Battle for Skyark (2015) User Reviews

All the basic elements of Japanese fantasy, sadly none of the graceful production value

[quincytheodore · 4/10 · 12 May 2015]

For those who have seen or played Japanese video games, Battle for Skyark would be awfully familiar. It closely follows the aspects of role playing game, from the brooding teenage boy who is destined to save the world, intricate yet impractical costumes, cheesy one-liner and stereotypical one dimensional characters with outlandish hairdo. I was seriously having flashback of childhood memories when watching the movie, unfortunately it does not even remotely create the same fond memory it's inspired from.

If one searches the image of Final Fantasy or any other Japanese RPG, it should show a character similar to Rag, the main protagonist. Rag is destined for greatness as a savior. He must journey to fulfill this prophecy, meeting new allies and defeating monsters along the way. The movie is, in the very sense, a live action inspired by anime or video game. It borrows so heavily till the point of cringe-worthy.

Most fantasy games have excellent visual and incredible CGI, this is not so in this case. Battle for Skyark is frankly a low budget flick. It tries to deliver the style with the same complicated outfits and extraordinary hairdo, but it's trapped with typical tedious scenes with little coherency. The monsters and setting seem very uninspiring as it only shows bits of special effects, these are too few to create any convincing atmosphere.

Sadly, this formulaic "teen saves the world" gimmick was already dull in Japanese fifteen years ago. Using same artificial rigid characters, like the stern companion or silly sidekick, can feel very monotonous. The screenplay doesn't work well either, often glossing over details or stutters slowly in the middle. The dialogues are corny, they might work on games or animations, but given the real life interpretation, they feel bizarre at best. Lastly, narrative doesn't clearly explain nor does it conclude in satisfying manner.

I wanted this movie to work, maybe due to sentiment or nostalgia. However, in all honesty Battle for Skyark might copy the look of characters, but the plot, setting and overall atmosphere merely produce a lackluster movie.

So Much Potential, So Little Budget...

[tommylangzik · 4/10 · 8 May 2015]

INTRO: Unfortunately, I was bittersweetly disappointed with this movie; let's break it down...

BUDGET: Clearly Too Low. Movies are expensive, but it seems clear to me that this movie was out of it's budget's league. At least the movie got finished, which is in and of itself an accomplishment, but it seems like there wasn't enough to give it the polish and finesse that the concept really deserved. I think this could have been a gem, but I get the impression someone got a little too ambitious and jumped the gun.

FX: Not bad, but rather sparse for Sci-Fi. The environment, and elements that required obvious Motion-Graphic/3D treatment were pretty well done; they didn't distract or disconnect you from the movie, and that's really all you NEED. Having said that, given that it's a sci-fi flick (and that the cover sort of gives a similar impression), it didn't seem like there was a whole lot going on in terms of digital effects; much of the visual effects seemed to be done on set, which is fine for keeping costs down, but also doesn't allow you to edit and refine things in the post-production stage; that can make all the difference when trying to add more intensity to an otherwise 'flat' scene.

ACTING: It felt forced. It didn't come across as natural at all; there were a couple actors and a couple of moments where things 'felt right', but it was a really mixed bag, feeling forced overall. Maybe (again) the budget constraint caused the process to be rushed, or maybe because the movie's target audience is kids, the decision was made to just 'rough it'... or maybe there was too much work placed on too few people, causing burnout(?)... Either way, direction, takes, and/or talent were lacking for a polished experience.

PACE: Too slow. The movie really seems to drag on more than anything and emotionally flat-line throughout large swaths of the film. Due to the level of acting, lack of effects, and lack of developing/fleshing out the overall storyline, it feels like lots of time is wasted with what can only be described as "awkwardness".

STORY/CONCEPT: Good, but needs some fleshing out. Overall, the concept was actually great. The problem, however, was its vision. The animated introduction was a little complex (given the amount of info vs time), then throughout the movie we have long periods where really next to nothing is developing, and then nearly everything is revealed at the end. The middle, where conceivably the conflict would REALLY begin to gaining traction, was more of a whimper; not even the characters were fleshed out or understood as individuals to a point where one could connect with them on an emotional/personal level. Also, most of what was revealed at the end was rather predictable and not really much of a revelation by the time it was formally stated. Thus, much of what was displayed at the beginning of the movie and unveiled at the end should have been evenly spread out throughout to make it less turbulent to digest.

