Beyond the Trek (2017) User Reviews

Im(Perfection)

[dariuslanghoff · 4/10 · 16 August 2017]

In the beginning two things attracted my attention and caused me to examine this movie: the poster, which is graphically original, and the title which is incomprehensible, unless you are familiar with Greek. After looking it up I learned TELEOIS stands for "perfection". So, my artistic sense was pleased, my linguistic knowledge increased - so far, so good.

Then the time came to watch the film. Knowing its budget was limited I did not expect fireworks of production values, but it not necessarily makes a good sci-fi picture an impossibility. One spacecraft with a crew of 5 is sent to investigate the demise of the crew of another space vessel. A premise more than satisfactory. A certain parallel with EVENT HORIZON (1997) may by seen here, though the Paul W.S. Anderson's work itself is hardly original, as it borrows heavily from NIGHTLYERS (1987).

The rest, with very few exceptions, is sorrowfully miscarried. The direction seems to be almost absent, or present at its incompetent worst. Majority of the actors are so lame it seems their acting lessons had the form of a correspondence course. Especially Lance Broadway, T.J. Hoban and Christian Pitre deliver performances of abysmally bad quality.

However, Ursula Mills makes Lulu AH 320 an interesting robotic character. And then there's is ravishing Sunny Mabrey who can act and can bring some conviction to her lines, her final speech sounds quite poignant and dramatic, but it is not enough to save the misbegotten movie. More than a decade passed since she appeared in SPECIES 3 where she had little to say and served mostly as a nude window dressing. Now she is an accomplished actress and deserves much better roles.

The costumes represent an utter lack of visual taste. And it would have sufficed to remove those hideous frontal brown areas, otherwise they are nicely female figure hugging.

In summarum, this motion picture is worth viewing only for Ms Mabrey, other reasons are extremely difficult to be found. On second thoughts, some might be tempted to see Michael Nouri in his brief video transmissions to notice how he has aged since the time of FLASHDANCE (1983).

Interesting premise, terrible execution

[imdb-57934 · 3/10 · 11 January 2019]

The acting is about what you'd expect from a low budget film, the two main issues that really drag it down are the pacing and directing: you could easily remove 30 minutes of the film where the characters are just aimlessly existing on the space station. The time wasn't used to develop the characters - there are none - they just keep restating their mission, I almost turned it off during that time because it didn't seem to be going anywhere.

The directing is something else entirely, 90% of the movie the camera just keeps swining side to side, like you're tilting your head left and right constantly, it started making me nauseous and it didn't seem to have a purpose to it either - they had artificial gravity the whole time - it was purely a stylistic choice and it sucked.

In space no one can hear you snore...

[paul_haakonsen · 3/10 · 21 April 2017]

I was lured in by the movie poster and the hope that this was actually going to be a good sci-fi movie, and the fact that the synopsis of the movie seemed interesting also caught my attention.

Then 39 minutes into the movie, I just gave up. This movie was sheer and utter boredom presented in a shiny and glowing sci-fi wrapping. There was just nothing compelling about this mundane and boring storyline that the writers had mustered to put together.

And it didn't help that everything just screamed low budget presented in a mediocre wrapping. Granted, I have seen worse productions of sci-fi movies, but there just was that spark of low budget to "Teleios" such as in the weapons, the sets, and the so-called human-like robot beings. I mean, the way that they were moving was just so 1950's and laughable.

I didn't get captured by the storyline, despite the fact that the storyline had potential to make a great movie. It was just the lack of pace and Progress to the movie that killed it off. I could live with the sense of pseudo-low budget, sure, but the inactivity of the storyline and the irrelevant characters was an anchor around the movie.

"Teleios" didn't bring anything new, memorable or innovating to the sci-fi genre, and it is hardly a movie that will make a lasting impression, even with those in the audience that manages to sit through to the very end. And it is hardly a movie that will stand out as being a milestone in the sci-fi genre.

The acting in the movie was adequate, although I can't really claim to be familiar with those cast for the various roles. Some did better jobs than others, of course, as it always go. But no one in the movie were really outstanding or memorable.

