It's my second bad rating today.
I really hate doing this, but I hate even more seeing things like "rating 8/10 by 45 votes" for one really lousy movie. I wonder who gave this votes, may be the movie crew itself?
On the Subject:
1) It's a low budget movie.
2) Unknown (at least for me) actors with bad performance.
3) No special FX, low cost cameras.
4) Long scenes from the same point of view (like the number of cameras was very limited)
Sorry, but I prefer a well done stupid movie (Hollywood style) than a movie with good potential and very bad realization which is the case here. There is no excuse to make a movie without regards to any current technical standards only because it's not a Hollywood production. There are many good movies without using "state of the art" equipment, but this one is away from them. It looks like an unprofessional work to me.
I hope my comment prevents people from being misled like me by the high score here.
I really regret watching this movie. Pure waste of time.
I really hate doing this, but I hate even more seeing things like "rating 8/10 by 45 votes" for one really lousy movie. I wonder who gave this votes, may be the movie crew itself?
On the Subject:
1) It's a low budget movie.
2) Unknown (at least for me) actors with bad performance.
3) No special FX, low cost cameras.
4) Long scenes from the same point of view (like the number of cameras was very limited)
Sorry, but I prefer a well done stupid movie (Hollywood style) than a movie with good potential and very bad realization which is the case here. There is no excuse to make a movie without regards to any current technical standards only because it's not a Hollywood production. There are many good movies without using "state of the art" equipment, but this one is away from them. It looks like an unprofessional work to me.
I hope my comment prevents people from being misled like me by the high score here.
I really regret watching this movie. Pure waste of time.