Beyond the Sky

Small budget on this one, and it shows. You would wish it was only that. But the script is very, very poor. It's not absolutely incoherent, but you feel the writers tried to put more into it than there were means to get it done. The acting is not so bad. But you time and time again, during the duration, feel that this or that is ridiculous, and you never fully get caught up in the plot.

Of all the (countless) movies on the topic, you have very ample choice to find another much better.

Well as the headline says,i'm not quite sure what i shall believe, but this film came over me like an alien encounter. it is not a high flyer big budget movie, so what has been made here are quite sensational and groovy. when i write this im in my cabin in the dark woods of norway,and i dont dare to go outside taking a leak...why? watch the film and you¨ll find out. the story are pretty standard alienish, some of the acting seems inexperienced, but at the pivotal moments it does works. the filmography are typical documentarish style,with some low quality picture images, but the locations are nice,but what makes it worth watching is the special effects in the final part , and the shock-jolting moments out in the desert. i can recommend this one, and will very likely show it to my wife....thats sign of quality...

Interesting movie. A much more realistic approach to the debate between the truth and skepticism about alien abductions, in my opinion.

A good story with average acting and above average special effects. It's not breaking any molds here, but it's worth the watch if you enjoy stuff about extraterrestrial conspiracies.

Overall, I'd say Beyond the Sky is a pretty good alien abduction film. But a few blunders here and there stop it from getting a better score.

The movie makes use of some "cam shots", as it's basically following a video "journalist" (more of a blogger as he has no professionalism) who wants to disprove alien abductions. Fortunately it doesn't suffer from the usual shaky cam, blurry nonsense the "found footage" movies do. The camera shots are used in places and mostly done quite well. Most of the film is standard movie angles and all with just bits of cam footage tossed in at decent moments. Such restraint is definitely appreciated.

On the flip side, the so called journalist really doesn't deserve the title. He basically aggressively accuses alien abductees of lying, constantly getting in their face about things. While it's fine to not be a believer, to basically tell people that they're lying to cover up other traumatic experiences and badgering them about is downright stupid, and usually would result in a punch to the face. As a journalist, or even just a human being, the way the main character treats others is downright shameful.

The special effects are decently done (though most of that budget goes into the last few minutes of the movie). No cheesy special effects that you'd see in a SyFy flick. They have a budget and work well within it to make the most of the presentation.

One of the biggest flaws for me though, is that the movie basically does one of the stupidest things any show or movie could do. It shows you parts of the ending, and then jumps back to X days earlier. NEVER do that. EVER! You're basically spoiling your movie right from the start, which for a lot of people is enough to just give up on it right there. When you know the outcome, then all the rest of the movie becomes mostly meaningless. Everything that could have been an interesting reveal basically becomes an expected outcome.

If not for the horrible idea to put key parts of the end right at the start, this movie would have probably scored an 8 out of 10. It's really a wonderful low budget alien abduction film with a lot going for it.