Andromeda

This movie is a great effort, but falls short in all categories. Interesting premise, albeit popular and unoriginal, I still enjoy sci-fi bombs.. (this was just barely not a bomb.) There is enough to be intrigued, while acting is adequate at best. And take note of the digital graphics: while low level, still fun to observe. It's so funny, because I restarted Mass Effect: Andromeda (PS4) the night before I watched this film. Very similar stuff (including art...) except that Mass Effect had more than 89 minutes and a larger budget to execute something expansive and filled out. If I'm not mistaken - I saw Andromeda 2 may be in the works. If they get another chance, let us hope for a bigger budget.

Now, given my general lack of interest in sci-fi movies, then I don't have to say that this 2022 movie from writer and director Brett Bentman was a movie that had fully eluded my attention. Well, right up to now in 2024, as I happened to stumble upon it by random chance. And yeah, I opted to sit down and watch it, despite never having heard about it, much less knowing what I was getting myself into here.

The storyline told in "Andromeda" was pretty far fetched, and it failed to entertain me. In fact, I actually fell asleep two or three times along the 79 minutes that the movie dragged on for. But I am sure that diehard sci-fi fans will enjoy this movie a lot more than I did.

The movie has a small cast ensemble, none of which that I were familiar with. The acting performances in the movie were actually fair, I will say that much.

Visually then "Andromeda" was actually better than I had expected, given the movie's dubious cover.

"Andromeda" failed to entertain me, and it is not a movie that will ever find its way back on my screen a second time. Nor is it a movie that I would recommend you to rush out and get to waste your time, money or effort on.

My rating of writer and director Brett Bentman's 2022 movie "Andromeda" lands on a two out of ten stars.

Acting from agent sharp was amazing, CGI wasn't that great but with a low budget they did well. I enjoyed it. Jeff Hamm did great with the shots he got. From beginning to end the story is pretty solid, idea is solid, the main character needed better carved Acting, with as little budget as they did it with i feel that They managed to tell a pretty decent story.

-1 for Bad acting main character -1 for CGI (could have found a better way to do it, i feel) -1 for audio being off in parts -1 for the ending I know how hard it is to make movie so I gave it a quality 6, ive definitely seen worse movies.

Cheap bad imitation movie probably doesn't want you to know that its a ripoff of better things. Not inspired but a bad ripoff with no originality. Misleading poster and movie trailer might have you believing you'll watch something else but even if you have watched the movie trailer you can already tell that it looks like a PS2 game with it's visuals and sounds like a PS1 game with it's bad acting. If you want a cheap scifi movie to watch for some reason then I'm sure you can find it somewhere but not here. IF you want a cheap scifi movie that delivers nothing but boredom bad writing and laughing when not supposed to be funny then watch Andromeda.

This is not the worst film ever, but it is let down by a low budget which comes across very early on and stays with it throughout. The CGI is very obvious and dated. Acting is wooden and the flow is pretty staccato in places. Props are even worse.

The story itself is quite compelling and you tend to stay with it. Given that this was probably also affected by the writers strike and the various problems over the pond it is not a bad effort. That Amazon has it on Prime is a good excuse to watch it.

Not everything is Star Wars quality filming. And that is the issue. Audiences have come to expect better CGI, better CSO and better writing. Give this a chance. There are a LOT worse that are out there!