Not outstanding and not memorable seems to be keywords to this movie.

If you enjoy sci-fi, then there are far, far better movies available. And personally I find it hard to see why anyone would actually sit through the entire length of "Teleios", because it was a drag of a movie.

Better than average, average, and less than average.

[bmbelko · 15 August 2019]

Overall, it started slow, but I felt it picked up as it progressed. It's more a thought provoking story a la "Solaris" than an action flick. At times the lines were delivered like a high school play, especially from some players. I'd recommend it to my movie and lit groups on social media, with caveats.

Collagen and wooden

[DrTeeth007 · 1/10 · 18 April 2017]

Occasionally, one comes across a film with actors so bad, that it makes one realise how difficult it is to be good or even great at the craft. The actors' faces look as if they have been injected with collagen and Botox...they just do not look right and it is distracting. The story did not really take off and I was left feeling most underwhelmed, unfulfilled and dissatisfied at the end. I only suffered to watch the whole film as I do like science fiction and I always give the offerings from that genre the benefit of the doubt until the end. I really should learn that if a film does not get me gripped and involved by the time 20 or so minutes have passed I should just do what the song says and just give it a miss and watch some paint dry.

Beyond The Trek AKA Teleios (Perfection) not perfect yet enjoyable for me

[gazelle024 · 5/10 · 23 October 2017]

It is obvious that this is a low budget film and for many that almost automatically means not what they are looking for. Still despite some bad acting from some of the cast in roles where they are playing emotionless Vulcan-like characters it's still pretty good.

It's a slow burning story that reminds me of Event Horizon, Gattaca, Sphere and Sunshine with a 1980's B-Sci-Fi kind of feel updated for today. At first I found myself thinking they were Blade Runner androids nearing their expiration dates. The Beyond The Trek title seems as appropriate as Teleios/Perfection here as they may as well be some of Kahn's genetically enhanced people along with emotion controlling Vulcan training. It's hard enough for an actor to take on a Vulcan role let alone then experiencing emotions or insanity for the first time ever. Sunny Mabrey pulls it off, no one else does.

Beyond the acting of the other GT's nearly everything else here was acceptable or even quite good. For me this is a little gem of a low budget film, but it's not for anyone who expects action or can't handle some poor acting. If you like Star Trek fan films, 1980's Sci-Fi B-movies, a lot of those original films on the Syfy network or those knock offs that The Asylum cranks out this may be for you, but if you are looking for anything approaching the polished fare of Star Wars or Star Trek blockbusters forget about it. It's more like the slow moving thinking Indy movies I mentioned above without the budget they had and the plot is not even as sophisticated as those and even predictable at times. It's an uneven film where they tried some things that sometimes hit and sometimes missed.

Student Film trying to trick us, or something

[JoeB131 · 3/10 · 2 December 2019]

Okay, let's start with the title, which was supposed to cleverly fool you into thinking this was Star Trek Beyond, and hoping you can't read.

The story line is intriguing. A bunch of genetically engineered humans goes up to find a ship manned by regular garden variety humans who were looking for the McGuffin Element. They find a lone survivor and his sex robot. Unfortunately, the genetic humans are all going insane because of code, but because they were in stasis for three years getting to Saturn, all the Genetic Engineered humans back on earth have already gone insane and have destroyed civilization.

So the film is five bad actors arguing ethics for two hours...

But I do give them credit for some story ideas and plot design.

Poster is a rip on the first season of the expanse

[mhorg2018 · 1/10 · 9 August 2019]

At first I thought this was a documentary on post Star trek science fiction. Especially with the rip off poster that looked like Julia Mao floating in space. While the idea behind this is decent the film itself is boring. From the emotionless acting where no one's expression changes, to the less than well imagined uniforms and sets. The X-, Files episode Ice was far better.