DETAILS: Too many "ugh" moments. - Even though I loved how the SkyArk looked, it drove me nuts seeing it within Earth's atmosphere, and then seeing it clearly orbiting the Earth in space only moments later. It seemed rather inconsistent. - The monsters aren't scary, and often-times they were just so lethargically slow and awkward. They looked a little neat, most notably the semi-transformed individuals near the end, but they didn't seem super-human enough in terms of speed and ability. - No blood... really? This movie needed a little more blood; the weapons were always clean, and even the only gun-shot in the movie didn't have any audio/visual weight/impact to it; you'd almost have been better off to zoom out the window, make a flash, and have it be an implied death. - As an adult, I found myself rolling my eyes and sighing too often in regard to the acting/character progression. The mannerisms, the gestures, the movements, the lines... there was just way too much lacking, giving the impression of extreme cheesiness. Part of me thinks this should be a series of movies or a web-series, and the story should begin earlier; that whole intro should have been a movie on its own where you focus on getting the fundamentals spot on, and then use this base as a springboard to get on to the more complex sequences in a sequel.

FAVOURITE LINE: "To survive in a world of monsters, you have to become a monster. You can stop this; all this pain and suffering... Drink!" - Rusty I'm so glad this movie had a line to really reflect on and provoke thought; in my case it actually reminded me of something Hitler is said to have believed regarding control and how the only way one can change a given power structure is to rise to the top.

CONCLUSION: All in all, my frustrations with this film are bittersweet and in a sense almost a compliment; the concept has SO MUCH AWESOME potential to be a solid family movie, but it currently isn't fleshed out enough in any area. I definitely wouldn't throw out the concept, but I'd start it over in a few years after REALLY fleshing out the story/'universe' more and developing the characters with increased complexity.

An excellent sleeping pill.

[vidocq-4 · 2/10 · 5 June 2015]

Battle for SkyArk: a movie with no battle for the aforementioned Ark. All we get are a handful of kid bums with laughable weaponry, pitted against unconvincing "monsters" who could die... of laughter when they see the so-called weapons. The whole movie drags through, the one massive monster is yet another take on the guy-turned-giant-monster- with-mask-and giant-weapon we've seen hundreds of times, from Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome to the Resident Evil and Silent Hill movies/games franchise. No development at all, just kids scurrying through what seems to be a huge junkyard. I had few hopes, considering the score given by other viewers, but I didn't think it'd be such a sad sight. The kids do what they can, I won't throw them the stones, they're all very young actors. Whoever made the movie though, should consider a change of career and run said junkyard instead. At least, they'd get an honest pay for piles of rubbish.

Soulcrushingly Bad

[afouchs · 1/10 · 16 August 2015]

It's my first review on IMDb and it will serve a sole purpose: I hope that reading this will make at least one person step away from this flick and save his soul (or at least his time).

Bad movies are my guilty pleasure, B movie as well and i'll watch birdemic or zombeaver any day. But this film is nonsensical, mediocre, boring and cringe-worthy every second.

On the plus side, the story might remotely make some sense, and I've seen worst FX for that kind of budget.

But for the rest: I hate every single character, the direction is abysmal, the score is too heavy (ear that piano chump! Now be sad we command you!). No one seem to have the slightest bit of common sense Most reaction are either cliché or completely idiotic.

The cast tries way too hard being cool and they all fail miserably.

The pacing is out of this world and will bore you to death.

I have had no fun whatsoever watching this film: It's so boring that (and i'm not kidding here) played farmville during the movie and I couldn't care less.

I wish future me would travel in time and punch me in the face for watching this. So please don't be as foolish as myself and run away from this piece of mental abuse.

Drags out the most pointless stuff

[sunworksak · 1/10 · 15 January 2016]

The movie is indeed a movie...that's about it. It kind of seemed from previews it was supposed to be some sort of battle between the city in the sky and the rejects left on or sent back to earth. Yet, 80% of the movie you are trying to figure out about some sort of rebellion or what shadows are and the main character trying to find some guts. The little bit of CGI in the movie is 1 or 2 scenes that are repeated over and over again. The acting is pretty rough and forced with little to no emotion. Action scenes are horrendous. Costumes are somewhat on point but the movie is obviously low budget and you can tell. Oh well, it is worth the watch if you have absolutely nothing else to do and want to cringe a little and try to solve the mystery of Battle for Skyark.

