First Signal (2021) User Reviews

Good Concept - abysmal film craft - beyond low budget.

[Nemesis42 · 3/10 · 22 June 2021]

The story itself is quite good, and this story concept could be picked up by more aptly funded team to make a great movie out of. It could be morphed into a pretty slick sci-fi action feature. This film, however, has a clunky script. It feels like UFO tropes have been cobbled together into a public lecture designed to 'educate' the audience. The acting, direction, lighting, production design, dialogue, colour grade, editing, makeup, sound design, sound recording, sound mixing are all terrible. The acting from a few characters is good, but that's it.

I only watched it because of the high rating on here.

Intriguing film title. It all ends there.

[cxcxc · 2/10 · 28 April 2021]

Don't bother. "Written, produced, directed by" same person.

Amateurish production, mostly shot in a hotel conference room posing as a 'bunker'. Premise (title) was intriguing, but ended there. Just a wannabe knockoff of "Contact", sort of. But it nicely gives a nod to Carl Sagan. Actors' dialogue was so wooden and unnatural - there was absolutely no overlapping dialogue... Kind of like Lego people that just sit in their place for over an hour and speak on cue when the director points a finger at them.

OMG, terrible & wooden

[chrisbw1965 · 1/10 · 18 November 2021]

I give most movies a chance, and have liked what others found really bad, but this one was truly terrible. Only made it part way into it and had to shut it off. You know those boring training classes you have to endure at work, where you have to perform stupid skits with wooden dialog and acting read off a card? Yeah, that's oscar worthy compared to this. Really, the president travels without security, and gets briefings in a third rate conference room with plastic tables? And along those lines, we're suppose to believe this inarticulate woman, who can't even speak convincingly, and wears no identifiable US pin or badge, is supposed to have earned the highest office on the planet. I'm sorry, but it's even too much of a stretch for me. Truly god-awful!

The only impressive thing about this film was...

[david6995 · 1/10 · 10 October 2021]

The only impressive thing about this "film" was how they managed to get so many obviously fake positive reviews. To even give this one star was generous. I was once again duped into watching this as the result of the supposedly high scores this steaming log of dung obtained.

All this film consisted of was a bunch of wooden inept "actors" talking to each other. That wouldn't have been THAT unforgiveable if it wasn't for the fact that the dialogue was so unengaging and devoid of thought-provoking ideas.

Now I'm not one to slam a heavily dialogue-based movie, but in order for it to pass, it would HAVE to be interesting and/or original enough to keep its audience's attention. 'First Signal' does NOTHING of the sort.

A dialogue-heavy film that does it right is Pontypool. Similar to 'First Signal', Pontypool was mostly dialogue sci-fi/horror flick that was set in one location, but it was so damned interesting and original, it kept me glued to my seat throughout. To those who read this: watch this film only if you find amusement by watching paint dry. Don't listen to the false high reviews. You have been warned!

Interesting story premise but so badly acted

[gary-kramer · 1/10 · 22 August 2021]

The actors are terrible, some of the dialogue is awful

It's a film that had promise from the point if the story, but the execution completely ruins the film.

Could not finish it, it was that bad.

We need to see in

[nogodnomasters · 1/10 · 15 May 2021]

A satellite picks up x-ray transmissions from an alien satellite located at the edge of the solar system. The film is consumed with dialogue of the military informing the president. This lasts for too much of the film and goes into an idiotic heated debate on history that was ill conceived and acted. The president uses that same room to talk to other people and then we have a long scene in an open field.

The film was boring and as unpleasant as a root canal. There could be a part two. Conor Timmis was painful to watch. And with all the careful rewrite of history, why do anti-gravity ships have jet propulsion?

Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity.

Nice story, ruined by bad acting.

[Taz_Man998 · 3/10 · 26 April 2021]

I have to agree with psxvince.

Allthough i will not give it a 1 star review.

The acting is, unfortunately, pulling the whole story down with it.

However i was amused by it and because it has more potential, if redone with more experienced actors and maybe a few better lines, i'm giving it 3 stars.