Semi-Decent, especially given the budget

[davidvandekerk · 5/10 · 3 July 2017]

I have to judge a movie partly by the budget. This was a one million dollar movie in 2017 dollars. That's tiny! Sharknado 4 was three million dollars. Don't expect stellar special effects, great sets or even decent costumes. This looks more like something a bunch of Star Trek fan fiction alumni would end up with if they pooled their Doritos money and produced a full movie and I wish them

A crew of emotion-less "super humans" wake up in a space ship near Titan. Their orders are to recover the lost cargo on a mining ship. They find a seemingly insane crew member and a robot tending the gardens.

Any time the trope of "emotionless humans" comes up you know exactly what is going to happen next - and it does. Sorry - this is no master gem of a script either. Expect the expectable and you won't be disappointed.

It's a movie with a message.

[iive · 6/10 · 17 April 2017]

In many ways this movie reminded me about the original Star Trek series. The costumes, the props, the effects, the clichés, the play, and even the way it tries to explore social norms and problems.

It's definitely a low budget film, so don't expect amazing visuals. It's not an action movie that would hold you on the edge of your seat, either. It's a drama and if you could overlook 1 hour of SciFi clichés, you might come to enjoy it. I certainly did.

Be warned, the plot does involve 3 different themes, one of which comes out as surprise twist out of nowhere, yet it strangely rhymes with the events on the station. It's not hard to imagine that both are result of the same logic, even though they are completely separate events. In retrospect this twist is probably the reason why I liked this movie and why I would recommend you to watch it.

Deep Space Nein!

[wolfgangdesigns · 2/10 · 27 July 2020]

I found this film whilst searching for some Science-Fiction viewing to pass some time. I am not entirely sure what drew me to this movie - whether it was Sunny Mabrey herself or the write-up.

The first thing that should make you wonder about this film is that they couldn't even decide on a title. It has been called 'Teleios,' 'Beyond the Trek' - which I presume is so people searching for Star Trek Beyond would find it, and Deep Space.

Early on the premise of the film appears to have been based around the concept of human cloning. Earth has perfected the cloning technique and now full human clones are part of society. We learn that a crew of five clones have been sent from Earth to locate a ship, piloted by "standard" humans, which has gone silent. The mission objective is to retrieve a substance they were transporting.

Incredibly early on I realised that the film was rather disastrous. The acting portrayed on-screen was shockingly bad from all accounts and the plot seemed sketchy at best. Upon finding the human vessel the clones engage into the unknown - trying to find the missing crew, find the substance, which has gone missing, and journey back home to Earth.

At this point is seemed as though there were five writers, all in different rooms, working on the same film. We learnt of a plot where the substance itself was to fix Earth's water contamination issue - something not fully explained. We then learn that the human crew are missing apart from one lone engineer and an incredibly poorly acted droid. The clones then all start to behave erratically leading the viewer to believe something is in the air - it must be the substance. Shortly we discover the substance killed one member of the crew as it was actually contaminating water. The engineer explains how the company had fitted a filtration system aboard, so clearly knew it was poison. At no point is it ever explained why they wanted the substance.

After this the engineer explains that the crew started killing themselves as they were torn into two factions - one who wanted to destroy the substance and one that wanted to take it back home to Earth as it was their job (as ridiculous as it sounds). At this point another plot is thrown in - the clones receive message that their genetics are breaking down and they will all go insane due to the new emotions they will all be feeling.

The science soon becomes sketchy - apparently to fix their genes they need to replace all of their blood (five crew members - eight pints each - 40 pints of blood) with the one last remaining humans blood. However the maths behind this is two pints each, and the science is merely laughable.

Soon the crew make a discovery - it was in fact the droid that killed the crew. And no, this is too never explained how or why.

After a battle between droid and clone most of the crew are now killed. At this point Sunny's character now turns on her captain and kills him because she was angry as a child (say what?).

She lets the engineer go, with the murderous droid, back to Earth and flies his ship into the nearby planet to kill herself.

Nothing is explained, nothing makes sense and laughably it appears as though they left the ending open to a possible sequel...

I am giving it two stars only because Sunny Mabrey looked excellent in her uniform.