So bad that it couldn't actually be worse.

[chrisroberts-5 · 1/10 · 5 July 2015]

How do films like this get made? I'm sure that I'll never know. But somebody spent a fair amount of cash producing this nonsense.

The good: It's short? The bad: Everything else. There is no discernible plot of any kind. The characters actions make absolutely no sense. There's no exposition, no climax, no goal to achieve, and it ends as a cliffhanger. The acting is unforgivable. No part of the story makes the slightest attempt to follow a thread of logic. Kids are beating up/killing adults at every preposterous turn. The fortified camp of survivors on the planet's surface is essentially a ring of shopping carts pushed together with some cardboard for extra reinforcement. The dialogue is embarrassing for any genre regardless of expected audience. The special effects don't even make sense (is the "skyark" a few hundred feet above the ground hovering or in orbit? You'll never know; you'll never care). As a distraction for sitting through this dreck, I tried to think of a worse film that I've ever watched; all I could come up with was "Ski Patrol" ... maybe, but Ski Patrol at least had a dog that could fart on command which exceeds any of the talents in Battle for SkyArk.

The verdict: This is not worth your time, money, or effort to make sense of. It's simply one of the worst movies that has ever been made. It has absolutely no redeeming virtues. Nothing that could have been done to this film could possibly have made it worse - it is the low marker for judging movies. Imagine the worst anime that you've ever sat through being turned into a live-action film by a group of 5 junior high school students with a handicam... that is better than this by a factor of 100. Run away!

Absolutely terrible.

[bngoold · 1/10 · 6 June 2015]

I watched this movie not expecting it to be anything special, just a bit of entertainment. Never could of I prepared myself for how horrendous this movie was. The whole time I just wanted to punch every actor in the face. It was awkward, ridiculous and cringe worthy.

Beware, you will never get the 1hr 30mins back of your life.

The concept had promise, the title suggested it would be based on earth and the Skyark, but no. it was just a bunch of kids that drew their roles as a prize out of a box of cereal running around a scrap metal yard packing their undies every time they heard a noise.

There was no time spent on the Skyark at all. Every single actor was up there with the worst I've ever seen. The movie had no story line, no purpose what so ever. I cant believe someone actually paid to produce this steaming pile of manure.

You have been warned!

The movie is so bad even a spoiler can't spoil it for anyone

[sprathore · 1/10 · 7 June 2015]

The movie is supposed to be futuristic but the way it's made it looks dated and old. The actors are young and inexperienced (I hope so) The story is boring and predictable but is presented in most chaotic manner. The CGI effects are basic and poor quality. If you want to make a low budget movie - I don't think science fiction is a good option.

Now my opinion on the movie - It's kind of movie where you wish there was a negative ranking on IMDb. Where you can give a movie -2 or -3 because there is hardly anything good in the movie and it's full of mistakes, awful acting and cheap CGI. It can become the 'Room' one day and people might start watching it as it's so bad. The minimum length of review on IMDb is 10 lines otherwise just the word 'awful' will do sufficient job in describing this movie. As previous reviews mention - if you are having difficulties sleeping - this is a good movie to put on. You can get around your friends and family and have a laugh watching this as well. Enough said.

Poorly envisioned. May I suggest some fixes?

[rushknight · 3/10 · 10 June 2015]

This movie has a great many ideas that could have been put together effectively, had the director and writers had the right goal in mind. The goal that they chose was to make a film of self-discovery, early teenage romance, and a coming-of-age story set in the midst of apocalyptic desolation. All that would have been fine except that too many necessary parts of the puzzle were not available.

As always, I am here to brazenly presume that I could do better! If you're interested, I have some "fixes" I would have applied had I been involved.

1. The biggest missing piece, of course, is the acting. Coming-of-age stories are typically dramatic in the extreme, and very demanding of the actors involved. Early love, infatuation, disappointment and broken hearts, betrayal, jealousy, depression, passion, the death of loved ones.. It should have been evident from the start that all of the young people involved in this film don't have the acting chops yet to pull this off. I would instead suggest that the film be focused much more on action. Less time playing sad music and watching downcast eyes. I got REALLY tired of watching the hero periodically give up and slump to the ground in defeat, especially since he didn't seem to be trying very hard. Don't ask him to portray such feelings, instead keep him in the fray. Bring on the monsters!

