Holes in the Sky: The Sean Miller Story

I actually paid to watch this movie. What a BIG mistake! Nothing really happened until the last 10-15 minutes of this movie, and then what happened wasn't scary at all because it was filmed SO poorly. Shaky camera without a full view of the action. I had to watch the ending 2 times for it to make any sense. Bland, uninteresting characters whose actions often made no sense. The movie could have done without the characters of the sister and her awful husband. Did not care that the movie ended with the disappearance of 2 of the characters. Was looking forward to watching this movie. Should have spent my money on another movie. Skip This Movie!!

The biggest fault of this movie is that it focuses way too much on the filmmakers, which really skews the focus of this movie. The part where they talk about sad songs is super cringe, and it feels like a vanity project. They don't even describe what the original Sean Miller story was until like a third of the way in. It feels like a student film, not in a good way. The audio is not good. I feel like we saw way too much of the filmmakers for this to be a believable found footage "documentary" film. The video quality is also pretty poor. The acting is poor. The most common voice and face is Ash, who's supposed to be a professional filmmaker/documentarian, which goes against how you make a documentary. This definitely feels like the filmmakers had friends left positive reviews, so the IMBD score is egregiously skewed.

To make movie, and to do it basicly from home, a 101 encyclopedia how to make a fictious documentary about a F. L. crime dissapearance, involving loads of hi tech stuff and trying to make an ''invaders from space'' abduction into something cool and nervewrecking...

well dissapointed i was, not by the efforts and esteem, more the fact that the story is very generic...based on all the true life incidents that runs the gossip over there usa... that leads to a heartstuck lack of realism, and i do feel that i am one of the best moduscandidates to test such a film on, mostly due to im a grumpy old man, i am considering me as an eminent observer and viably sceptic and fully litterate norwegian that thinks far beyond the countyborder...

yes its a film for the digital generation, baiting every conspirative thout on social media, and for the rednecked illiterat... a 2 star recommendation is generously given to ''holes in the plot''

... Obviously inflated the user reviews.

Some films use found footage and documentary style shots as an artistic choice. From the very first frame, it's plain to see this was not made out of artistic choice but budget necessity.

Meandering, boring, full of clear self insert characters, wouldn't fool even the daftest human alive for a millisecond that it's real... Genuinely more of an endurance test than a movie.

Tries to keep building and building this sense of mystery and curiosity, but basically just stretches out it's very basic story of maybe, two or three sentences and stretches it out to movie length.

Utter waste of time.

This is one of those disposable films I put on just so I have something to watch, and not expect too much. Of course I'm always open to an unexpected gem, but this was not one of those.

It is just your basic generic disposable 'at least its not unwatchable'. Not really engaging, and some fairly problematic premises. I was hoping for more, I give it 5 stars because anything lower is reserved for films that make me mad for being so bad, waste of time, or films that prioritize commentary over artistry.

Better than a student film project, but nothing inspiring at all. There wasn't any point in the film, turn of events, or surprise or sequence that had any impact at all. Not necessarily a train wreck, but more of a quarterback fumble on the 50 yard line.

The worst most annoying part is some of the footage is supposedly shot by the film maker on his cell phone, and guess what? The filmaker is shooting cell video in portrait mode. I mean...