Redivider

The premise of the story is good, the special effects are good too. The acting isn't even all that bad. The story/plot/dialog is where the film falls down somewhat. The camera work (1st person for most of the film) is where it jumps off a cliff. Best review I saw was "good if you've run out of good SF films to watch". That about sums it up.

It's a reasonably well acted and an interesting sci-fi film. It's not the most exciting nor smart film ever, but it's not terribly bad either. It has some elements from first-person shooter games, some other parts are your typical scenes, some tropes from other sci-fi films, etc. Very average sci-fi flick.

I don't think it's good enough to pay money to watch it at the cinema, but if you can find it on Netflix or Amazon Prime, then go for it. You might actually be pleasantly surprised.

Okay, I felt like I'm in a first person shooter game pretty much for the duration of the movie. I do like the idea behind the movie, but the First Person view ruined it for me to a large degree.

It's okay, but it's not something to shout off the rooftops. The story is jerky and disjointed at times. You do get the gist of what's going on, but the "info" on the screen (from the Head up Display type screen) was quite distracting.

It could have been done much better, and if they'd ditch the first person shooter idea, it could be phenomenal.

If (like me) you get seasick when you play first person shooter games -- this one's not for you.

P.S. I had to type out all the first person shooter etc stuff, because the site decided I was shouting...

Yes, that's right, folks. Dan Stevens, the star of the movie, only appears for about ten minutes. He appears as Will Porter at his home, in his office and on the lawn. That's it. The rest of the time he's hidden behind some HUD device so the producers wouldn't have to pay him very much. The director has the screen fade to black while the character is knocked out.

The movie is a real big yawn, except for a couple of moments of intense fighting. As another reviewer put it, it is literally a First Person Shooter where you see everything from the protagonist's point of view. You actually start to hope that because Porter is a PILOT, that he'll take control of one of those fancy flying vehicles. Don't hold your breath.

The Pseudo-science behind the project (that pillar of light that you see in the poster) seems likely enough, but sounds incredibly risky as opposed to more "conventional" sources of energy.

What's the message of the movie? Hope? Desperation? Stupidity? How to make a visually crappy movie?

No, the message of this movie is save your money, save your time, and avoid this "movie". You'll be glad you did!

Anyone think it's a little silly that most of the reviews here so far seem to mainly consist of "Gee whiz do I hate movies filmed in first person pov, so gee whiz was I shocked to find that I was upset that I also didn't like this movie that was filmed in first person pov!"? If you have an irrational hatred of anything in first person, don't watch this. Problem solved.

That aside, it's a perfectly solid sci-fi action movie. The core concept is clever, though at it's heart it's just a flashy action movie. Don't expect this to be a thought-provoker like The Arrival, but it's not down there in the complete brain dead zone like a Michael Bay movie either. It's somewhere in between, with a decent plot, above average special effects, and the always enjoyable, though perhaps a little underutilized, Dan Stevens.

It's not going to make any top 10 lists or win any major awards, but it succeeds at being entertaining without requiring that you shut down your brain entirely to enjoy it.