Retina (2017) User Reviews

Nice story, but little dialogue

[Tenagon · 5/10 · 12 May 2018]

The plot is quite nice, but there are too many quiet minutes in this movie for me to enjoy it. People do stuff without speaking to each other, like pulling a gun on someone or getting shot and saying nothing. Which is a shame cuz this is actually an action/conspiracy movie that could be much more. but I found it boring.

For this reason I don't recommend this movie to average joe's (like me). if you don't like to watch movies where 10 minutes pass and nothing is said, and you are used to Hollywood movies, this one isn't for you.

5/10 since the story is ok

Dreams and reality

[TheLittleSongbird · 4/10 · 19 June 2018]

Was drawn into seeing 'Retina' with a cool poster/cover, a very intriguing and creative premise (one of the most innovative for any film seen recently) and as someone with a general appreciation for the genre. That it was low-budget, which from frequent personal experience is rarely a good sign due to that there are so many poor ones out there, made me though apprehensive.

'Retina' is a film it doesn't do enough with its potential (although there are far bigger wastes of potential in film) and could have been much better, can't say that it is a great film because it isn't. It is not a terrible film though, as far as recent low-budget film viewings go it's lacklustre but with good things. It certainly could have been far worse, considering the large number of films seen recently being mediocre at best and irredeemably terrible at worst.

Lets start with the positives. The scenery is atmospheric and spooky and 'Retina' is surprisingly well shot and easy on the eye, was expecting a cheap looking film and to me that wasn't the case here.

Found that the acting was not bad, while not award-worthy it was not amateurish and it seemed like the actors were trying to engage.

Also that there were a few nice moments that intrigued and there was some suspense and unsettlement, the first portion is promising.

The suspense and unsettlement doesn't come consistently however, with the second half having very little if any of either. What stops them from being frequent and stronger is an at times deadly dull pace with too many overlong scenes of little going on, not all necessary either and there for padding mainly, and also a structure that is not as cohesive or clear as it could have been.

'Retina's' idea was great but the content is nowhere near enough for a feature film. It feels more like a short film over-stretched. The over-stretched sense is present too in a deliberately sparse but rushed-first-draft-stage script. With a pace and structure that fails to compel it is very difficult to ignore.

Characters have very little to them, while the editing is careless at times, the direction shows little personality or atmosphere, the sound is random and obvious and the music is more monotonous than ominous.

Overall, lacklustre. 4/10 Bethany Cox

Silent movies had more dialogue!

[Australian1 · 3/10 · 13 May 2018]

For a start, what's with these movies where you watch 5 mins then they go 6 days earlier, 6 months earlier.... Start a story and get on with it and stop with the interminable confusing flashbacks! The "plot" for this movies could have been good, but minutes pass with just a moaning soundtrack and either someone is sitting in a train saying nothing, doing nothing, B&W close-up scenes of things, of people's faces, well part of a face, part of an action, too much macro shots becomes very annoying. One loses the thread going back and forth... Can't recommend this movie. The whole script/dialogue must have been one page!

Terrifically bad...and yet

[blackroc-03888 · 1/10 · 24 September 2021]

A few 20ish friends get together, clean up the old barn and make a movie!

"Gosh, Judy!" "Idd'n it Swell, Mickey!?" Purportedly a love child project 10 years in the making. That fits the timeline perfectly.

So, in spite of the admirable technical accomplishment of actually making a movie in the first place , let alone one with occasional flashes of inspiration and on a budget that probably cost someone his second year of college...at a good school, which should not be skipped!!

In spite of all the "yeah buts" this is, finally, what it is - a precocious twelve year old'a idea of a thriller. Unfortunately the concept never matured.

The interesting thing, the thing a committed artist prone to useful analysis might glean from a bunch of mostly negative reviews is what matters. And what's interesting.

Outline it: Lessons learned: They hated it: Bad pacing Poor storytelling Bad dialogue Silly plot devices (All sounds pretty bad, non?) But, as an artist, the question is: what does that mean?

Well, almost every one of us who hated it watched it all. We all sat through a movie we hated.

Now, what does THAT mean and what do the viewers potential motivations, their internal approbations that we're triggered, offer as useful insights?

We get good reviews from morons as often, bad reviews from them. You can't succeed on good reviews alone, they're poison and can kill your creative souls faster than bad reviews.

Artists learn about the impact we have by ignoring the superficial "hurrays" and "calls to be banished" and instead, in strong reactions, good or bad, try to understand what buttons we've succeeded in pushing and which buttons are not even wired up.

I'm surprised to see this movie has stuck with me. It really stinks...but! It's still eating my lunch and that suggests I need to look at what strength this movie maker has that got such that some aspect of his piece got in...and more deeply than I might've considered right after I finished watching it...I mean, after I finished throwing up...

Waste of time

[blueriverpebble · 1/10 · 31 January 2020]

The Director seemed to think looooong drawn out senseless scenes would be interesting or he just needed filler for a BORING story. Very irritating dream sequences. The acting was horrendous and The main actor/character had absolutely no chemistry. I felt nothing for her at all. I think all the high scores here are definitely from people who had some connection to the movie. I fast forwarded through most of it. A couple of stops for plot points and understood the movie. Basically 10 min. of story and the rest just boring filler.