Impressive number of fake ratings

[supermellowcali · 2/10 · 9 August 2021]

Yaaaaaaawn. There's no original idea here. The writer seems to have no idea what's interesting about science fiction. About 90 percent of the movie is people talking in a cheap, undecorated, serviceless hotel conference room without security. The first 3/4 of the movie is simply unnecessary explanations by amateur actors. I liked some of the graphics and the costumes were good, a waste on such an unexciting story full of cliches that don't even fit the situation.

Wooden actors with wooden dialog and 1920s sound meets the future

[haydens · 22 January 2022]

Terrible acting, wretched script, the sound and sound effects are a joke.

Slamming doors obliterate dialog.

The dialog early on consists of longwinded inane speeches.

The president is alone in the conference room with people she's never met, there is no Secret Service in sight.

Every last actor has no skills at the art whatsoever. I think they rounded up some out of work local weather personalities who have dreamt of becoming movie stars.

The early conference between the president, her NSA advisor, some military types and two non governmental scientists supposedly takes place in a room protected by a faraday cage. Yet people simply open the doors and walk out into ordinary hallways. Clearly, this was filmed in a hotel with conference room facilities.

The president meets with the Prime Minister of the UK and the Russian President. No security, no aides, no translators, no one else that would have to be paid to be an extra.

This movie is a joke. I keep hoping that they'll get to the aliens, this is just daytime television acted by amateurs.

Cerebral Sci-Fi at its Best

[EdeBorrett · 9/10 · 27 March 2024]

Okay, from the top, this is NOT ray-guns and spaceships and battles - what it is 100% cerebral sci-fi that you need to watch, yes actually watch, not have in the background while you play your Playstation 3.

The acting is underplayed and beautifully realistic, no-one screams and shouts - well okay, not many people and not very often. People talk and discuss and present ideas. The storyline is incredibly clever and will have you guessing as to where it is going and who you can trust. Indeed who, if anyone, is telling the truth!

Direction and Production are first class. I am so glad that 'The Studios' didn't get the script and turn it into a big budget blockbuster - it proabbly wouldn't have worked one tenth as well.

If you liked 'First Contact' (Jodie Foster) you will probably love this. Ignore the naysayers. Who cannot think beyond the next Star Wars movie and enjoy the pure entertainment of acting.

I was there

[davpenn · 6/10 · 1 November 2022]

The story is great. In spite if the low budget it is still worth the time. It's based on an actual place and the events have some valid references to reality. I would estimate that approximately 45% is fact, 15% is probably fiction, and the rest is possible or just noise. I was there for several years. The stories of non terrestrial activities date as far back as the days of pre Vietnam War. The room where the meeting takes place is multiple levels beneath the surface. Yes, US Presidents have secretly visited. It is also one of the most frequently UFO reported sitings locations worldwide. The people who produced the film had to have personal knowledge of the location and operations. I was entertained.

As low as you can go in pure banality

[villard · 1/10 · 22 December 2021]

A mind-numbing nearly two hours of banal dialogue around a meeting table? This has to be the lowest budget sci-fi film ever made. I recommend it only for insomniacs, or conspiracy nuts who soak up this kind of sappy soap opera melodrama. The seminal film 2001: A Space Odyssey sweeps audiences into an experiential visualization of finding evidence of intelligent life off the Earth - without all the yakity-yakity-yackity-yakitying. I've seen much, much better student high school films. A zero rating would be too generous for this anemic attempt to entertain UFO cultists.

Stupid to the core

[burgif · 1/10 · 26 April 2021]

Amaturish actors with amaturish lines lead to no where. I just cannot undestand the thing of referring to the Jewish people in any movie or sitcom whether the mentione is warranted or not take for example Sienfield, the Nanny and this film, the Jewish people suffered alot and do not need publicity like that.

Don't waste your money

[srjspr · 1/10 · 22 June 2021]

The worst film I've watched in my entire lifetime.

Very poor casting, the NSA head or whatever she is gives the appearance of a nervous woman unfitting for her profession and so on..... Dialogues looks entirely artificial, like in old school dramas. And the CGI..... RIDICULOUS!

