R.I.A.

The first 30 minutes are very good and then starts the great fall to the depths of bad acting, bad script and in general really bad movie. It seems like the writer and director of first 30 minutes is completely different from the other movie!

There is another review bere that mentions the good first 30 minutes and captures everything that goes terribly wrong afterwards, so I won't repeat. I would like to point out the actress who plays Ria - she really is a breath of fresh air, the only good thing throughout the movie. It was a nice surprise in an otherwise disappointing feature.

I don't mind Luke Goss, he is hardly what you would call an a list actor but he has been in some ok films, this is not one of them. Besides, although he may be the main protagonist in the flm, his role, as far as screen time goes, is quite minor. Not a terrible 1 star film, but one that you would find hard to recommend somebody spending money on. Would agree with the reviewer that said this could easily have been a black mirror episode. If it was it would have been half the length and not as tiresome to sit through. Some terrible acting, choppy editing, only just watchable.

Experienced editor, turned newb writer and director Richard Colton started his film off great, but when more characters were introduced, the film became very apparently amateurish.

From the start, the cinematography, score, choice of colors, and the awesome set were impressive. The refreshingly unique storyline drew me in and kept me intrigued. Newb actress Jess Impiazzi as RIA performed really well alongside Luke Goss' character. Up to the point Jack # 2 was introduced, this movie felt like it was going to be one of the better B-grade films I've seen in a while. Even the 95 minute runtime was just right for the pacing.

But as soon as Amar Adatia started performing as Jack # 2, amateur vibes stated buzzing. Then as more of the other characters were introduced, and some repetitiveness of the film became apparent, those amateur vibes grew. I'm sure mainly due to Colton's inexperience towards his failure to direct his cast properly, all the other performances seemed horrible, unconvincing and very amateurish. Even some dialogue became ridiculous along with the plot and technical issues that started to surface. Pretty much the rest of the film then became your basic low budget B-grade film, and that's too bad, because this one had serious potential to be amazing.

Although Colton's directing and his storyline remained decent, the poor acting and terrible dialogue flopped what should've been a gem of a film. I wish he at least had a seasoned writer edit his script, and/or an experienced cast director help with his actors poor and unconvincing performances. But considering all new filmmakers have to start somewhere, he still gets high points from me for his storyline. I don't feel this film is deserving anything less than a 5/10. I mean Goss did the best he could with what he had. So it's a 5/10 from me. To see my review criteria, or more of my 1000+ reviews, click on my username. Then if you're a fan of Goss, sci-fi, and have nothing else to watch, and know going into this it is an amateur low budget B-grade film, go see this - you'll probably enjoy it.

First of all, the story description they give you on IMDB (same as on Redbox) tells too much, but is also somewhat inaccurate. It is a pretty good idea but it is undermined by low budget production. If you can get through the first half-hour, which is in serious need of editing, it's a decent story that explores our obsession with voyeuristic TV-watching and raises ethical questions regarding technology, politics, etc. There are some glaring implausibilities and "Huh?" moments that you have to overlook if you are going to be entertained by this.