Last Survivors

I thought it was a good movie. Yes in the middle it was predictable but still a good story. Wish they answered more questions about everyone's past. But I enjoyed the 90 minutes. Kept me entertained and thats all I can ask for in a movie. So it was good. Watch it for what it is.

Filmmakers (the writer and director) that only have short-film experience need to start becoming more mindful of what they put on a film's running time. Of the long and dragged out 98 min runtime, the entire first half should've been condensed to at most 20 mins. Ya we get it, father and son are survivalists, get on with the story. Typical rookie filmmakers mistakes.

And whoever decided to genre-label this a "sci-fi" needs to give their heads a shake. There's zero sci-fi in this film. For that matter, there's very little thrills even calling this a "thriller". Maybe 10 mins tops near the end where your heart rate may go up a few bpm. This is more of a mystery/drama film, that drags out a lot of filler, and underutilized any good substance there was in the story. Conceptually, the story is smart, but the execution was clumsy, drab, and muddled.

The performances were good and convincing, especially Silverstone. The cinematography was decent, as was the soundtrack - especially the last song by Baker Grace, but the score was your typical B film nonsense; loud, overbearing, constant and annoying. If you're patient, and maybe fast-forward most of the first half of the film, it does get better by the ending, and it'd be a good one-time watch if you have nothing better to see. It's a generous 6/10 from me for this non-thrilling non-sci-fi film.

It's difficult to talk about the film without spoiling its premise, so beware, even if the premise is old, tired and badly implemented, not to mention telegraphed way before the reveal. The problem, though, is that after the reveal, the movie is just plain bad and totally predictable. Alicia Silverstone acts like her character is mentally deficient, which may just as well have been in the script, but I doubt it, Stephen Moyer kind of phones his performance in, while the plot holes are large enough to drop dead deer into. It could have been enjoyable if about a third of the scenes in it would have been deleted and people seemed to care about the production.

Bottom line: just wanted to watch the film because of Moyer and because I've not seen Silverstone in anything relevant in a long time. But it was a mistake.

The movie was a de ja vu to a hundred different movies that you can't help but skip to the end just to confirm that you're not wrong. They could have chosen a different title too. This should have been a 3 if it weren't for the actor's exquisite behind.

Some great ideas (survivalists / loyalty / desertion) but also faint whiffs of gun control and anti-masculine ideas that seem silly. Silverstone is good - but the last third of the movie falters in making any good points.