Real Playing Game

I was very interested to see this movie after learning that it had been "made in Portugal" and especially after watching the trailer. However I was hugely disappointed. In fact,I left during the interval, something I have not done in a very long time. The acting was very stilted, I could not get into or enjoy the film. In my opinion, if this movie had been made in Portuguese, that is, actors speaking Portuguese, then the actors and the movie would have come across as more natural. I think they were concentrating so hard on speaking English they forgot how to act. This is a great disappointment as Portugal has produced great films and it is just a pity this is not one of them. The trailer appears to be the best part of the film.

Okay, so the whole 'Hunger Games' scenario is very popular right now – the one where a group of people are stuck in some sort of situation that involves them having to kill each other so that one ultimately survives. Here, with 'RPG' Portugal throws its hat into the ring.

In a not too distant future (where everyone drives slightly more space-age cars than now), a handful of rich people want to live forever, so they go to a place which makes them go into a 'virtual reality' world (think 'The Matrix')where they're portrayed as younger versions of themselves (to get a feel for what it's like to be young again). However, once there, they have to kill each other – only one can apparently be reincarnated. Why? I don't know. I don't think I picked up on that.

So, there you have it. Oh, and this is probably a good time to point out that, if you saw Rutger Hauer's name on the poster, you may need to know that he's not in it that much. He's one of the oldies who quickly gets replaced by a younger version of himself (and hence actor).

I can take the lack of originality in the plot and the slightly 'made-for-TV' feel of it all. It was the acting that got me. I've sat through countless badly-acted horror films and never let the acting annoy me. However, here, everyone seemed to be reading their lines. At first I thought it was because many of the cast didn't speak English as their first language. However, when I saw they had a British girl among the cast who also seemed to have trouble speaking English, I realised they had just had to scrape the bottom of the barrel for acting talent.

The Hunger Games may be popular, but this is copying it in 'scenario only.' It's nothing like it. Therefore, if you're a fan of the Hunger Games, don't watch this expecting anything similar. Also, if you're generally a fan of people having to kill each other for sport (think Battle Royale or the Running Man), RPG isn't half as good as either of them.

Just forget this film all together. I'm sure Portugal can do better.

I was willing to get past the thought that it's one more "Survivor"/"Hunger Games" concept ripoff and was curious to see if they managed to do something different. The beginning was promising but then it quickly descended into cardboard cutout characters and not much action either.

I understand that this was a low budget production so they couldn't have much in terms of the SFX and action scenes but they could have made a great ensemble piece if they spent a lot more times thinking while writing, coming up with character developments and then treating it almost like a theatrical play with a lot of rehearsals. That's how a low budget production can compensate for the lack of expensive effects and fight choreographies - by taking the time to write much better script and rehearse actors to perfection.

Instead they pinched bits and pieces from different aspects available to this kind of movie and ended up with nothing. Even "romance & sex" scenes were unconvincing.

10 wealthy old people play a virtual reality game where they inhabit the bodies of young people. They have to kill one another leaving 1 person at the end who gets to keep the young body even in real life.

The idea is great and makes for great SciFi and some good ethical and moral questions. However, aside from Rutger Hauer's first 5 minutes, you quickly realise that the dialogue is awful, as if put together by some student writers who don't have a clue. It's like something from a 1950's melodrama.

The acting is pitiful mostly throughout the film. Not just bad, but embarrassingly bad. I felt for the actors, if they watched themselves on screen they may well be embarrassed at themselves for their poor performances.

Was it the Director that had no idea how to direct them? I don't know but the videographer was poor too. Obviously the camera was hand held throughout, but not even steady cam. So watching it was almost like having vertigo.

I gave it a 3 because I loved the idea of it and the overall storyline, I just think how it was brought to film was poor, amateurish and sloppy.

What is the matter with you people? This cerebral thinking person's gem of a metaphysical film has lofty themes and piquant dialog--quoting Sartre at one point and speculating on what Hitler knew at twenty years of age for heaven's sake. Shades of Bergman or Bunuel! The entire premise is deeply personal as well as universal--what does anyone really know at twenty of the inherent treachery of human interaction and aren't we all trapped in some prison or another--whether it be old age or the naivete of youth? This film makes good use of low budget sci fi sets, as well as carries on the European auteur tradition of tackling the grand themes of philosophy. The fragile balance between trust and suspicion, cooperation and competition, love and hate are so explicitly explored here, how could anyone miss it?