wind up in confinement afterward for such criminal acts. Teach better lessons, Disney.

Wait, what am I saying? It's Disney; they've been teaching kids bad lessons for years. ; )

It still would be nice to NOT glorify open criminal defiance of essential security measures and willful (and shameful) destruction of property. So only 7 stars.

Despite these drawbacks, the movie was a fun watch, and the overall story well done. I found it entertaining, and the interaction between the characters very-well formed.

I mean i understand that it is not a great movie, but it isn't that bad that it gets only a 5.3 rating. This movie is about a band of friends filled with emotions, have dreams, cares for each other. They really show their bonding all over the movie. And that is what all matters.

The fun little adventure they had, the sudden fear of danger, trying to get out of that danger, all things were written so well. I know it might feel like generic sci-fi movie and it is 100% scientifically accurate. But keep in mind that it wasn't meant for adult viewers. It's a movie for the young ones. Who have dreams and want to have a quality time while watching it.

To anyone reading any bad reviews or wanted to skip this movie because it has a bad rating, don't listen to anyone. Give it a shot. It's worth it.

It's the year 2257. A lunar mining colony is extracting helium for fuel to travel to the ultimate destination Omega. Newly orphaned Caleb (Isaiah Russell-Bailey) gets a spaceship ticket, but must leave his friends behind. He with his three best friends decide to steal a rover to go on a road trip to a crater where his father suggests something important. The boys need an exit code and recruits new Earth arrival Addison Weaver (Mckenna Grace).

This script is on the 2015 Black List. There is some work here, but most of Caleb's personal discovery drama is muddied by the tween sci-fi road trip adventure. I would have preferred a treasure hunt like the Goonies. All the world building may be interesting on the page. It didn't translate on the screen. It's still a fun road trip. As for the ending, it is not good action adventure. I was going to give it a fail for the tonal shift and for the bad logic. It's unlikely that they would place an unconscious Caleb on the rocket ship. Ultimately, I am giving it a pass for its poetry.

This movie had so much potential! Squandered completely squandered moments denied to us by writer and Director. This movie could've gone in so many directions; towards social injustice, toward future and time travel; and many other sci-fi, realms; toward a love story; or just ... anywhere! They took us to the top of the cliff, and left us standing there, saying "You could have! Too bad you didn't try harder!"

Unlike the little engine that could this movie doesn't accomplish anything at all. The main character's conflict is a non-starter. A discussion on what indentured servitude is could have been enlightening to kids about to get first jobs, the audience is there-where's the writing?

This film offers a charming, albeit familiar, adventure that's easy to enjoy but hard to love deeply. The story follows a group of kids on a lunar journey, and while it hits the right notes of friendship and discovery, it doesn't push the boundaries of the genre. The visuals are decent, and the lunar landscapes create a sense of wonder, but the plot doesn't break new ground-it's the kind of story you've seen before. The characters are likable, though some lack the depth that would make their journey truly resonate. There's heart here, and the film's intentions are good, but it never quite reaches the emotional highs it aims for. Crater is a pleasant watch, especially for a younger audience, but it's not a film that will stay with you long after the credits roll.

There is the foundation for some youngsetr-adventure, but this script is either writte4n by an AI, or someone who should be banned from writing scripts.

The basic is, some kiddo wants to go to some crater. What is there? Nothing.

But you know what is everywhere? Oxygen.

Then you have plenty of Talking Faces In A Room. What am I watching - The Asylum? No, The Asylum does this better, because between the talking-in-rooms there are crazy things. Here: just blatant absurdity.

There is no reason why anyone in this film do anything, and what they do shouldn't work. The worldbuilding is the worst I've ever seen. On top of it that's not how physics work. That's not how anything works, really.

Finaly, there is the racism. Every coloured person in this product has disability. This is how Disney tells you, they are lower race, I can't figure out otherwise.

This is just bad. Frighteningly bad. There is no message, theme, any kind of coherency, really. I suspect AI-generated content, how alien this is to me. So deep in uncanny valley, it's absurd. This is why HPL-protagonists go mad.

Too cliched, other movie mash up, not perfect science... its so easy to criticize these sort of films, but no way enough to give a bad rating when the acting is great, story flows well, has a good message, it gives you amazing landscapes/scenery and makes you think a ton about life, love, friendship and existence in such a fun and different way. Good entertainment for kids over 6 up to adults.

I enjoyed it a lot and didn't feel it dragged at all and my two boys of 7 and 11 were glued to it also. I hope disney makes more of these kind of movies that deliver what a family movie should deliver. For a groundbreaking artsy masterpiece movie I would expect something else, but probably wouldn't have such a good family time.

'Crater' works, I enjoyed it.

It's nothing out of this world (...), though what Kyle Patrick Alvarez & Co. Managed to create here does the job, in my eyes anyway. A decent plot is held together well by good acting, solid music and serviceable effects. There are naturally some issues, most notably the arguments between the characters are a bit forced/overly dramatic. Still, it comes together nicely and I found the ending to be rather sweet.

A shame that Disney quickly removed this from their Plus streaming service, seemingly through no fault of the film itself - it merits way more eyes on it.

No story, no adventure, no humor, no chemistry, and no sci-fi. Just copy and paste dialogue from one dimensional children in what is essentially a car ride to a lunar movie projector while discovering insurance fraud. With all the typical bleak, hollow future tropes that has become Disney's hallmark of late. Skip this mess and watch The Swiss Family Robinson or In Search of the Castaways and try to remember when movies were good. Since there's a mandatory character number for reviews and there's nothing left to say about this "film", here's some random words...pedantic, puerile, pathetic, putrid.

When you find Disney Sci-Fi movie you would expect something great or at least good, well flash news it's not, no logic, no physics, no script, still it is a well made visuals.

And if you're looking for Sci-Fi good news, disney gave you up to 5 clips that has a Sci-Fi things, they're literally using a paper map, if they just used google maps it'd be much better.

They kept mentioning a planet called Omega, and in the end it was just another earth, no sci-fi again

It's literally an unwhatchable movie, disney if you just brought a video of two monkeys in the zoo and gave them some voice over it'll be much better.

I gave the movie one star just because i couldn't find the -1 star button.

There is no reason why they did that or that or anything at all.

And i thought bee movie is a trash, don't watch this movie unless you really want to start appreciating any other bad movie you have.

Thank you for reading and your time.

It is beautiful to see a company waste millions of dollars on child actors, just to end up with a dumpster fire that is appropriately called 'Crater'.

It is beautiful to see a company waste millions of dollars on child actors, just to end up with a dumpster fire that is appropriately called 'Crater'.

It is beautiful to see a company waste millions of dollars on child actors, just to end up with a dumpster fire that is appropriately called 'Crater'.

It is beautiful to see a company waste millions of dollars on child actors, just to end up with a dumpster fire that is appropriately called 'Crater'.