Algorithm: Bliss

The pace of the film is very slow, it's rather dull and predictable, "low-budget" seems really low in everything: script, props, sound, locations, even some acting.

It has no notable plot twists, it does not evoke any thrill, excitement, compassion, plain interest - nothing - thus this movie resembles rather unpleasant documentary which you force yourself to watch till the end, although guessing that it cannot end well.

The moral of the main character's story: don't let your passion outgrow to obsession that can consume you with very unfortunate consequences.

It would be a nice short film (20-30 min), but as a full-feature it sucks...

Although I must admit that acting of Sean Faris and Sarah Roemer was rather good and believable, compared to other actors, that is why I can give this flick 3 out of 10 stars (and not 0/10).

P. S. Interestingly enough, in the end of credits I saw a line "A film by Isak Borg and Dena Hysell. ©App Film, LLC 2014", so the question is: why is it marked by IMDB as made in 2020, and not in 2014?...

It could have been an 8 with better editing and a better crafted last 1/3rd of the movie.

In short: If you are all about the effects, this movie isn't for you. If you like low budget and well crafted movies, this is. CInematographically speaking it isn't aced, not even close (editing, pacing, lighting, camera shots etc - all could be better), though with that being said most areas are above anticipated for this kind of movie. And it does somehow feel somewhat fresh to this type of movie, maybe because it focuses on the character study and does that well.

For those who think these kinds of things are far away; look up OCZ NIA - that is a brain interface for mainstream gamers that came out around 15 years ago. If you ad that to the scientific pair of doctors who made nerve crafted implants to their vertebrates and could actually "trade" feelings this is very close to home when it comes to science that is out there yesteryear.

Pro's Character study Somewhat fresh and some chemistry Good band for the buck versus budget

Con's Budget Editing at parts Varied script or if it was due to editing - some parts could have been done better

Script was poor. it seemed like actors hardlly anything to talk abt. limited material. Actors tried but script didnt help them. Science was unreasonable. many unexplainable things. cast was very limited. the whole movie felt lonely

Everyone behaves in a completely illogical fashion. The basic idea is just silly. The budget production grates and i thought the lighting was bad. I think that you would regret watching it.

This movie would have worked better as a straight-to-video VHS B-movie in the '80s with a touch of David Cronenberg thrown in, or perhaps an entry for Hammer House of Horror back in the day.

As it stands now, it's absurd! Even the poster is a lie - Vic doesn't use a handgun in the movie. Watch it if you're not expecting a blockbuster, but a low-budget affair with some ropey editing and a poor audio/foley mix.

Still, they made a movie so congratulations.