Not What I expected = That's Good

[zboston3 · 8/10 · 11 September 2017]

I'm going to review this because I so object to the low, around 3 stars, rating it seems to have gotten. It's a science fiction film, but it's not about killer robots, particularly; it's not about planets or star ships blowing up; it's not about aliens invading the earth. It's a quiet, sort of slow film, that seems to be about one thing and then turns out to be about something else. It's low budget but I don't think that is damaging in the least. The acting isn't bad - it's part of the story. In fact, I will watch for the actors in other work just to see how they do. The story, as I said, seems to be one thing, but then starts to twist and turn to an ending that is quite moving.

All in all, I'm glad to have stumbled across this.

Amazing considering the budget.

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 4 September 2017]

"Teleios" is a new sci-fi film from Ian Truitner and what makes it worth seeing is its budget. Until recently, independent filmmakers would rarely touch sci-fi as the films were quite expensive to make… mostly due to the special effects. However, recent advances with software have allowed gorgeous cinematic quality CGI at a relatively small cost. This would explain why a film with only a million dollar budget would look this good! For that reason alone, the movie is well worth seeing.

The film is set in the mid-21st century. Genetically modified humans are proliferating on the planet and they are stronger, smarter and more capable in many ways compares to 'normals'. A space ship, the Teleios, with five of these super humans is about to make contact with a vessel that's been stranded in space for some time…and no one is sure whether anyone is left alive on this stricken ship. The crew's orders are, first and foremost, to recover the cargo from the ship. But there mission is soon complicated by many things. The crew of the stricken vessel has all been killed…with only one remaining as well as a robot and neither seem willing or able to explain what happened. The other problem is that these super men and women are beginning to show signs of weakness…weaknesses they supposedly have overcome. Their emotions are running amok and soon they begin preying on each other. Why and what's to become of their mission?

The best things about the film are the CGI, costumes and music. All of these look very professional and caught my attention. As for the story, it's only fair and is, at times, a tad confusing. Because of this, it's a movie that might just improve with repeated viewing. Overall, a mixed bag but a lesson on economical and effective filmmaking…and a decent sci-fi flick as well.

Not bad... at least as good as most television

[moorek · 5/10 · 10 June 2017]

I had never heard of this until actually watching it. I didn't know what to expect but I would suggest if you like television based sci-fi then you will like this. In fact I thought until near the end that it might be one of those movies created as a pilot for a TV show. Some have compared it to Star Trek but I'd suggest it is more in-tune with Gerry Anderson's shows especially UFO. The sets, uniforms, hairstyles were much more marionette than human.

I will admit I might have missed it but I thought the rescue crew were not just genetically enhanced humans but in part androids themselves. Likely cyborgs - this explained their appearance and their lack of emotion. Initially when I started to watch this crew I was struck by how bad the acting was until I realized that they were all supposed to not have emotions. In which case the blank faces made sense.

There were plot holes but mainly unanswered questions more than anything. I suspect that was planned but it did come across as a little jumbled. For example there is no rationalization given for a scanning done of a fallen android near the end of the film. I suspect there might have been plans for that to go somewhere but it didn't. Or maybe the writers did it on purpose to make people like me question it.

Overall I found it entertaining for an hour and a half. Like finding some rarely scene old sci-fi movie on late night TV.

imperfect

[smoke0 · 8 April 2017]

This seems to have started out as a thought-provoking script and devolved into a thoughtless movie, mainly due to the ridiculous costumes that looked like they were created by Project Runway rejects - the poorly sewn dart seams on the voluptuous actresses' costumes were distracting, and the shoulder pads were ill-fitted on the hunky guys' costumes, and let's not forget those high heel booties so necessary on space missions. This looked as if someone decided the acting was going to be so bad that they may as well make a porn, and then forgot the porn.

Weird science and poor script

[pilot1009 · 2/10 · 16 January 2021]

Low budget and just strange. Some good ideas but radio and video from Triton moon to Earth instantaneously - huh? Like so many films there has to be some credibility unless it is a deliberate comedy / spoof / just pure entertainment (ie not intended to be credible at all). This one just goes off the rails at the start, shame 'cos some of the low budget stuff is actually really clever, this one not so much.

