Sorry, this movie sucks

Highly Overrated But Still Good

Fresh and Exciting

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

I can't believe some reviewers language - inventive, original. More appropriate language is redundant and boring. To each his own I guess. I think it's trying to be a war flick with some alien junk mixed in. This movie is NOT Cowboys and Aliens. Maybe it's a haunting drama about bad characters in futile pursuits. Acrotomaphilia-for Christ sakes

A shoddy, stale-looking, dull sci-fi that manages to make alien contact as mundane as ordering French Fries. To make things worse, the "auteur" of this low-IQ piffle focused much more on politics than on sci-fi, filling up the movie with tons of extremely stupid fake-CNN news-flash exposition, which shows the U.S. invading Iran and eventually causing the outbreak of WW3. (The notion that a liberal-lead U.S. would even contemplate such a move is truly hilarious. What, Obama or Hellary invading Iran to save Israel? Bolivian mushrooms must be very cheap these days.)So no, I am not joking in the slightest when I tell you that this garbage is a cross between "Born on the 4th of Scientology"… Sorry, got confused there… A cross between "Born on the 4th of July" and "2010". Is it as dumb as it sounds? Much worse. Because dumb can be occasionally entertaining, but this idiocy is just excruciatingly boring. The premise of an alien being restoring human limbs is not bad, but it's handled with such incompetence by the writer and the actors (especially that sociopathic secret agent: over-actor extraordinaire) that it makes no difference what potential there was or wasn't in it. Certainly there was zip potential in combining left-wing propaganda with alien contact. I'm pretty sure some pompous mongrel had already done that anyway.To give you a hint just how much muddy pee-worthy incompetence the film swims in, the director can't even make up his mind whether the story takes place in the States or Australia, because there are clear indications of both.

I have read a number of reviews on this site and disagree with most. I have read nearly 330 science fiction novels and with the exception of a few you can pretty well see what is coming. This movie was a delight in that the end was never obvious until you experienced the climactic scenes. This movie is a low budget masterpiece in the same vein as "Crawl or Die" which was done for $6,000.00. I am sure the budget for this film was higher but I liked both equally in that the endings were surprises. The cast was great, the acting was spot on. The character development was complete if you pay attention (some have criticized it). One reviewer noted that the actors were "obviously" meant to be cheap replacements for Christian Bale and Guy Pearce. I agree and throw in Amy Smart while you are at it. These actors did all three proud if that is what the intention was. The cinematography was done with low cost equipment but it was very well directed giving the audience the views it needed when needed. I, frankly, was amazed at the quality. One possible drawback to some is how the depressing the overall mood is at the beginning but that is integral to the story. Just so you know, I am a big fan of this type of film ... two of my past favorites are "Zardoz" and "The Quiet Earth" to give you an idea. If you liked those films you will enjoy this one.

Yeah, you can find a lot of problems with this film, from some of the characters being too cliché to the (I can't believe I'm saying this) lack of special effects, in a few scenes, that would have added weight to the movie. Still, it isn't bad at all and, most important, it delivers more than you expect. It has a good plot twist, it keeps you guessing and makes you think you got it - but you'll find out you didn't. I think it's the best a small budget, unknown actors (but they are actors, not Richard Grieco...), and aspiring writers and director can get. It may not be of Spielberg value, but it's on an honest path towards it.