Settlers

Any real "critic" doesn't whine and complain about how "Bad" they thought a movie was, while also not blabbering about how great a movie is with NO explanation as to WHY they thought so. Too many princesses writing curt, nasty reviews that obviously approach what they watch with TOO high expectations. This is a decent movie that was done well, for the most part, but like any movie, it has it's flaws. It's a 5.5 in my book. I would watch the sequel if it was at least this good. Photography and directing were above par. No complaints about the acting whatsoever. Amazing location find. And yes, despite the crybabies saying it's not, it IS indeed a "sci-fi" movie, like it or not. Biggest fault: No history of how and why they are there, or almost anything else. It misses the mark by not providing enough personal history, and lacks basic high drama. I would definitely use a different director if a sequel is ever in the works.

My review.

Yes at the beginning it is boring with some average boring family drama.

It starts with the little girl being told that the planet she saw was Earth.

Then it picks up later. And suspense are added, making you want to know more.

A few plot twists here and there. Protip: don't watch the trailer.

The breathable air is explained halfway.

As to the gravity? I cannot explain that to you.

Makes me wonder if it's a prequel to the Star Wars: A New Hope.

I agree with the rating of 6.4.

Worth watching if you are not too easily bored. Patience has it's merits.

Got problem with gravity? You can take it up to those who made "The Martian".

Sofia Boutella is a fantastic actor, and this movie is full of wonderful landscapes, paired with great sound design. It's everything else that is the problem.

The story feels trite, with little importance on dialogue. Remy (young and old) and Jerry are just... boring. Very unfulfilling to watch as an audience member. The scenic design of the home is... boring and ugly. Genuinely looks like they ran out of money.

The vfx artists did a great job on the landscapes and the robot, and the ending before the epilogue is the only good part after the first 30 min (but the scene itself is really well done, with great acting from Remy).

Overall this movie felt like a first draft. Clearly could've been better with more time and money.

This is a story that could take place on Earth - when for any reason you decide to write a scenario for a story om Mars, you MUST take into consideration AT LEAST basic facts about Mars, otherwise DO NOT PUT YOUR STORY ON MARS. If you do not have enough BUDGET to shoot a Mars-based film, DO NOT DO IT, PUT IT AN AN IMAGINARY PLANET... Subsequently it does not matter whether the storyline or the actors are decent, the whole film becomes just 'unacceptable', it is as simple as that...

...to appreciate this film, and even then it could be better.

Mars does have water, btw, and a breathable atmosphere could be produced through various processes. The huge dome for just one farm is a bit of a stretch.

But this isn't really about Mars, and the sci-fi elements are mainly window dressing.

Many questions are raised, but answers are scant and no more than hints. If you can be patient with that, it tells an interesting story about human nature and desperation, but it is a rather grey and grim story with nothing uplifting.

That, in the end, is why I don't give it more than 5 stars, despite good performances and accomplishing a lot on a limited budget. It's very dystopian, in the most depressing sense.