Resurrected

Yes, it is a webcam- and chat-based movie. Which makes me wonder how well packed it is with action, that keeps you edge-seated. One third of the time are action scenes, shot again on webcams of all kinds.

Poster on IMDB page contains the poorest possible screenshot from the movie, please just disregard it. You may have your answer why this exact 3D is so rubbish when you watch the movie.

Key strength is a script. It's hard not to give away any detail, let's say the story contains ethical questions around religion, conspiracy theory, and several solid twists. Couple of gory scenes. No horror at all to my personal standards. Performances are better than one would expect.

My only criticism would be around final scenes, when it all breaks loose.. those could have been more.. spectacular, but I believe this is owing to budget limitations only.

Btw, don't skip final titles, the story is continued there.

I was really surprised to see how good this movie turned out to be, seeing as it is so lowly considered here on IMDB.

The movie deserves a much higher rating being that it has such an original story, solid writing, acting, pacing, and follow-through from beginning to end.

Joe Rechtman does a fantastic job, and it's enjoyable from beginning to end.

I found the immediate premise interesting and something significant to most people, which is what happens after death, and what could happen if we were able to resurrect, and all the complexities that go along with it.

The pitfalls, the power, the problems, and the promise of second chances.

No, it's not revolutionary or even 'good', but it IS okay if found footage is your thing and you've run out. The premise is actually interesting, it would make a good big budget movie/or a series! (maybe there is already one, maybe I've missed it?)

But would I watch this again? No.

Would I recommend it? For one viewing yes, if this type of movie is your thing.

Will you miss anything by skipping this movie? Not really, but again, interesting premise!

I feel like the actors did fine with what they had. The face time filming thing wasn't terribly done for what it was, it can usually be worse! It was cleanly made and not a nightmare to get through. I actually cared about the main character.

So over all, not too bad, but I don't think I'd have the free time to spend rewatching this in the face of other films.

The overall plot of this movie is quite absurd to say the least, but me and my partner had a lot of fun watching it because of it.

All the people who mentioned "bad acting" in their reviews must have been watching a completely different movie than me. The acting was really solid from all of the actors. It was far better than in most of such movies.

It was also fun seeing that the director wasn't afraid to make a movie that openly criticizes the Catholic church and the way that a lot of people perceive it, so as nothing more than a huge criminal organisation hiding in plain sight.

If you like the found footage genre, you'll definitely like this movie. My partner loves this genre and even she said that it's one of the best ones she ever watched!

Is the acting the greatest? No. What makes this movie interesting is the story, the idea itself. That kind of saves the whole movie. It is an interesting story: resurrection... What would happen to the world, if we really could resurrect people... This movie made me think about that. How would people react to it? How would the world look like? And like the movie itself discusses too: Who would be entitled to it? So yes, I do think the movie is worth a watch for the story. And this new concept of making movies with online cameras/Facetime only, I find interesting too. This type of content becomes more popular. Seen worse. The acting isn't the greatest, but overall worth a watch if you find the storyline itself intriguing then you won't be too bored.