Don't bother

[holminjone · 1/10 · 19 February 2021]

Could not watch it to the end. Amateur actors and cheaply made.

This movie will make you sea-sick.

[webhead-97553 · 5/10 · 27 May 2023]

This movie will make you sea-sick.

Why does the camera keep rocking left and right, like it's at sea.

Is the camera weightless, while nothing else is?

The GC ship looks nice but the corkscrew motion is impractical.

I can forgive the low budget, and the too-cute GC humans, but I hate when sci-fi does something for no reason, just to be different.

No spacesuits? Was this made in 1950? Spacesuits are a must-have item. You don't leave your planet without one.

The depressurized cargo hold with no suits was just unnecessary unrealistic BS drama.

Might be watchable but the camera rocking is distracting. If you are susceptible to sea sickness - skip this film.

very boring

[a-mi-ra · 1/10 · 29 June 2017]

usually you understand if you like a film after first 10 minutes..... after 40 minutes of the film its still boring...... very bad language representation, as they took people who do not speak it. Could ask native speakers to read. I would not watch it again... i would agree with most people who left a review here.... like actors.. there could be anyone instead of them, there is no much dynamics. also a lot of foreign language what was not translated... it is a super boring detective...

A Star Trek clone with racial bias...

[ulisses_phoenix · 3/10 · 10 June 2020]

Besides the title, "Beyond the Trek" which conflates this project with the Star Trek franchise, it includes a clone (Sunny Mabrey) of the character played by Alice Eve in "Star Trek Into Darkness." These knock-off films are known as "mockbusters" or as those in the business call them, "a drafting opportunity." They hope to exploit the massive promotion of the real film(s) to give theirs a boost. Even if only 1% of the huge audience looking for the real Star Trek film(s) mistakenly pick up this one, it can be enough to push these relatively low budget flicks into the black.

However, the film is not anywhere close to the quality of Star Trek films. The acting is uneven -- approximately the quality you'd expect to see in a soap opera if the players were given just one more take.

However, there is a tangible plot line, decent FX, and plenty of techno-speak to keep geeks entertained. The cinematography is pretty good, too. Unfortunately, there is the subtle racial bias that seems to be creeping into more and more films these days. The character who is the most sneaky is stereotypically played by an Asian women. Another character -- who appears angry all the time, commits the the most abhorrent act of violence, has intellectual impairment, and who draws the crew into making amoral decisions -- is played by a black man, which reinforces the racial stereotype of the stupid and angry black man committing crimes.

This film is hard science fiction with all the techno trimmings and would actually be an entertaining hour and half if were not for the bad acting and the racial bias.

Triggers: strobe effects, racial stereotypes, racial bias in the composition of the cast/characters, graphic violence, gun (laser) violence, amoral behavior by protagonists

3/10 (originally published 16 May 2020; resubmitted 10 June 2020)

Storywise better than Passengers (2016)

[ChazzJazz · 7/10 · 9 April 2017]

Without a forum, I cannot reply to review such as below...which is a bit harsh. The movie is a mishmash of 2001, Event Horizon, Lost in Space. Its a better movie story-wise than passengers (2016) with the Hollywood sweethearts JLaw and Pratt. Doesn't have the Hollywood budget unfortunately.

The mystery was gripping and kept the attention BUT the resolution was a bit weak.

The Genetic Transformed (GT?) Super Humans of the future are sent to fix the mistakes of a previous human mission to the distance planet. They find a lone Human survivor and artificial person.

Then everyone, it seems, malfunctions, and ethical dilemmas and decisions have to be made....

Interesting use of literature from Tolstoy to Sun Tzu....

"This seems to have started out as a thought-provoking script and devolved into a thoughtless movie, mainly due to the ridiculous costumes that looked like they were created by Project Runway rejects - the poorly sewn dart seams on the voluptuous actresses' costumes were distracting, and the shoulder pads were ill-fitted on the hunky guys' costumes, and let's not forget those high heel booties so necessary on space missions. This looked as if someone decided the acting was going to be so bad that they may as well make a porn, and then forgot the porn."