Apalling acting

[Saiph90 · 1/10 · 2 March 2022]

I would love to be able to write a full length description of this film but I could not get beyond 5 minutes of some of the worst acting I have ever seen. If these actors got the parts you wonder how bad were the actors who did not get selected. The brief part I did watch looked like it was in a hotel conference room and the acting was so stilted and looked like they were reading from an autocue made us switch off, it is unwatchable.

Simply painful to watch

[ldg-accounts · 1/10 · 25 October 2021]

This movie is simply horrendous. It's nothing more than a serial effort in sanctimonious speech making. The writers probably thought they were making some existential statement about - something (I don't know what), but all they accomplished was to string several disparate word salads together.

The acting is terrible (another reviewer said 'wooden,' and I think that was being generous), the direction is first-year film school quality, the sound is out of a 70s home movie, and the story is terrible.

A bad movie, all the way around. Skip it.

This made me want to punch my TV

[cnoonward · 1/10 · 21 August 2021]

Basically a bunch of randos in a hotel conference room improvising a script. Community theatre level acting and production. Full disclosure... I couldn't watch move than 7 minutes before shutting it down.

Low buget

[carlopicassodecorators · 3/10 · 18 May 2021]

Felt I was watching a pirate copy of a film. Obviously low budget. Felt it could have been an amazing film if more money was pumped into it, and better actors. Sound needs massive improvement.

Good science fiction for nerds like me

[64026402 · 8/10 · 19 September 2021]

This is very good to watch if you like real science fiction and have a high enough IQ.

The low reviews aren't wrong about the lack of dollars spent on the best actors, and the coolest director, and the highest cost screen writers etc...

But I watched it and enjoyed it immensely.

My friends who don't enjoy reading books, and don't like Blade runner because it is to boring. Who don't learn about things for the sake of enjoyment. They will not like this.

Government shenanigans and UFOs are always an interesting film subject

[baccaruda1 · 7/10 · 29 April 2021]

An unique take on the government's viewpoint of the UFO phenomenon. There is more an more factual information dripping slowly from the government on this subject every day, and this movie takes some of those headlines and incorporates some of them into the story. I enjoy watching UFO docs that I find on Prime, and this movie bookends those shows nicely!

Why was the music louder than the dialogue?

[fbianco-99862 · 1/10 · 6 July 2022]

I had to turn on the subtitles just to hear what was going on! And what was the reason for overly dramatic music to play for an hour and a half Non-Stop? I guess it was to drown out the tanniness of the horrible audio in that room. And how implausible it is that so few people would even know about such a thing? It's even more implausible that people in such high positions would be so childlike in their demeanor and attitudes. So condescending and negative. Then there is the video, practically filmed in black and white there was so little color in that conference room. I only continued watching because I was hoping something exciting was going to happen.

ENDING WITH 3 WORDS

[xgreatunwashedx · 1/10 · 2 August 2021]

Make Plan 9 From Outer Space look like an Oscar worthy masterpiece in all categories!

Sets - acting - plot- quality of production - WTF?

The following review comment makes more sense and is of higher quality than any component of First Signal:

klafrhiu3w4yt9824hun3iu37067kbvsfhvfhj kjgshkbgjhklgshjbgsk *(&^(*&HUIUYyuiuhihkljh^&&^^&Yghjgfrjkfgygyu&*^&(*hjbhhbjbhj

First Signal is JUST PLAIN CRAP.

Bad film that would make a freshman NYU Film School student vomit

[duffhammer · 1/10 · 29 September 2021]

This is a pitiful effort at making a movie. The script has its bright spots, but the acting is atrocious, the directing is bad, several of the shots weren't even in focus at first, and the story became painfully obvious early on. It's like someone gave a local community theater a $50,000 budget to make a film. How this piece of dreck got any awards is horrifying.

7/10 average!?

[gregorionchant · 1/10 · 12 July 2021]

I did actually watch the film (ugh), but you only need to watch the trailer to realize how terrible this is.

7 out of 10? Yeah right! This is a solid "1".

Low-Fi

[skennedy-36258 · 1/10 · 6 October 2021]

Be prepared for a very low budget production with no action , surely because of no money. Wardrobe, cast, set ( supposed bunker ) and effects all at the lowest standard possible. Avoid.