Light

Well, without ever having heard about this 2024 sci-fi thriller titled "Light", I opted to sit down and watch it, as I stumbled upon it by random chance. I didn't really know what I was in for, but the movie's synopsis sounded interesting enough.

Now, had I noticed that the movie had scored a staggering 2.7 rating here on IMDb prior to sitting down and watching it, I might have skipped on the movie entirely. However, I can understand why the movie has landed such a low rating, because this movie was a swing and a miss from writer and director Matt Woollard.

The storyline is supposed to have an alien creature stalking a crash-landed mother on a dark planet. But instead of that, which actually was an interesting concept, we are treated to 93 minutes of close-ups of Christine Roche and Gia Lily's faces in some low budget space suits, with a purple filter added to the camera, while they are delivering monotone dialogue. Yeah, there was absolutely nothing interesting happening throughout the course of the movie.

I wasn't familiar with the cast ensemble in the movie. Not that it really mattered, because the acting was severely restricted, as the actresses and actors virtually had nothing to work with.

"Light" looks and feels like it was shot in a 5 foot by 5 foot stage, making it look very low key and low budget.

If you enjoy sci-fi more than life itself, then you might get a kick out of watching writer and director Matt Woollard's 2024 movie. However, if you sit down to watch a movie with the intention of being entertained, then "Light" is not a movie that I would recommend you waste your precious time, money or effort on. Some of us suffered through this dumpster fire of a movie, so you don't have to; you're very welcome.

My rating of "Light" lands on a very generous one out of ten stars.

Just managed to make it through this steaming pile. Also just realised that it's released date was 1st April, which makes sense as it was a joke. A 4 key piano tune (if it qualifies as a tune) is supposed to convey suspense, terrible lighting meant at times I could ignore the picture completely and listen as I would do a radio play. I'd say the plot was terrible although I'm unsure it actually has one. I can see why some gave up before the end as I was tempted to leave it unfinished. If there was a budget for this then it was likely spent on smoke machines and torch batteries because that's all the effects this has to offer sadly.

This was definitely a budget Sci Fi film; but having a tight budget is no crime. The premise reminds me of the Sci Fi short stories I used to voraciously consume as a teenager and a young adult. The subject is tightly contained, there's an air of discomfort and oppression, and there's a disturbing twist. I think the acting was fine especially given the constraints of the survival suits they were required to wear, the sense of claustrophobia was palpable, and the story was original (although there were a lot of elements nicked from elsewhere). What ruins it is its length. This should have been a short. And there was a bizarrely hammy interaction near the end with a new character and some hand signals. However, I'm still thinking about the plot the next day - which is a good sign.

I watched this thinking a review rating of 2.8 mighty justify a view. I was wrong. 2.8 is far above and beyond what this film deserves. Everything about it was bad. The plot sketchy, the acting almost non-existent due to the characters in spacesuits with only their faces visible though the visors, also making movement slow and ponderous, filmed in excruciating detail as each step is meticulously followed across a flat, barren slightly stony landscape, but with the permanent fog it is difficult to work out where they are coming from or aiming to get to. And the fairy lights should have stayed on someone's Christmas tree rather than finding their was into the prop box for a science fiction film. I didn't think a science fiction film could get much worse than the dreadfully dreary Spaceman where the Spaceman in question spends most of the film in banal conversation with a giant spider, or the underwhelming and at times quite boring DUNE remake, but this one is far, far more boring than either. What's gone wrong with science fiction filming making?

I love long movies. But this story was definitely destined to be a short film. One in a compilation of many, perhaps.

I would give it more stars if it was that.

I get it. They used close-ups and fog all through the movie because of budget constraints. They could have done more by using the same budget for a much shorter movie (or indeed just a short film of about 35 minutes or less).

The acting is fine, no issue with that. The camerawork is fine, although they were forced to use the minboggingly constant closeup shots. The soundtrack is fine, but again it would have worked if it was a short film. It just drones on.

You glance at how far through the movie you got and it's a only half. Wow.