2. Budget concerns. Obviously this is not a high budget feature. That's OK, they did great with what they had. I think it could have come off a little bit better if they'd put more emphasis on dirt. Quite frankly, all of the important parts of the movie were much too clean to be convincing. The actors looked freshly washed. Some of them even have hair that can't exactly keep it's look if you live in a garbage dump. I would suggest filming after they'd actually lived in the dust and sand for a few days without a shower.

3. Direction and Pacing. The story kept slowing down, the motives of the characters appeared to change constantly. Just have a goal and stick with it. The entire story appears to happen within a day! That's not enough time for the characters to grow and reach the sort of conclusions they reached. I felt as though this should have been at least a few weeks worth. Some re-writing is absolutely essential here. Character growth takes time. If you really want your story's timeline to happen quickly, leave out the drama and take my earlier suggestion to bring on the action.

4. Violence. This is conceptually a very violent movie! This movie has monsters, sword fighting, killing, it's all here. And yet blood was mysteriously absent. The fighting stunts are weak and difficult to follow, and completely nonsensical. Blood is a must, and death scenes should be on camera, not suddenly off camera and assumed.

5. Common sense. This is tough and maybe even unfair, but too many things happen that simply don't exemplify the sort of things rational people would do. The writer should have sat back, had some random people read the script and ask what impressions came to mind. People would immediately give some corrections. It can be hard for a writer to pull his head out of his work and look at it objectively, so outside input is critical.

6. Casting. There was really not much need to have so many actors in this film. Or rather, there was no need to have so many extras. Too many of the kids said and did nothing, all the way until they were removed from the story. Why not just trim the cast down to the more important characters?

I'm not certain who the audience for this movie was supposed to be. Is it a family film? It has some pretty violent undertones for a family film. It's clearly a sci-fi monster film. It has all the elements of something I wouldn't want my children to watch, and yet it pulls it's punches, coming off as surgically clean. It's like a horror film with no horror.

prebook review

[phoenix21389 · 4/10 · 30 September 2017]

this film feels like an adaptation of a semi-good young adult novel, a bad adaptation but an adaptation non the less, or a plot bunny for a fan-fiction. the past is fast, backstory:non, and quit frankly the writer would have been better off trying to write a novel rather than a script. I will admit the concept of the story is intriguing and kind of cliff-hanger like but still next time dude, try writing a book.

over all if your looking for inspiration or something so mind numbing dull to sober up with. I'd watch this, however if a book was written and more depth given, I'd read it.

I give it a 4 out of 10 for that alone.

Battle for SkyArk (Spoilers included)

[sigmacademy · 6 January 2016]

Personally I believe this movies was made for a much young audience (in other words, not teen or adult sci-fi). It definitely had a "The Tribe" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0274988/?ref_=nv_sr_2) feel to it. This story has a lot of potential, but somewhere it slightly went off track, as if it was unsure of what type of movie it was trying to be (scifi or family film). The story has a lot of interpretation that can be found within the concept or even interaction of the main characters, but the film itself doesn't try to be overly technical or philosophical; it's simply a plain and simple story of survival for the young main characters, who doesn't feel particular fear or overly extremes of angst or tension in their struggle, which in turn might be seen as "poor acting" by some. IMHO it is simply because it was made for a younger audience which might not understand such complex human, emotional or societal issues.

The storyline was a bit rushed in my opinion, with characters just dumped into the story to create emotional loss later on, without really explaining what their role in the movie really was. An example is the main character, Rags/13 who is supposed to be the hero of the story, and the other younger kids at the camp and yet spends much of the story trying to become the hero whose transition was simply too quick and contrived, most of who has no clear function within the camp. Although it is meant as a coming of age story, it simply tries too hard to focus on the emotional moments of the film and not enough on what is going around them. Monsters are scattered at key points, almost as a forced moment of tension for the characters, and implied explanations are too readily available without a rational explanation why the explanation might be the correct one, automatically assuming the reasons given by the main character are the correct one, without even considering alternatives.

