Jekyll Island

Well what can I say, that was a waste of time. The acting is bad and the story looks like everything was put together last minute with very little research etc. The music background was tacky and such a cliché and so where a bunch of quotes and monologues. The conclusion is predictable the cinematography... well there is none and even the costumes look like they were bought from the nearest mall. Generally, it felt more like a drama class project and less than a professional job. I gave it 3 stars and in my most generous mood I wouldn't rate it with more than a 4. I would strongly advice for choosing another film to watch tonight.

I don't spend a lot of time reviewing movies, but when I looked this movie up on IMDb and saw a few 'great reviews' I figured those folks were getting paid, so I wanted to add my thoughts.

My theory is that they made the camera work so bad (the camera is constantly shaking and zooming in and out) the viewer wouldn't notice the terrible character development and lack of plot. Seriously, if you have ever tried to take a photo with a camera while the the zoom/focus constantly is going in and out, then you will have a preview of what it is like trying to watch this piece of junk. Did they give an I-phone to a 2 year old to do the camera work?

As far as the plot, totally predictable and weak as water, and I felt no no connection to the characters.

Bottom line: if you were wanting to present a movie where nothing worked, this would be a superb example.

Low-budget waste of time and resources. I can't imagine waking up every morning and saying to "I can't wait to work on this!" Much has been said about the spastic cinematography, elevator music score, ridiculous plot, poor dialog, and D-level emoting. Agree on all prior comments indicating this must've been made as a junior high school project. Personally I believe this was made expressly as a tax write-off to decrease a beach vacation rental. Watching people pull wires as high drama. I hope the write off was worth squandering so much effort.

After trawling through a splurge of "awful" "didn't finish it" "they ate my brain" reviews.. i was wondering if i wasn't "on a different moral compass" but possibly in a different mindset.. I thought (and this is why i bothered looking) somebody might have speculated on a little suggestion. Perhaps the film wasn't great so my thinking picked upon character representation.. wouldn't get to deep here.. but sometimes it seemed as though the reasons for these obscure character traits were on a deeper level with characters representing the government, federal reserve, the public... the choppy sea as the big scary world etcetera..... Might have made/maybe was a wonderful novel but the Hardyesque qualities have been lost in Hollywoods vision... (because that never happens)

This film tells the story of a finance guru, who is convicted of some financial crime. The government gets him to stop a cyber attack on the American stock market, but he finds out the truth is actually different than he is led to believe.

The first minutes of the film may have been completely lost on me, as I'm still unclear what crime has Guy been convicted of. Is the stopping of the cyber attack a part of an exoneration deal? It would have been nice to find out. Anyway, the story is a little thin, as you can tell from the film length and from the lack of details in the plot. The supposed moral struggle by Guy is not obvious at all. The part where they have done computer generated lights running along a cable to indicate signals being transmitted in the cable got me laughing. This is such a primitive way to convey this message! After all, it is just a film to kill time, but don't expect to much.