Beta Test

The movie had an interesting gimmick that was destroyed by some terrible acting and dialogue. The plot was decent, the initial set up and first 30 minutes were even suspenseful. I managed to watch the entire movie, but not without being ejected from my suspension of disbelief more than once. This was not because of a bad script, but because of terrible dialogue and the very bad acting of a few individuals. In particular, Kevon Stover, who reminded me of a poor man's Danny Trejo, was so cringe worthy and distracting that I was unsure whether or not he was added for comic relief. It seemed a waste of some passable d-list actors. I'm sorry, I rated it a 4, below average.

Hey, it's just a fun, mindless romp of urban science fiction with a great plot, decent directing, some sketchy dialog, good and bad acting, and you can even write a love poem while watching it and never miss a thing.

There is even a very 'Ballsy' stoke of genius in this movie, in that the scene from about 104:12 to 110:12 is a continuous shot. 6 full minutes. That took guts. I have to respect anyone who would do that and be willing to risk the whole movie. There was obvious no real risk here, and that's probably why it worked.

For the whiners out there who constantly wail: "I want my 2 hours back!" "Worst movie ever!" "I walked out in the first 10 minutes."...Just shut the hell up. You really do NOT how to watch a movie using basic 'discernment' techniques rather than judging the hell out of it like an old, angry housewife.

See, discernment allows an evaluation to grow while a judgement puts an idea or concept inside a contemplative box where it can never evolve beyond that place within your own mind where you originally judged it. That is indeed the most wretched excess of a personal 'opinion'. It wastes everyone's time and energy. You reviewers who prattle on like wounded princesses here are seriously lacking in the most basic of intellectual evaluations skills and shouldn't even be posting your reviews with educated adults. Jesus...

So, in regards to ANY movie, when you see the trailer and read some professional reviews, you pretty much know what you're in for. But anyone who plays the 'princess-victim' of utter disappointment after spending a dollar at Red Box seriously needs to ease off the meds.

...or at LEAST take some creative writing classes.

I'm not the review-writer really, but after seeing this movie and the absurdly high rating it gets here on IMDb I just had to write my 50 cents worth. To sum up some things about this movie in short:

• Acting: Poor/lacklustre/wooden/amateuristic - Directing: There was a director on set?! - Writing: Nice try, but utter fail - Production: Cheap

Guy is beta tester for a gaming company to find out he's controlling a real person (ex-employee turned against the company). If you like this premise alone, I strongly suggest you go and watch 'Gamer' because in that film this concept is executed 100 times better. Gamer and ex-employee turned avatar go against company, have a couple really slow-paced unbelievable fight-scenes towards the end. Director of gaming company has a popcorn-frenzy somewhere in the last part of the film... I mean really? Someone must really thought let's flip off our viewers and shove them some bs down their troath. Even for an Indie-movie with a low production budget this is an insult to nominal human intelligence in general, and they should have spend that money on repaving some road in Texas or something.

This movie is Into The Woods bad (and that movie was really bad). There's not a single thing that I can credit as being positive about this movie... Wel... some of the music was OK. You'll be craving the endtitles before the first 3rd of the movie has passed!

At the time of my review this is carrying a 7.1 score on IMDb. I'm left wondering if the user votes on this movie are bought from some click-farm in India.

So the premise of the movie is a chump who is the ultimate beta- tester for a game studio who gets to beta test a new game, only to find out he is actually controlling someone else in real life. As events unfold the uber-beta tester decides to "do the right thing" even under penalty of death.

As you can imagine, a movie that mixes video games and real-life footage has to be brilliantly convincing. This is not the case. At all. This carries, at best, SyFy production values in a movie with terrible CGI, awful acting and the result is, shamefully, something the actors will have to live with for the rest of their lives.

The "biggest fight scene" tries to cash in on Daredevil and the likes, but the premise is so contrived (and the execution so poor/unconvincing) that you'll avert your eyes or start laughing.

Sorry click-farmers... this is horrible.

BTW: if you remain unconvinced that this is not even worthy of a TV Movie, please bear in mind that it grossed $9000 box-office. mmmkkay?

Not 7.1. Not unless that is a scale of shittiness.

Summary: Could have been a good movie but it had a very limited budget for an action movie making it very lame and lacking.

This a first person shooter game that mixed with reality. Its not a novel idea but you can get a good movie out of it. The movie had a really good interaction between the gamer and the characters.

FPS means a lot of gun shooting and action scenes but nothing of that happened. The action most of time without gun shooting and focus on hand to hand combat. The action scenes in general is below average just compare it with "Hardcore Henry" you will find a great difference in quality.Instead of the action scenes the movie is full of long conversations which in most of the time useless. This could have been used to make the movie a little bit realistic but it was a wasted opportunity. Most of the time a lot of unrealistic events happens with a lot plot holes.

So in the end I can say that it was a good story and the actors made some good job but the script and the film direction was a great mess. This may be due to limited production budget but in the end it really affected the quality of the movie.