Not the worst ive seen but it was really bad.

[dchchaman · 1/10 · 15 May 2018]

Nice idea behind the story. But it continues very boring without any excitement. Really bad . Waste of time . I hated it .

Just don't.

[vegicat · 1/10 · 16 May 2018]

Easily one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Terrible acting, terrible filming, no plot. Pointless, annoying dream sequences. Stupid soundtrack. Definitely not a "thriller", since it was boring as heck. There is zero character development and you won't care about the lead actress at all. I kept asking myself, when is this going to be over? Do yourself a favor and skip this hot mess.

Might be good if you like this sort of thing

[vchimpanzee · 10 October 2021]

I was more impressed when I saw how few people there were in the credits. That's a sign of independent film and those are usually good. I'm not really sure what to say about how good this film was, because it's not really my style, but I was entertained enough at times. Something about eh way it ended seemed less than satisfying but the circumstances of April's situation were explained. I'm not sure what Brian's contribution was.

I wouldn't say the acting was outstanding but it was good enough. If you're looking for creepy this film delivers. There is some mystery as you wonder why April is being treated like a criminal, even though she's clearly the victim of something. We don't see her tell her story to the cop or whatever he is, but we see flashbacks showing what she experienced.

April's dreams reminded me of the movie "The Parallax View" where people watched videos that resembled those dreams. These were intended to brainwash. In this case, everything was blue except a red blanket, and editing was very quick. Most of the video was shots of New York City, and there were words on screens apparently intended to form a message.

There was a also a dark green flashback to New Year's eve but I didn't understand the purpose other than to show April was unhappy and drinking.

I am confused about one thing. Who gave this film a V-chip rating? While TV-14 was clearly correct, there was no sex. Why wasn't there a V for violence? A couple of scenes do get quite bloody.

And as far as attention to detail goes, a newspaper story explaining the movie's events at the end has misspelled words.

I've seen better, but I'll give the few people who made this movie credit for accomplishing a lot.

What did you do last week?

[nogodnomasters · 2/10 · 18 June 2018]

In NYC, we see April Watson (Lindsay Goranson) abducted and questioned about her last week's activities. The mystery is "what did she do?" She visited Dr. Green (Gary Swanson) about her anxiety issues and takes an experimental drug. She doesn't completely follow the instructions and has vivid dreams. Then there is Brian (Ian Temple) who is spying on her. She also remembers stuff about Brian that happened when she wasn't around...but most flashback films do that.

About 14 minutes from the end we get the surprise ending and April's crime. It wasn't worth the wait. Low budget. Poor dialogue. Bad acting.

Guide: Sex. No nudity. So swearing that I recall.

Ignore the low ratings - worth watching

[djbaxter-980-742507 · 7/10 · 9 June 2018]

I enjoyed this film. Intriguing and puzzling with several plot twists. Reminiscent of Jacob's Ladder in some respects. It's a mystery/thriller/suspense film, not horror.

retino-phathia or epileptic beware -severe FLASH backs occurs

[ops-52535 · 4/10 · 13 May 2018]

Its a film about medical experiments ,betrayal,and alotof bad dreams in sedativa hypnotica. it is a film built on flash backs,i think this is a blur of a movie,made for the psycoactive viewer,there are some traces of excitement,but it was to me an experimental bore.

True Indy filmmaking

[jenks-art · 10/10 · 16 September 2018]

Let me start by saying i worked on this film.

For the haters. Get over yourselves.

We made this movie when we were 23 years old as a senior thesis. It was a 3 man crew making everything happen

Carlos Ferrer, my friend, spent ten years on this film. He wrote, directed, shot, wrote the score and did all the cgi on his own. Which is unheard of.

So put that into context when you watch it.

While it might have quiet, slow times (I'll agree) but we did what many wish they could do.

Whether you hate it or like it. Realize that it was a crew of three and a director that literally did everything that usually takes a actual film crew to make.

Engaging, deliberate, surprising, suspenseful, rewarding.

[stevetowsley-2 · 7/10 · 13 August 2019]

It begins like a film you might think you've seen before, but then turns into fresh territory and offers many small surprises, in a film that begs for the viewer to do some of the detective work, then surprises again. The score falls somewhere between a Leone and a Hitchcock picture, which is saying something since the writer/director wrote the score. All the performances make sense by the end and there is a satisfying climax. I agree with the viewer who said this reminds of Jacob's Ladder but it's not the same story either. Rewarding for a thoughtful Indie film lover.

Terrible

[latoshaadams · 1/10 · 17 April 2021]

Worst movie I ever seen boring all this going on and nobody notice any of it ..a guy a in black that's been shot twenty time still after her. 🙄

Artistic, but not a real movie

[bonniath-13968 · 4/10 · 6 January 2022]

They really tried, but I can't recommend this flick. The best part is scenery, DOP has beautiful ideas, but film isn't cohesive enough. Sorry, but no.