Not worth the time

[satu-mmk · 4/10 · 29 February 2020]

Actors look like they just got botox on their faces and women are not in space but in a night club. Script is weird and actors are just making their best with what they got. Intresting concept. Low budget is not explaining the execute.

A study in ethics.

[grantconlon · 8/10 · 13 May 2017]

This movie examines some big ethical and moral issues. Any film that quotes Tolstoy and Moliere is for thinkers. It may be sci-fi, acuity is not the best, but really quite good. Questions about eugenics, intellectual property rights, the morality behind life and death decisions, and the emotional weaknesses of humankind make it intellectually interesting. Reviewers who have focused on the costumes are missing the point widely.

No gaping plot holes and a few surprises

[codive · 7/10 · 30 April 2018]

Had this been a 50 million dollar project from a big studio with budget all over the place you'd have stars and perfect lighting, fresh dialogue, a lot of ka-boom, and whatnot, but probably also some really stupid plot holes.

Then I would rant on about some of the camera, some lighting here and there, and some of the acting, but most of all about the plot holes. I have a problem with films that tell me one concept in the beginning, and then trash that ten minutes later, as if I didn't remember.

But in this case, I just have to root for the makers. They only had a million, and came up with characters, and a pretty good story, that does not have the plot holes. So, at no point in the film I felt as if the makers thought I was stupid. On the contrary. The story even came up with a few twists, that I did not see coming.

Is it as intricate and mind-beding as "Primer"? No.

Is the acting as staggering as Sam Rockwell in "Moon"? No.

But if you saw Primer or Moon, and you liked those, I think you'll have a good time with this one.

Or if you like Star Trek.

I would put it in the same league. It stays true to what science fiction is.

Thanks, Ian Truitner! I also hope to see more from him.

Last point: Yes, the acting. They need to work on that a bit, but since I can't act at all, and they really had a limited budget, maybe they just couldn't shoot that take the ten times it takes to get it perfect.

Good premise but executed too slowly and with too many plot holes to keep me fully engaged in this movie

[Brianknowsmovies · 5/10 · 7 July 2018]

I started off engaged and interested in this movie, initially there was some good pacing and dissemination of information, but as it went along I lost a lot of interest. Part of the movie involves getting vital information from the survivor but I found I got as frustrated at the crew at how slow the plot progressed past the initial phase and tried to resist skipping forward to find out what information they try to beat out of the survivor.

The costumes immediately reminded me of ST TNG like others have stated in reviews and the dart seams (thanks smoke0, didn't know what to call those) on the women were distracting, gave the appearance of women having fake 'pokies'. The costumes otherwise were very flattering to the actor's figures and Sunny Mabrey has never looked better than in one of these jumpsuits. She probably was the highlight of the movie for me. The movie also did a decent job with special effects and making the surroundings look good.

Plot holes were the unraveling of the movie for me. From the very start you see the spaceship had a rotating outer part but the crew is in the middle but somehow they have gravity. Also, the space station had 2 rotating rings but they do not dock there and the movie takes place in the main body that is not rotating and again they have gravity somehow. I was like OK, whatever and moved on but then more things like that kept pecking away.

I was really put off about how they deal with the survivor and the companion bot. Why would you leave them on the compromised station instead of taking them back to the ship???

The biggest "hole" is allowing the modified bot to just roam around the station...that is just too great of a liability and never would happen , it would have to be deactivated or contained. They were attacked by some small bots from the very beginning, why wouldn't they fear the same or worse from the survivor's modified robot companion? very big hole that destroyed any coherence.

I really wanted to like this movie more and wished there were some more hooks or breadcrumbs or even plot misdirects along the way to keep me engaged but it takes the whole movie to get any information at all about what happened and by then I just wasn't interested. I found I wanted to beat it out of whoever wrote the screenplay as much as the crew wanted to get it out of the survivor.