Ejecta

I have to agree with the reviewer Gavin; I think he summed it up pretty well, except in my lowly and wretched opinion, I think he was just a BIT too generous. I ALMOST wanted to give this a '5' because, as Gavin mentioned, the 'Pedigree' of the film. Also, there were some truly effective moments, especially in the last 10 minutes or so. But, in all objective fairness as a whole, I had to give it a '4'.

I also LOVED 'PONTYPOOL'; and I feel it is indeed one of the best Horror films to come out of Canada and certainly is a perfect example of how to make a VERY effective Horror film with very little. I think that in this case, if they wouldn't have tried to go so much with the 'Found Footage' type delivery (although I can understand why, maybe, because of the obvious, severe budgetary restraints) and instead spent some more time developing substantial dialog for the interview between the blogger and the main guy (for example 'THE INTERVIEW' - in that case, almost ALL of the film is the questioning of a guy by two cops. But, it is VERY effective - I think they should have used that approach instead of all the wasteful running around in the forest, etc.)

Also, maybe I am in the minority here, but I absolutely could NOT stand the woman who played the military interrogator. Seriously Gawd-frigg'n-Awful. I absolutely HATED her little cutesy approach; it was horribly clichéd and painfully corny, especially for one SUPPOSED to be in a high-level military position. If she had just played it VERY straight and disciplined, as a military individual WOULD have, then that part of it at least would have gone better. Also, perhaps if they had just cast a coldly beautiful woman in that role, again playing it STRAIGHT without all the nauseating cutesy stuff, I really do think that would have gone a LONG way to improving the film. Now, I'm NOT talking about some Barbie Bimbo with large breasts (not that there is ANYTHING wrong with that :) But, just a good-looking, but steely cold woman, and with MUCH more incisive dialog, THEN I can see that part of the film being a LOT stronger. Think about it... Imagine her coming across as stone-cold and calculatingly efficient, and with MUCH better written dialog. If done properly, I think the sharp contrast between her beauty and amoral coldness could have been quite chilling and effective, raising the hair on the back of our necks instead her inane dialog causing our eyes permanently to roll infinitely far back in our heads...

So, unfortunately since the very two things I mention are pretty much the entire film, I do feel that if they had approached both of those parts in different ways, but still kept all the other story elements and style in place, that REALLY would have boosted the quality of this film and made it FAR more entertaining.

In my opinion, the film makers just took what could have been a decent, entertaining idea, and ruined it with a lazy and stupid approach.

Sad, but I think unfortunately true...

I wasn't completely disappointed with this film. There were a couple of things that really were clever. I wished they would have capitalized on those nuances that were unique and steered clear of the "found footage" filming style. Haven't we had enough found footage films to last a life time? What worked well is the use of real complaints that some of the abductees report; missing memory, showing up in strange places with no way of knowing how they got there, and the sleepless dull pain shrouded in unadulterated fear. That was creepy storytelling. It was a twist to consider the idea something is also controlling some of the visitors just like humans are controlled. Assuming all alien contact is only part of a bigger conspiracy of highly intelligent entities controlling the rest was a bright spot. Dire film with simple special effects made for a solid picture to catalog along with others that make the grade! Quick moving fun!

I usually like low key, low budget, Science Fiction films, but I could not get into this one.

It just did not have a strong enough story I would expect from a cheap Sci-Fi film.

It's a shame to. Some of the visual moments could have been classic, but the movie itself was not memorable.

It seem incoherent and inconsistent, which would not bother me so much if the movie was either cooler or more horrifying.

Too much was going on and not enough was said.

Not everyone can be Cronenberg. This film proves that. don't go.

17 August 2017. This review offers possibly the only real positive review of this movie. After watching hundreds of science fiction movies and plenty of horror ones too, this movie stands out for being a strikingly different and admirable addition to the science fiction genre. Thank you for a limited film budget. Makes for some daring and experimentally brilliant filmmaking.

What perhaps most vital to even appreciate this movie is to summon up and keep in mind the possible historical dark secret about a Roswell conspiracy cover up and a sinister government discovery of aliens years ago which would lay a reasonable foundation upon which the movie plays out to make sense of what follows.

This science fiction-horror fusion is one of the few successful transformational films. Unlike Event Horizon (1997) that started with a strong sense of science fiction fascination to only descend into a crazily skewed horror motif, Ejecta manages to intermingle and blend The Thing (1979) with creepy intelligence using the riveting found footage technique pioneered with The Blair Witch Project (1999) to offer a dirty version of the clean intensity of The Signal (2014) which Was released the same year as Ejecta. The low budget special effects fit well with the movie's overall cinematic photography, using electricity as well as different rougher textures and darker colors to provoke a strong unique visceral alien intensity. The difficult use of flashbacks captured the sense of chaotic, off-balanced twisting, emotive weirdness all the while maintaining a coherent, intelligent progression of the main storyline.

The only significant weaknesses of this movie occur with the difficulty of managing the overuse of revealing alien presences without losing the scary shocking fear intensity and the almost two-dimensional reaction of one of the characters when faced with the alien unknown.

The performances are outstanding with the odd and strikingly strange William Cassidy character who apparently is experiencing an otherworldly phenomenon who is being interviewed by Joe Sullivan who was mysteriously invited to meet with Cassidy. Julian Richings as William Cassidy offers an award- winning performance with his schizophrenic presentation, striking physical features, and a fascinating personality. Another story is also concurrently presented with a sinister female interrogator, one of the most potent, strong solid female antagonist who is seeking to discover and confirm alien life by any means possible. What occurs then is a back and forth reveal of the entire story while massive ejecta from the sun closes in on earth. While not as fascinating or tight in its scale or glamour as The Arrival (2016), it has a comparable emotional cinematic bite as Phantoms (1998). By the end of the movie there is a puzzling sense of haunting dark balanced satisfaction as the story nears its completion.

Come on! If it doesn't have a budget of hundreds of million of dollars it's a bad movie? The IMDb rating is way too low for this film.

It is not perfect, that I admit, but it is far from bad. I think the worst part of it was the interrogation room. They used some weird tech and they made a great effort to explain that no one knows how it works, only what it does. It had absolutely nothing to do with the story. Also the psychopathic doctor cliché went a little bit too far and for no good reason.

It basically played out like an over extended Outer Limits episode sans the budget. Lots of annoying clichés were used like the evil shadowy government organization, the humanoid alien that makes cameras fizzle right when it enters the shot, the found footage bit, the black eyes, etc. However it stops right at the edge of being too much and overall it kind of works.

Bottom line: the ridiculous low budget shows in the special effects, the sets and, unfortunately, the acting quality. The story, though, is interesting enough to keep someone watching and always trying to understand what is going on. I wouldn't recommend it, but I can't tell people off, either. A bit too long for the content, though.