Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Josephina Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

midge56 I strongly disagree with the other reviewer's fixer suggestions. Those were clearly the suggestions only a 20 year old would like with no consideration of what OTHER viewers might like.The first problem was nobody over 21 wants to see a movie which is nothing but a bunch of kids as the sole focus of the movie. Especially wearing cookpots on their heads & stupid pieces of debris & crushed cans, etc. What is this... an "Our Gang" episode? No. You don't need to fill the show with fake blood as suggested unless you want to lose what little audience you had... not to mention damage your rating further. That again is something a juvenile would want. Adults do not need graphic violence to enjoy a movie. Nor should a writer present his work for the opinions & criticisms of the cast & crew. He may be a bad writer but that would end his career permanently if he asked for suggestions. The only opinions a writer can afford to request is from a trusted friend or spouse. However, a good director should have held a script review with the cast & writer where issues would be discussed in general.However, he was right about no parent allowing their child or teen to watch this movie. Since no adult wants to watch a bunch of self denigrating kids with 1930's style cookpots, makeshift swords, etc. All we were missing was the beanie with the propeller. That leaves you with the low end of the 17-21 age groups for an audience. Parents wont allow anyone younger to attend. Adults don't want to watch a movie about confused kids. Remember what happened to "Last action hero"? The audience came to see Schwarzenegger as the star. Not a kid. The movie failed miserably. It takes a rare quality family show with a great story like Harry Potter, Enders Game or Daryl for a film starring kids to be a success.The majority of the movie should have been on the Skyark with plenty of clean technology & more about the conditions, the rebels, the interactions between the Skyark groups & their families. Not violence & endless battles. Also, a better ending on the Skyark.We don't need more dirt or scroungier kids either. Nor do we need to see a B movie Zombie show. Again, that is something a juvenile would come up with. Those fixer suggestions would have done worse, not better.You needed to find a better premise & plot instead of dumping a group of confused kids into a Zombie version of Our Gang. I do agree that these kids had no idea what they were doing & the dialogue & actions were clearly missing direction & guidance. No one wants to see constant self denial & lack of energy from any actor. Much less children. I cannot understand how anyone could throw away good money to produce a film without ensuring they have a good story and competent actors which would compel an audience to watch it.He was right that you should consider the age group you are targeting. Despite starring kids, this was not fit for kids or families & is not a theme for adults either. Just that slim 17-21 age group.As it is, this movie is a waste of time. Too violent for kids & unpalatable for adults.

sigmacademy Personally I believe this movies was made for a much young audience (in other words, not teen or adult sci-fi). It definitely had a "The Tribe" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0274988/?ref_=nv_sr_2) feel to it. This story has a lot of potential, but somewhere it slightly went off track, as if it was unsure of what type of movie it was trying to be (scifi or family film). The story has a lot of interpretation that can be found within the concept or even interaction of the main characters, but the film itself doesn't try to be overly technical or philosophical; it's simply a plain and simple story of survival for the young main characters, who doesn't feel particular fear or overly extremes of angst or tension in their struggle, which in turn might be seen as "poor acting" by some. IMHO it is simply because it was made for a younger audience which might not understand such complex human, emotional or societal issues. The storyline was a bit rushed in my opinion, with characters just dumped into the story to create emotional loss later on, without really explaining what their role in the movie really was. An example is the main character, Rags/13 who is supposed to be the hero of the story, and the other younger kids at the camp and yet spends much of the story trying to become the hero whose transition was simply too quick and contrived, most of who has no clear function within the camp. Although it is meant as a coming of age story, it simply tries too hard to focus on the emotional moments of the film and not enough on what is going around them. Monsters are scattered at key points, almost as a forced moment of tension for the characters, and implied explanations are too readily available without a rational explanation why the explanation might be the correct one, automatically assuming the reasons given by the main character are the correct one, without even considering alternatives. Also, the story doesn't explain why kids are dropped to the surface with no provisions or survival gear, yet "Skunk" gets a eye camera (sophisticated technology) to take to the surface. If you went down to a planet full of monsters, wouldn't you take some sort of protection or weaponry with you to increase your chances of survival, especially when you are on an important mission? It also doesn't go into detail why it would dump kids on the surface of the planet in drop pods, and yet bring the entire SkyArk down to pick them up again. In science fiction there are certain conventions in every story that allow characters for certain capabilities or limitations - in this film, there are no such conventions, which leads to a somewhat confused storytelling process. The "blue drop" also has no real explanation of what it is or how it works. Hard core sci-fi fans will probably figure out long before the big fight at the end what the connection between it and the monsters are.The "Monster" catchphrase also sounds as if it could have been lifted and somewhat modified from Stallone's "The Demolition Man". It feels as if it is somehow inappropriate in this movie, and some other phrase might have been better. The main characters also try to hard to bring purpose to their every action and every consequence, rather than on the journey each of them takes and how it effects their group dynamic in the process. The end was also a bit overdone, when considered with the general pace and tone of the moment, trying to be overly heroic when the film was clearly trying to focus on the journey of the characters and their obstacles. Worth at least a single look, but am looking for more in my science fiction films.NOTE: Other reviewers have touched on the technical issues of the film. I have focused more on the story and the characters themselves.

