R.I.A.

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.

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!

What I wrote:

"You know that old saying about pigs and lipstick? This is kind of a TV movie with a lot of Netflix-style background neon lighting. It looks pretty decent at first glance, but it's covering up a whole range of issues.

Plot-wise this film had a promising first half but then proceeds to go completely off the rails."

And here is ChatGPT's 600 word version:

Movie Review: Neon Lights and Lost Plots You know that old saying about pigs and lipstick? This is kind of a TV movie with a lot of Netflix-style background neon lighting. It looks pretty decent at first glance, but it's covering up a whole range of issues.

When I first sat down to watch this film, I was immediately taken in by its stylish aesthetics. The neon lighting and sleek visuals give the movie a modern, edgy feel, reminiscent of the high production values we've come to expect from streaming giants like Netflix. This initial impression is crucial, as it sets the stage for a potentially great cinematic experience. However, much like the adage about dressing up a pig, the superficial gloss can only distract from deeper flaws for so long.

Visuals and Aesthetics There's no denying that the film's visual appeal is one of its strongest suits. The cinematography is polished, with vibrant neon colors casting a moody, almost otherworldly glow over the scenes. This aesthetic choice seems to borrow heavily from the visual language of neo-noir and cyberpunk genres, adding a layer of intrigue and sophistication. The production team deserves credit for creating an atmosphere that is both immersive and visually stimulating. This high standard of visual design is the lipstick that makes the film initially appealing.

The Plot: A Tale of Two Halves Plot-wise, the film starts with a promising first half. It introduces an intriguing premise, builds suspense, and hooks the audience with well-crafted scenes and character development. The setup is engaging, hinting at a complex narrative that promises to unravel in fascinating ways. At this point, I was genuinely excited about where the story might go, eager to see how the filmmakers would navigate the twists and turns they were setting up.

However, as the movie progresses into its second half, it proceeds to go completely off the rails. The narrative loses its coherence, with plot points becoming increasingly convoluted and character motivations turning murky. It's as if the writers ran out of ideas and decided to throw every possible twist and cliché into the mix, hoping that sheer unpredictability would carry the day. Unfortunately, this approach backfires spectacularly.

Character Development and Acting The actors, to their credit, do their best with the material they are given. The main cast delivers solid performances, bringing depth and nuance to their characters in the film's more grounded moments. However, as the plot descends into chaos, even their talents can't salvage the situation. Character arcs that initially seemed promising become muddled, and relationships that were being carefully developed suddenly lack credibility. The disconnect between the actors' efforts and the script's shortcomings becomes painfully apparent.

Themes and Execution The film touches on several themes, including betrayal, identity, and the corrupting influence of power. These are fertile grounds for exploration, but the execution is where the film falters. Rather than delving deeply into these themes, the story skims the surface, offering only shallow insights. This superficial treatment makes it difficult for the audience to connect with the characters on an emotional level or to find meaning in their struggles.

Pacing and Editing Another significant issue is the pacing. The first half of the film is well-paced, gradually building tension and drawing the viewer in. However, the second half feels rushed and disjointed. Scenes that should be pivotal are glossed over, while less important moments are inexplicably dragged out. This erratic pacing disrupts the flow of the narrative and diminishes the impact of key plot developments.

Conclusion: Style Over Substance In conclusion, this film is a classic case of style over substance. The striking visual aesthetics and initial narrative promise are undermined by a plot that ultimately collapses under its own weight. Despite the best efforts of the cast and the occasional glimmers of potential, the movie fails to deliver a satisfying or coherent story. It's a reminder that while good looks can attract attention, they can't compensate for fundamental storytelling flaws. For viewers seeking a visually appealing but ultimately shallow experience, this film might suffice. For those looking for a more substantial and rewarding cinematic journey, it's best to look elsewhere.

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.