IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON. It Had Potential

In In the Shadow of the Moon, overworked police officer Lockhart (Boyd Holbrook) is trying to train as a detective with one hand while taking care of his pregnant wife with the other. Despite good intentions, neither of those things is going particularly well for him. Meanwhile, Philadelphia sees three identical deaths that cannot be explained. Lockhart throws himself into the investigation, hoping it will speed up his promotion to detective. It won’t be easy, because the victims died in a highly unusual way, practically impossible to trace. Their necks were punctured in three places, and an unstable isotope was injected into their spinal cords. The cycle of killings repeats every nine years. The protagonist keeps returning to the case, becoming increasingly obsessed with it. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the viewers.

Boyd Holbrook, who plays Lockhart, resembles a young Mel Gibson — though more in appearance than charisma. His version of the world-weary cop comes equipped with the standard loadout: past trauma, family problems, and an obsessive dedication to the job. The elements appear one by one, building the image of a broken idealist. At least on paper. On screen, Holbrook tries to convey every shade of mental unraveling, aided by fairly solid makeup work. The result is superficial, because Holbrook simply fails to make the audience care about his tragedies or his victories.

In the Shadow of the Moon is almost entirely devoid of emotion, and without emotion neither a crime story nor science fiction can be engaging. The stakes are supposedly enormous — Lockhart’s actions literally determine the fate of the world — yet his decisions inspire only indifference.

As for the supporting cast, it’s enough to say that the best performance comes from Michael C. Hall (Dexter, Cold in July) as Lockhart’s brother-in-law. He’s an actor with limited range who tries to choose characters that suit his abilities — and that’s not an insult. Knowing his strengths and weaknesses, Hall picks roles he can inhabit fully. Here, that strategy pays off, because he’s the only somewhat interesting character in the entire film.

On one hand he’s a jerk and a stickler, but on the other he’s helpful and understanding — even when Lockhart tries to take advantage of him. But one swallow doesn’t make a summer. While Hall’s acting is passable, the rest of In the Shadow of the Moon drains the will to live. Even Bokeem Woodbine (Ray, Spider-Man: Homecoming), usually a capable actor, is reduced here to a single expression: a mocking grin and another drawn-out “shiiit” hissed through his teeth.

There’s also a time-travel subplot. Unfortunately, every sequence tied to it makes painfully clear how cheaply someone tried to shoot a sci-fi film. The “future” consists of exactly two scenes, one of which is almost entirely bad CGI, and the other is just a guy behind a desk. And then there’s her — the woman eliminating seemingly random targets. She has a high-tech needle from the future and runs around in a sporty hoodie, and that’s basically the full extent of her characterization. And when the filmmakers reveal her identity near the end, you can’t help but ask: is it really impossible, even in 2019, to come up with something less banal? There are several time jumps, but the filmmakers didn’t bother to distinguish the decades from one another. The protagonist often wanders through nearly empty locations, which surely saved money on sets — but also makes the decades feel identical.

The whole film feels like watching something through thick glass. You can see exactly when and what emotions should appear, the actors wave their arms and pull faces of sadness or amusement, but the relationships between the characters are emotionally sterile, like an operating room. In the Shadow of the Moon has nothing genuinely engaging in it. As a result, the viewing experience is depressing — you’re watching wasted potential for a decent sci-fi crime thriller. Not a particularly original one, more reliant on clichés than subverting them, but still — potentially decent. Instead, what we get isn’t good, but… well, just bland.

After watching, you get the impression you’ve seen the most unnecessary film of the year. What’s more, it’s yet another proof that Netflix is extremely selective about which of its productions it actually cares for. While the platform’s series are often genuinely strong (Mindhunter, Daredevil), some of its films never should have been made (Falling Inn Love, Tall Girl) — their place is at the bottom of Silicon Valley. In the Shadow of the Moon is yet another completely expendable title in Netflix’s catalogue.