rushknight This movie has a great many ideas that could have been put together effectively, had the director and writers had the right goal in mind. The goal that they chose was to make a film of self-discovery, early teenage romance, and a coming-of-age story set in the midst of apocalyptic desolation. All that would have been fine except that too many necessary parts of the puzzle were not available.As always, I am here to brazenly presume that I could do better! If you're interested, I have some "fixes" I would have applied had I been involved.1. The biggest missing piece, of course, is the acting. Coming-of-age stories are typically dramatic in the extreme, and very demanding of the actors involved. Early love, infatuation, disappointment and broken hearts, betrayal, jealousy, depression, passion, the death of loved ones.. It should have been evident from the start that all of the young people involved in this film don't have the acting chops yet to pull this off. I would instead suggest that the film be focused much more on action. Less time playing sad music and watching downcast eyes. I got REALLY tired of watching the hero periodically give up and slump to the ground in defeat, especially since he didn't seem to be trying very hard. Don't ask him to portray such feelings, instead keep him in the fray. Bring on the monsters! 2. Budget concerns. Obviously this is not a high budget feature. That's OK, they did great with what they had. I think it could have come off a little bit better if they'd put more emphasis on dirt. Quite frankly, all of the important parts of the movie were much too clean to be convincing. The actors looked freshly washed. Some of them even have hair that can't exactly keep it's look if you live in a garbage dump. I would suggest filming after they'd actually lived in the dust and sand for a few days without a shower.3. Direction and Pacing. The story kept slowing down, the motives of the characters appeared to change constantly. Just have a goal and stick with it. The entire story appears to happen within a day! That's not enough time for the characters to grow and reach the sort of conclusions they reached. I felt as though this should have been at least a few weeks worth. Some re-writing is absolutely essential here. Character growth takes time. If you really want your story's timeline to happen quickly, leave out the drama and take my earlier suggestion to bring on the action.4. Violence. This is conceptually a very violent movie! This movie has monsters, sword fighting, killing, it's all here. And yet blood was mysteriously absent. The fighting stunts are weak and difficult to follow, and completely nonsensical. Blood is a must, and death scenes should be on camera, not suddenly off camera and assumed.5. Common sense. This is tough and maybe even unfair, but too many things happen that simply don't exemplify the sort of things rational people would do. The writer should have sat back, had some random people read the script and ask what impressions came to mind. People would immediately give some corrections. It can be hard for a writer to pull his head out of his work and look at it objectively, so outside input is critical.6. Casting. There was really not much need to have so many actors in this film. Or rather, there was no need to have so many extras. Too many of the kids said and did nothing, all the way until they were removed from the story. Why not just trim the cast down to the more important characters?I'm not certain who the audience for this movie was supposed to be. Is it a family film? It has some pretty violent undertones for a family film. It's clearly a sci-fi monster film. It has all the elements of something I wouldn't want my children to watch, and yet it pulls it's punches, coming off as surgically clean. It's like a horror film with no horror.

datacain bleh! Stay away!I hope these kids are given a proper chance at acting with better writing and directing.CG was pretty decent in some parts (there was not much CG though), however some CG effects were also a little off.Bad writing! The story is fairly rubbish and the dialog while 'ok' in a couple of small parts, was mostly just bad filler.Poor characters who flip-flop attitude and decisions between scenes.Bad directing. :\Bad locations and sets!World felt empty despite the dialog trying to imply differently.Prosthetics were not too bad.