Also, the story doesn't explain why kids are dropped to the surface with no provisions or survival gear, yet "Skunk" gets a eye camera (sophisticated technology) to take to the surface. If you went down to a planet full of monsters, wouldn't you take some sort of protection or weaponry with you to increase your chances of survival, especially when you are on an important mission? It also doesn't go into detail why it would dump kids on the surface of the planet in drop pods, and yet bring the entire SkyArk down to pick them up again. In science fiction there are certain conventions in every story that allow characters for certain capabilities or limitations - in this film, there are no such conventions, which leads to a somewhat confused storytelling process.

The "blue drop" also has no real explanation of what it is or how it works. Hard core sci-fi fans will probably figure out long before the big fight at the end what the connection between it and the monsters are.

The "Monster" catchphrase also sounds as if it could have been lifted and somewhat modified from Stallone's "The Demolition Man". It feels as if it is somehow inappropriate in this movie, and some other phrase might have been better. The main characters also try to hard to bring purpose to their every action and every consequence, rather than on the journey each of them takes and how it effects their group dynamic in the process.

The end was also a bit overdone, when considered with the general pace and tone of the moment, trying to be overly heroic when the film was clearly trying to focus on the journey of the characters and their obstacles. Worth at least a single look, but am looking for more in my science fiction films.

NOTE: Other reviewers have touched on the technical issues of the film. I have focused more on the story and the characters themselves.

Lacking, but I've seen much worse.

[photoweborama · 8/10 · 12 March 2018]

I actually like it. The details are well done. Not too crazy about the ending. Feels like a pilot. Too many details go nowhere without a series to back it up.

If you let your imagination go, it's a pretty good watch.

Not a bad watch at all.

[Eyerobot · 6/10 · 27 May 2017]

The reviews said this was almost a terrible movie. But it wasn't. It is definitely a kids movie, However it is done very well, And in my opinion was as good as any other children's movie out there. IT didn't have the big budget effects of the ewoks, But the acting was really good. And it was surprisingly enjoyable.

I really have no complaints about the movie, It pushed it's budget to the limit, And the story line worked very well. While i would like to have seen more effects, I was not disappointed by the overall movie.

much bad

[datacain · 1/10 · 4 June 2015]

bleh! Stay away!

I hope these kids are given a proper chance at acting with better writing and directing.

• CG was pretty decent in some parts (there was not much CG though), however some CG effects were also a little off.

• Bad writing! The story is fairly rubbish and the dialog while 'ok' in a couple of small parts, was mostly just bad filler.

• Poor characters who flip-flop attitude and decisions between scenes.

• Bad directing. :\

• Bad locations and sets!

• World felt empty despite the dialog trying to imply differently.

• Prosthetics were not too bad.

Broccoli Racing Cars

[nic_manning · 2/10 · 18 September 2015]

If this movie can have a title that has nothing to do with the plot, this review can do the same. The movie has absolutely nothing to do with any sort of Battle for Skyark. Instead, it's about a bunch of ragtag kids trying to survive on earth that have been kicked out of Skyark.

People aged between 12-15 can probably add another 4 stars to this review, but otherwise this is pretty danged bad. I mean, I couldn't do better, and there's some cool costuming... but the script, plot, monsters and most of the acting all bring this 88 minute flick crashing down to the ground.

The movie had a couple of nice moments, Taylor Coliee & Garrett Coffey performed reasonably well under the weight of a pretty poor script, and the clichés were copious but fun. But it was let down by an almost nonsensical plot, no 'battle' for Skyark to be found and hammy script.

On the plus side for younger viewers, there's no blood/gore so this should be good for families with older kids (there are some scares) and there's plenty of PG action, thrills and romance to be had.

Think of the movie more like an exceptionally good high school film and TV assignment and less like a professionally produced movie, and you'll get the right idea.

I give this movie 2 out of 10 Broccoli Racing Cars

So so bad

[mycompetitions · 1/10 · 10 October 2015]

I sat through most of the movie with a look of utter disbelief of how bad this movie was! It felt like a bad film school production with amateur actors from the local drama club. To be honest, I've seen better from amateurs.

