Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

mraculeated The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Edwin The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Benet Simon The future ain't what it used to be.I couldn't get enough of this weirdly compelling, banal, engrossing, dull, yet strangely addictive movie.Well performed, low budget, tedious yet moreish, this isn't just like the 70s in space, but an homage to 70s movies like Darkstar and Silent Running, with a modern panache that they couldn't hope for. Sure, it's mostly about nothing, but all the better for it.A welcome break from big budget blockbusters.Should rate higher on IMDb, this is destined to be a cult, but I think most people won't like it.Not me, though. I love it!

bowmanblue I happened to catch the trailer for 'Space Station 76' and couldn't believe that no one had already thought of this type of film already. I grew up in the seventies and eighties and was well into the sci-fi of the day, i.e. with wooden sets, cheesy robots and unfashionable hairstyles. Therefore, when I saw that a film was dedicated to sending up this genre, only in the modern age, I couldn't believe my luck. This film was truly made for me. It looked hilarious.I was wrong. The trailer was hilarious. The film was not. Not because the jokes fell flat or didn't work when they were stretched out into a full-length feature film, but because the film just wasn't really a comedy, as it was presented in the one and half minutes trailer.Yes, the sets are indeed well-designed (i.e. old fashioned seventies incarnations of what the future may look like) and there are a few moments that produce a wry smile from you. However, the film is actually more of a dark drama and – dare I say it – quite depressing.Leaving the kitsch period feel aside, the film is about a space station billions of light years away from Earth. Some of the inhabitants of the station have lived there all their life, others much of their adult life. Either way, they're only one step away from going stir crazy. Therefore, you have many depressed and broken people, all desperately seeking some form of justification for their existences.And there's the problem. I rented this film thinking it was a comedy that based its jokes on the clichés of yesteryear's science fiction and I got quite a dark drama about the misery of human existence at its loneliest.Therefore, I –sort of – didn't enjoy it. But that's not to say that it was a bad thing; I just wanted something different. Just know what you're getting before you sit down to watch it. There are moments of humour, but much of it is very dark and there are places where you won't know whether you should be laughing or crying at the characters' plights. Just make sure that you're in the mood for something a little tragic that's dressed up as a silly seventies sci-fi show.

svanlijnden I consider myself a fairly 'typical' viewer. By which I mean that I tend to find myself agreeing with the professional critical consensus on a book, movie or film. (Rather than the popular one, which tends to get distorted by rabid fans on one side and equally rabid haters on the other end.) Personal mileage can vary of course, but it is rare that I find myself really enjoying something that – according to most critics – sucks. Space Station 76 is such a thing.The movie is a loving pastiche of scifi from the sixties and seventies, sporting some impressive retro styling and understated but modern special effects. It introduces us to the crew of the titular space station through the eyes of new arrival Jessica (Liv Tyler). A she will discover, the people on board have their share of issues. And Jessica has some of her own to add. Though the size of the station and the extras milling about in the background indicate that there is a large crew, the story focuses on just a few of them and makes them feel isolated and alienated. Some of their problems are timeless, such as cheating and the tribulations of parenthood, some have consciously been given a dated feel. Being gay is a shameful secret in this retro- future and emancipation is only just starting to be a thing. This is a future in which smoking around babies is no big deal and fashion shows are best viewed on stereoscopic slides with a cutting-edge plastic viewmaster.I can see how this movie would turn people off. It walks a fine line between being funny and being poignant, trying to engage your emotions while also going for the occasional cheap laugh. The cast is game, playing it mostly straight – even some of the more absurd bits – and going slightly camp when a moment calls for it. Like the space station itself, the story moves slowly and doesn't really end up getting anywhere surprising. You have to be fond of the kind of movies that Space Station 76 pokes fun at and you have to allow yourself to get enveloped by its weird mood and funky synth music. Seeing it in the dark on a big screen is definitely recommended. Fail to tune into its frequency and you will be left with a boring slog through phoney-looking sets that goes nowhere. The movie could have used more sting in its tale, but I couldn't help but be seduced by it.

brucetwo-2 Nothing in the plot of this movie has anything to do with science fiction. Yes, it is set on a "space station" but it could as easily have been a 20th century cruise liner or a 19th century Orient Express Train. The plot is all about the interaction between the personalities of the people on-board. Why is it so clearly a stage play?--because it uses the old tried and true plot structure of "drama"--characters reveal themselves to each other and come to make self-discoveries as the play unwinds--that's what the film is all about--these 'revelations'. Why is this supposedly the 1970s?--Well the art-direction--the sets and costumes look something like Kubrick's film 2001--which came out in 1968--and also Star Trek--the iconic 1960's TV show. There are touches like black-and-white TV monitors etc., telephones with cords, and lots of cigarette smoking. Actors--insecure actors puzzling out how to project the script that they're given traditionally use cigarette-smoking as an action to substitute for emoting. Well--there's certainly a LOT of smoking in this FILM. Maybe they're saying that smoking is still OK in this 1970s--but it's probably just a lame ripoff of the tobacco and alcohol consumption in the MAD MEN TV show. There is some "symbolism" in the movie--the huge asteroid, which seems to menace and trivialize the mere dilemmas and conflicts of the human characters. The other symbolism is maybe the sort-of-1970s setting--a guy freaking out over his unaccepted Gay Identity--really? In 2014?--come on!--Will and Grace has been off the air for years. Also the couple who "stay together for the children"--another theme from a previous era. Today's society has moved beyond these dilemmas. Most of these plot concerns are really kind of generic and clichéd. Best part of the film is the ACTING--and this is definitely a film about ACTING--not science fiction or plot or story! Some of the acting is uneven--some characters are better at it than others. Liv Tyler is really good and not self-conscious and labored like some of the others in the cast. She does not chew up the scenery. And it's fun seeing her play a real role and not just a comic-book character as in Lord of the Rings, etc. SO--I was a little let-down by this film, but I'd give it a 7 for effort but only a 5 (at best) overall. Kind of a weird hybrid of a movie.