Kubrick's Odyssey: Secrets Hidden in the Films of Stanley Kubrick; Part One: Kubrick and Apollo (2011)

I have been researching the so-called 'moon landings' in great detail for almost a decade, and have arrived at the conclusion that NASA indeed faked all footage purporting to show astronauts walking about on the moon's surface.There are many anomalies in photographs supposedly taken by astronauts whilst on the moon, but one which stands out as a major flaw is that which this documentary addresses in convincing detail. In every single photo without fail supposedly taken by astronauts on the moon's surface, a definite 'line' is visible separating the foreground from the lunar mountains in the distance. This is unnatural, and should not occur. Instead, the lunar foreground should blend in seamlessly with the mountainous background. The film explains why this curious 'line' is evident. Persons who are not familiar with, or who have not investigated the contention that NASA faked the Apollo moon landings, may find the film's allegations perplexing, even confusing.When one couples other anomalies in video footage of the moon landings such as curious flashes and bright glints appearing in the lunar background) with the contention of Kubrick's use of a Scotchlite rear-projection screen,(the forerunner of today's 'green-screen') it becomes obvious that this was indeed the manner in which NASA created the mountainous backgrounds in photos of the moon's surface. The separating 'line' prevalent in each and every photo is a give-away that Kubrick's Scotchlite screen was most certainly used to create these images.The films second half deals with Kubrick's subtle (and sometimes not very subtle) insertion of clues in his film 'The Shining' - as to his involvement in the filming and faking of Apollo footage. Examination of the film for these clues is very astutely undertaken, and there are many astounding revelations and scenes in 'The Shining' which go entirely unnoticed upon initial viewing of the film - if one is not familiar with allegations that the moon landings were faked.There are just too many obvious references to Apollo and Kubrick's involvement therein, for it to be coincidence. The evidence put forth in 'Kubrick and Apollo', that he was complicit in faking Apollo footage is so compelling that it is difficult to understand how anyone could not be utterly convinced thereof.Kubrick specifically stated that his last feature film, 'Eyes Wide Shut', was to be released on the precise anniversary date upon which Apollo 11 was launched, viz: 16 July. Apparently the above-stated film contained further clues pertaining to Kubrick's involvement in Apollo forgery, but after his death, (and before the film's release) these were excised by the film's production Studio. Notwithstanding whether this was actually the case, clues from 'The Shining', and Kubrick's mastery in 1968's '2001 - A space Odyssey' with it's rear-projection manufactured background scenery, and very similar to Apollo outer-space vistas, make 'Kubrick and Apollo' the final nail in the coffin of the Apollo programme - a deserved place for this great hoax perpetuated upon mankind.

While I don't know for sure, I am pretty sure that review about this being a fake documentary is actually about the wrong documentary. I believe he is referring to another mockumentary that does mention kubrick: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Side_of_the_Moon_(film)Either way this is not supposed to be a mockumentary, whether it is true or not i don't know and actual proof is not really given but it is one mans insight and speculation but it is NOT a mockumentary. It is at least very strange and interesting. It is not a movie about science and fact but a movie about wondering what if he did have something to do with it. Some things mentioned in this movie are weird and make you ponder but overall don't bet your life on it.

This film is full of nothing but baseless assertions. I was expecting a documentary, not a ridiculous fiction account with no supporting evidence.Though imaginative and interesting, the story told by the filmmaker is presented as absolute fact without so much as providing the slightest shred of credible evidence to support the claim. He says things like "Stanley Kubrick was hired by the US Government to fake the Apollo moon landings..." and then just continues along with his story without so much as showing a photograph, memo, letter, or anything to support the claim. The film continues along this path for its entire duration.You would have to be pretty stupid to believe this.

Don't believe a word of it.I don't.The premise is that we went to the moon, but in order to protect the technology, NASA asked Kubrick to stage fake moon landings. In exchange Kubrick would be able to make any movie he ever wanted to make.It's hogwash of course. There is no real evidence. Its all speculation. On the other hand it's an intriguing premise.The first half of the film is a weak attempt at saying that what we saw on the moon landing was faked because it mirrors the rear screening work in 2001. I don't see what they're getting at since it all seems random. I was ready to hang it up but then the second half kicked in and I was greatly amused.The second half of the film purports to show that Kubrick laid out all hidden messages in the Shining that reveal he faked the moon landing. Its a head trip. It sounds great...the trouble is the links are so esoteric that there is no way that anyone is going to get all of the connections... or even one of the connections.I don't believe a word of it...on the other hand it amused me to no end. I was so amused I handed it off to a couple of friends who were equally amused and appalled.As a goof the film is worth it. On the other hand don't believe a word of it because short of some evidence, real evidence, this is just a glorified party game. That said I can't wait for the sequel which may go into the possible murder of Kubrick for revealing a murder of someone who knew too much in Eyes Wide Shut.