The description is totally inaccurate too! The story line does not match enough of the description of the movie. Clearly this was so low budget they didn't have enough time to expand on the reasons for skyark in the first place and tried to set the premise with the description on the cover. They failed.

Don't waste your time seeing this ! It was too bad to even laugh at it.

This is my first ever review on IMDb .. i registered just to leave this review.. that's how much I want to tell people not to watch it!! ... unless you are a film school student and want to learn what NOT to do !

Be a monster to kill a monster

[nogodnomasters · 2/10 · 13 March 2018]

SPOILERS IF POSSIBLE

This is another kids save the world film. There is a Skyark where all humans reside In what amounts to shaky plot points. Some were sent back to earth which we destroyed, but apparently not fully. There are monsters or human mutants there. They are cannibals who feed off of exiled children of the rebels. We discover that Skyark is some sort of prison for all of mankind, apparently some kind of metaphor for government control/regulations. They also manufacture the monsters and put them on earth so people will want to remain in Skyark whose orbit is either in space or it hovers low in the sky, depending on the camera angle. Apparently another metaphor for government creating situations that would make the people want more government.

The film was low budget and the child acting was far from good. The lines were as confusing and ill delivered as was the plot. It appears as if they made a film from a video game where plot details are meaningless with killing obstacles and achieving a goal is the whole point.

Guide: No swearing, sex, or nudity. Violence with minimum blood. Go watch "Maze Runner" or "The Giver" or something with Tom Cruise instead.

Not as bad as most of its reviews, but certainly not good!

[billsoccer · 5/10 · 6 February 2019]

I love sci-fi so ignored the reviews and watched it. Note - it's a movie targeted toward (perhaps pre-) teens, acted by teens. Such films are bound to be a bit - er - rough around the edges and so is this one. The writing was poor, the acting would be about the level you'd expect of the ages of the actors. It tries to set itself up for a sequel, but that won't happen with these people in charge! The storyline was somewhat interesting. All in all, not as bad as most of the existing reviews state, but I could have probably spent my time in a more productive manner!

Worst movie to ever exist!

[cooldirector · 1/10 · 16 September 2016]

Probably the worst movie I have ever seen in my entire life. Complete waste of time. The acting was horrible. The story was horrible. The whole movie was completely horrible. I still cannot get over the acting of this movie, just utter horrendous acting. I hope I never see any of those actors in any movie I watch in the future. I cannot stop saying it, this is the most atrocious movie I have ever seen or ever will. This movie should be given an award for being so horrible. It is so horrendous, that its just beyond sense.

I don't know how in the world the producers even thought this could be a movie. I strongly recommend not watching it. You will just waste 1 hour and 30 minutes of your life. You have been warned.

Save Yourself, Don't Watch This

[getowned-com · 1/10 · 25 August 2016]

That is unless you want something horrendously bad to laugh at and break down as what not to do. I don't typically write reviews but something about this movie struck me as so terrible that it had to be put into words. I will break this down into parts.

Writing/Screenplay : The lines in this movie were terrible, so many awkward moments, a lot of melancholy and drawn out scenes while the important scenes just seemed rushed and lacking substance. I found myself wondering about half way through the movie how is could possibly not be over yet. The actions of the characters seemed almost random and as if they were incompetent. They would do something and almost immediately change their mind, or there would be a long pause to "think about" what you're doing or should doing in an "act now" scenario. The entire premise, plot, and plot development of the movie just seemed extremely half-baked and poorly done. Many parts of the movie just weren't believable or made little to no rational sense. I could probably talk about how bad it is for an extremely long time but the point is made, it was bad.

Acting : The acting was severely lacking and did not seem natural at all. I'm certain some of this had to do with the writing because a lot of the lines in the movie were poor but the actors portrayal of their roles seemed all of the place and the emotional response that should be triggered by good acting was non-existent. Their lines seemed forced. I honestly think that a significant portion of what made the acting bad was the bad writing, but this would only cause me to want to give a 1.5/10 if possible but it's a not worth a 2/10 so it stays a 1.

Plot/Time line : The plot development and time line did not seem to progress smoothly. It was as if their way of portraying the passing of time was just the main character brooding constantly. I could not tell if the movie was supposed to take place in the span of a couple days or a month or maybe it was years, probably not years but basically unable to tell. It probably did not help that I was laughing at how bad it was half the time and wondering if it could get any worse.

