VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Rainey Dawn The year is 2116 - so the film takes place in the 22nd Century NOT the 21st as mentioned in the summery. Basically they are out in space with an interplanetary reporter, Ray Peterson. Tensions build between many of the characters, there are ship malfunctions and the ship goes from Mars to Venus. It ends up that Peterson has to save everyone.The visuals are pretty cool for a B-film of the 1960s, the story seems like it could have had a little more spunk and most of the characters speak like robots and speak with little emotion quite often. Overall it's an alright film although not all that great - it's a bit flat at times but watchable.4/10

arfdawg-1 This movie is not as bad as some of the reviews suggest.It's made on a shoestring budget but still pretty neat.The special effects are better than you'd expect considering and it keeps your attention.The plot.In the 21st century.Ray Peterson, reporter for the Interplanetary News, is assigned to write a story aboard a space station. Tension mounts between Peterson and the station commander, who believes he is in the way, but has orders to leave him alone. Errant spaceship Alpha Two enters the solar system and its photon generators are radiating enough heat to destroy Earth as it approaches. It falls to Peterson to try to figure out a way to enter the spaceship, disarm the generators, and escape before suffocating.

polsixe OK, bad FX but given it was 1960 don't be too harsh in that judgment. Not having seen all SF films from that era it's hard to say whether it was below standard or not. Star Trek didn't get so much better by 1967, substituting flashing lights for analog gauges and completely rewriting/ignoring physics. I liked some of the techno babble here - the multi-stage rocket, the sleep chamber, the arched trusses inside the space station, weightlessness, hydrazine, the paramilitary dialogue. Tossing objects out to detect the beams and stay in the middle seems reasonable and inventive for a mere reporter. "Pecking the lobe" is an electronic way to do the same thing against enemy radar in modern warfare. There was a story here but things got compromised, as usual in movies time and space (ie distances), are ignored in order to cut to the chase (see Armageddon, 1997). The guy waxing philosophical during his space walk has been done in almost every space movie since, and even Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, et al spoke that way once on earth. Anyhow, good for a laugh.

gftbiloxi Now and then you encounter a film so tiresome that the thought reviewing it is every bit as tiresome as the film itself. Such is the case with ASSIGNMENT: OUTER SPACE, also known as SPACE MEN, a 1960 Italian flick.The story is unimpressive. A reporter (Rik Van Nutter) is assigned to cover the goings-on aboard a space station--and happens to arrive just in time for a nuclear space ship to go out of control and threaten the earth and everyone on it. So they all blast off for Mars, and then they blast off for Venus, and then they blast off for the runaway space ship. There is a romantic subplot and more uninspired cliffhangers than a Pearl White serial.The special effects aren't, the actors are stiff, and there are numerous insults to audience intelligence along the way. The absolute best thing I can say for this movie is that I've seen worse dubbing jobs--and now and then it does have an idea that seems interesting, although in truth nothing much comes of it. Unless you are a die-hard fan of lousy 1960s sci-fi, give this one a miss.GFT, Amazon Reviewer