The Moon Landing: Stanley Kubrick's Greatest Film | How NASA and Hollywood Fooled the World

Overview

This episode of The Y-Files revisits the claim that NASA faked the 1969 moon landing using a “moon landing hoax” conspiracy narrative, then attempts to rebut it by addressing common “hoax evidence.”

Main Arguments and Coverage

1) Why the conspiracy gained traction

• The show frames the moon landing hoax theory as spreading from early public doubt (the video claims roughly “almost 30%” of Americans once believed it), then growing through popular culture.
• It cites portrayals in major films as evidence the narrative reached mainstream audiences in the 1970s, including:
  • Diamonds Are Forever (a plot element involving a staged landing)
  • Capricorn One (a “fake Mars mission” presented as a template for what if space missions were staged)
• The episode claims the theory resurged with late-1990s/2000s internet culture and expanded further as high-profile podcasters (notably Joe Rogan, according to the subtitles) discussed it.

2) Claimed motivations to “fake it”

The video argues NASA would have faced intense pressure to succeed, then lists motivations suggested by conspiracy-minded commentators:

• The U.S. needed to beat the Soviet Union in the space race, with Soviet “firsts” highlighted, such as:
  • first satellites
  • first animal missions
  • first human in space
  • first women
  • first multi-person crew
  • first moon-related spacecraft achievements
• The U.S. is portrayed as under intense public and political pressure after falling behind.
• The show claims some people believed the Soviets were preparing nuclear weapons in space/moon contexts, increasing panic.

3) “Evidence” presented for a fake landing

A large portion of the episode lists visual and technical inconsistencies claimed to indicate fabrication. Examples mentioned include:

• Shadow direction problems
  • Shadows allegedly point in inconsistent directions (including right angles), implying multiple light sources such as studio lighting.
• Lighting cues
  • Reflections on astronaut helmets/photographs are claimed to resemble studio/production lighting.
• Background/rock/terrain issues
  • Claims about repeated or inconsistent backdrops, as well as rocks described like props.
• Stars disappearing
  • The argument claims the moon’s “black sky” should show stars and that stars were supposedly removed to simplify filming.
• Camera/recording anomalies
  • Some sequences are argued to imply impossible camera placement, remote operation, or contrived framing.
• Flag movement
  • The flag’s waving is claimed to be inconsistent with the moon’s lack of atmosphere, suggesting staging.
• Dust and landing module behavior
  • Questions are raised about engine exhaust marks, minimal disturbed dust, and motion allegedly suggestive of cables.
• Film/photography manipulation
  • References to “doctoring” of images and missing/altered crosshair marks used for photo processing, implying compositing after capture.
• Radiation belt argument
  • Claims that the Van Allen radiation belts would have made the trip lethal.
  • It further argues Earth-view footage could have been staged while still in low Earth orbit, as part of the same hoax theory.
• Erased original footage
  • The episode claims original high-quality moon landing tapes were erased/reused, leaving degraded TV recordings.

4) Kubrick/Hollywood angle (largest narrative escalation)

The episode pivots to a Hollywood/Kubrick conspiracy:

• It introduces a referenced “short film” (Kubrick’s Odyssey) and claims it supports the idea that Stanley Kubrick was hired to help fake the moon landing because NASA allegedly couldn’t achieve the feat.
• The show claims Kubrick used a technique related to front-screen projection (instead of CGI), pointing to supposed boundaries in Apollo photos between studio set and projected lunar imagery.
• It also claims Kubrick left coded references in other works—especially The Shining—including numbers/symbols said to map to Apollo 11 and the moon.
• A later segment claims an “unreleased 2016 interview” exists involving Kubrick under a non-disclosure agreement, allegedly admitting the moon landing was faked.
  • The episode states this interview was not actually Kubrick and frames it as a hoax/debunking of that supposed “confession.”

5) Counter-arguments: “debunking” the hoax claims

After presenting the hoax case, the episode offers responses intended to explain away the anomalies:

• Multiple shadows
  • Attributed to perspective and wide-angle lens distortion; shadows can appear to point differently depending on viewing angle.
• Stars not visible
  • Explained via camera settings and exposure effects: the bright moon washes out faint stars, and the camera iris is largely closed during moon photography.
• Background alignment
  • Attributed to long-distance optics and the lack of haze on the moon, creating optical illusions where near and far objects appear closer.
• Studio-light/reflection claims
  • Countered by arguing reflections/artifacts can be mistaken for “movie lights,” and that high-resolution originals don’t show the same lines seen in lower-resolution versions.
• Dust/engine crater absence
  • Explained through landing dynamics (engine cutoff/landing mechanics) and minimal wind reducing dust disturbance.
• Flag behavior
  • Framed as normal based on how it was mounted (springiness of rods and settling after movement).
• Footprints/boots
  • Explained by differences in boot cover tread patterns.
• Radiation belt concerns
  • Redirected by asserting astronauts weren’t exposed beyond necessary levels in ways matching the conspiracy’s assumptions, while also describing NASA’s broader program continuity as ongoing development.

6) Ending: “base” on the far side (new claim, not directly moon-hoax)

The episode closes by pivoting away from the landing hoax to another speculative claim:

• It presents (as alleged testimony) a former electronics repairman with clearance, who claims to have seen photographs suggesting “structures” on the far side of the moon and says he would testify to Congress.
• The host suggests humans may not have returned to the moon in decades due to what was found there—introducing an additional “episode” related to it.

Presenters / Contributors (as named in subtitles)

• AJ / “tacklefish” (The Y-Files host)
• Richard C. Hoagland (author cited for early hoax-related claims)
• Stanley Kubrick (discussed throughout)
• Arthur C. Clarke (credited for 2001 collaboration—used as a framing reference)
• Jay Widener (creator of Kubrick’s Odyssey short film)
• Carl Wolfe (speaker giving “base on far side of the moon” testimony)
• Joe Rogan (mentioned for spreading/drawing attention to skepticism)
• Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin (moon mission astronauts referenced)
• Richard Nixon (mentioned regarding alleged meetings; discussed in the Kubrick interview/confession segment)
• James Van Allen (scientist referenced for the radiation belts)
• Yuri Gagarin and Valentina Tereshkova / Tarshkova (Soviet space “firsts” referenced)
• Sputnik (and dogs “Laika/Leica,” as referenced) (Soviet missions referenced)