5th Passenger

If I could give it a -10, I'd complain I couldn't give it a -11.

Unbelievable bad script and acting (as in none). Homeworld 1 had better graphics, heck, I'm pretty sure Half Life 1 will hold up to this. It may have the tag "sci-fi", but I'm voting for IMDB to add a "sci-cry" tag, though Half Life 3 may be released sooner then that happening...

Edit; Atleast the keyboard warriors are telling the truth, the movie really sucks.

I love sci fi, especially "real ones" that are on space ships.

So I had to see this. There are a lot of known faces and decent actors in this movie, and a few really bad ones. Generic yelling black guy # 1 was very bad but most did a fine job.

The story wasn't bad but the script could have used some work. Okay it could have used a lot of work. Movie fights take a lot of work to be good, this only had one and they didn't put in a lot of work but it didn't ruin it.

What ruined it was certain characters who took decisions based on what mood the writers were in that day. We've all seen horror movies where they split up for no apparent reason, keep walking backwards or if they trip, they keep crawling until the bad guy gets them. This movie didn't have that but it did have some decisions based on the roll of dice it seemed. I really don't like that, especially in a space ship where you HAVE to assume every single person on that ship, with a vital role for the mission to be a success, has a certain amount of education, a certain amount of traning and certainly an IQ of above average. Script writers tend to forget that. In the real world, in a crisis, 80% of people don't actually panic and lose their head but for some reason well trained people on a space ship always seem to stick their own heads up their asses when stuff goes down. This movie could have been REALLY good with not too many changes.

Too many negative reviews and poor ratings don't make this movie that bad. In fact I quite enjoyed it. The movie moves at an acceptable pace, the story is fine and the acting is okay.

It looks like this is another film that I rate higher than what the majority viewers think. Usually it is the other way around. I consider this movie good enough to make it very watchable and pleasant to view. It fits perfectly in the sci-fi genre.

For a movie made on a shoestring it is an admirable result.

The plot lines are not new. There is a space crew in trouble. There are conflicts over authority. There is some perceived alien presence threatening the crew. There is a possible underlying government project.

The production is better than a typical sci fi TV show but not trying to extend the boundaries of CGI which seems to disappoint some. The ending may disappoint some as there is no extended battle. If you iike sci fi. most will at least accept it. I rate this is an average for many of the lower budget sci fi movies. That is, watchable since it should be about the story.It is a plus if you are a Star Trek fan to see familiar actors.

Note: It is cannot be a waste of 2 hrs since it does not even last that long.

A few minutes in, I was wondering why I was even watching, and I came here to read the reviews. I agreed with the people who wanted to give it negative stars. But for some reason, I didn't stop watching. The first 10 minutes or so are bad. Really, really bad. The acting was bad, the writing was worse, science was poor, and the political commentary on current events served no cinematic purpose. I had no complaints about the spaceship CGI.

After the first 10 minutes, it started picking up. The next ~50 minutes was decent. Nothing special, but not terrible.

The last 20 minutes or so were poor. Not bad, but below average. This is where the CGI took a bad turn, and the it looks like someone finished writing the script by recycling scenes and cliches from other movies. Even the trick ending was recycled, and if you didn't see it coming, I hope it is because you tuned out during the crappy start, and not because you missed the foreshadowing they applied with a sledgehammer. I guess you could argue that there was a second trick, but to me it looked like that got tacked on to make the ending artificially ambiguous. I think the movie would have been better served if they had committed to one "true" version and stuck with it.

Overall, I give it 4 out of ten. On my scale, movies between roughly 3 and 7 are watchable once. I've seen, and enjoyed, worse movies, but there are plenty of better options out there.