Effects : I will just briefly touch on this. The special effects were lacking in many areas, such as the action. There was continuity issues in a least a few places. Lack of typical combat effects, blood and the like. It was a low budget film so some of that is excusable, but the basics should not have been missing.

Overall : Great movie to watch for what-not-to-dos. Bad movie to watch if you want quality entertainment.

So red box got you too?

[jonathanwangsvick · 1/10 · 3 March 2016]

Look at the cover. The spacecraft is within the atmosphere. Consistent with movie, nice. Within minutes the line "get some rest" is used. A line usually reserved for after the first act. Maybe? I made it 16 solid minutes in and then fast forwarded to the end. I'm into cheese. Like "what do you call an apple that has fallen next to you?.... Fruit by the foot" .. Thats Cheese, not for everyone, I understand. Like many things. This movie is uncheese. Its rotten cheese. If you are the creator reading this please don't let the bad reviews get you down. Finishing a feature length film is a huge accomplishment. Congrats. And hey lionsgate... Your fired.-john

Wow!

[ersbel · 18 January 2019]

This is a spectacular production.

All the stupidity of a super hero movies, without the superhero. Add crappy scripting, low budget, no actors and you get something barely watchable.

Movie was Kind of awesome though

[syed-maaez · 8/10 · 8 May 2015]

Finally i have saw this movie in theater. The best part is earth has become desolate and dangerous in future. Skyark is a man made city its pretty much like a space ship. But its a good refuge for humans. population grows by the time and only rich people can stay. So the hole story is(In the near future the earth has become desolate and dangerous. Now inhabited by by a mysterious race of creatures, humanity has been forced to find refuge in the SkyArk, a man-made city in the sky. As the population grows, space becomes scarce and only the rich and powerful can stay, dumping the poor and orphaned of SkyArk to the abandoned earth. Among them is one boy, Rags, the son of a fallen commander who is determined to save his fellow orphans and exiles. Together with his friends, he must battle through the ruins of old earth, fighting off the horde of alien monsters to return to SkyArk and bring peace back to the people) .So give it 8/10 stars

Not bad for an low budget indie movie.

[james_scott_mcs · 6/10 · 4 December 2015]

As a movie overall, I'd probably give it 5 out of 10. But I give it an extra point because what they did with what they had. It's clearly a low budget movie. Which actually had some good CGI effects/scenes. And they relied on some practical effects instead. As one that thinks Hollywood movies now a days are to much CGI and not enough story/acting. I found this a bit refreshing.

It reminded me a bit of the TV show "The 100" with some "Lord of the Flies" and a dash of monsters thrown in. When you watch it, you will probably feel like you heard this story before.

Now considering the Director and one of the writers, Simon Hung, has a Masters degree in Film making. I did wonder on why the writing was so cliché and predictable. Not sure if this was done on purpose or that I have seen way to many movies.

The writer, director and actors are all pretty much new to making a full length movie. (a few did a couple of TV episodes and shorts). I think they all did a respectful job. But the acting was stiff in parts and overdone in others. But I wasn't expecting Oscar moments from kids in their first movie. Especially when they had no adult actors to play off of.

Overall it's a pretty good attempt at making major movie. But the predictable writing, so-so acting and clearly low budget, hold the movie back. Could easily be a made for SyFy Channel movie. I look forward to seeing Simon's next attempt.

As a side note, I don't know where this was filmed. But as a kid (ok, also as an adult), I would of loved to play in that scrap yard. Great location choice.

Keyword Recommendation

[aaaaaa-979-170680 · 2/10 · 9 May 2015]

Firstly, create a new category: "Sci-FRid" (Science - "F"ing Ridiculous). Secondly, "Rags"? . . . (Scriptwriters please review your meds {sic}or better still go heavier on the illegal substances. Think - is this movie set in the future or the 1980's?) Thirdly, what are the chances for "sky-arkies" becoming the new "trekkies"? OK, finally my keyword recommendations are: "Sci-FRid" (already explained) "Out-of-this- World" (nothing to do with the plot, just where we should send the scriptwriters); and, "Black-Listed" (the only way this movie will attract a default audience).

2 outa {sic} 10 "I know I should not watch this, but rebellion is my compulsion fixes".