Arctic Void (2022) User Reviews

"This is gonna be our best episode yet"

[hwg1957-102-265704 · 4/10 · 15 May 2023]

Well I liked the cinematography and the locations, particularly the deserted mining camp, but otherwise the film just left me bored. The plot about the mysterious sonic weapon had potential but limped along tediously until the very weak ending. When watching a film one likes to know what happens to characters in the end but the baffling way this concludes is just annoying. The main three characters, Ray and Alan and Sean, are onscreen most of the time and frankly are not memorable at all. The deaths of two of them make no impact. The actors playing those roles are bland. The constant music score, mainly whining, mars the film. In that bleak Arctic setting silence would have been golden. I struggled to get to the end and for my valiant effort was truly disappointed.

The only character I liked was Jim played by Rune Temte. He at least was entertaining.

Has a Twilight Zone feel to it

[jackmeat · 5/10 · 15 January 2022]

My quick rating - 5,3/10. The scenery in this one was excellent. I have to assume filming in such a place has to be dirt cheap but the feeling of being in the middle of nowhere while watching this is like an additional character. The feel of this is very much like an episode of The Twilight Zone or Black Mirror. 3 guys shooting film for their travel show are on a ship to Svalbard, Norway when a mysterious power outage occurs and the rest of the people on board for the tour "vanish." This leaves the trio to try and figure out what has happened and venture off to the only town they can spot from the ship which also happens to be abandoned. The acting in this one is fairly bland since rarely do either of them actually attempt to show any emotions. It is hard to tell if it was just a lack of dialogue or just painting them out to basically be in shock. The bit players are given hardly any time to develop, which is a shame since Rune Temte as Jim, the tour head, was on the way to stealing the show here. This moved by rather briskly at 82 minutes and as I mentioned, could've been trimmed down a bit more if they were shooting for a TV show slot. It does lack any twist or surprise though which I was hoping for since my initial thought of what was going on happened to be correct. And I am not trying to say I was getting really creative with my guess either. #jackmeatsflix.

Disappointing

[windsorenquirer · 5/10 · 16 January 2022]

This movie wasn't as bad as some people say. A little bit slow but still interesting and entertaining for the most part, at least the first 3 quarters of the movie. But the ending was very disappointing even though one could easily guess it at some point in the movie.

Would I recommend it? Yes but don't expect too much.

Wasted opportunity

[bitbucketchip · 3/10 · 1 February 2022]

There are a couple decent actors here, the scenery is spectacular, and the concept has real potential. Unfortunately, the direction is film student amateur, one of the lead actors has a non-existent range of emotion, and the writer lost the plot after setting it up. The net result is a dry slog through an abandoned mining town while no one, either on screen or audience, knows or cares what is going on.

Three stars for the acting of two of the three survivors, for the plot setup, and for the engaging setting. No stars for what happens after the 'mystery' is introduced. You can turn the movie off at any point once they reach the island and you won't miss a thing.

Another "Leave the Audience Hanging with Poor/No Ending" Movie 😑

[Instant_Palmer · 1/10 · 6 February 2022]

These types of screenplays (probably written on the fly during production) that don't have a proper ending, and are not witty or cool - only frustrating, just drives home the point that this film is a complete waste of time.

'Arctic Void' could have been passable with a screenplay and direction that let the audience in on bits and pieces of the "mystery".

Save on rental fee and watch something (anything) else.

Promised a lot but delivered not very much

[doujyr · 5/10 · 2 March 2022]

Excellent slow buildup, very believable. Second half all got a bit dull and the ending sadly didn't live up to the early promise of the film. Splendid scenery, but the CGI polar bear left a bit to be desired.

It was OK

[smoke0 · 22 January 2022]

I don't get all the hate for this, somebody doesn't like somebody personally or professionally and I couldn't care less about their feelings.

I would not bother to review a film like this ordinarily because it was neither great or horrible, just a movie that kept me interested enough to watch to the end, but due to all the hate I just felt I needed to add a more positive review.

Beautiful scenery byt not much more

[jlroodt · 1/10 · 18 January 2022]

This movie is an interesting experience. At first the beautiful scenery and the premise of the story grab your attention. The introduction of the supporting characters are done in a quirky way and most of these characters seem to offer something to be discovered.

At some point the entire plot changes inexplicably to add a mystery element, and then the remaining lead characters make some questionable decisions, that lead them on a journey into a deserted settlement of some kind. It seems as if the only reason this happened was to use the setting of this deserted settlement for some scenes in the movie. There's no other reason I can think of why they would abandon their ship and go onto land in any rational world.

Once they arrive on land the entire plot falls apart very quickly and leads to a very predictable and contrived ending.

The setting and scenery, together with beautiful cinematography make this watchable for the most part. The acting is good, but the plot and character development do not provide any satisfaction to the viewer.

Such a wasted opportunity.

[Top_Dawg_Critic · 7/10 · 17 January 2022]

Three writers and not one could come up with an actual ending? What's worse, is that this film could've so easily been epic. It had excellent directing, amazing cinematography, beautiful landscapes and settings, spot on score, and the cast and performances were great. For a low budget indie film, this can school even some experienced filmmakers on how to create the perfect suspense and environment for its genre. Even the writing was great until about the final act. There were no plot holes or technical issues, then the ending just got sloppy and boring. Seeing the little special effects with the animals brings the tension and suspense level right up, and you know it's building up to something huge, and then, boom!, a total let down. Budget can't be the excuse, because imagination is free. It's seems more like the writers got bored and/or lazy. Such an easy fix and what a shame. Sadly, it's only a 7/10 from me, all going to the first three-quarters of what was almost a perfect film, and it could've easily been more, if there was a little more effort.

Not terrible, just quite disappointing.

[leesimon-26357 · 5/10 · 26 August 2022]

Two men who produce a nature TV series hire a cameraman and head to a remote Norwegian village to shoot an episode. While on a passenger vessel with a colorful cast of bystanders and crew, an unknown event causes all but the 2 friends and their cameraman to go missing without a trace. What happened and what will happen to our protagonists?

The premise of the movie is quite good, however the script is lacking in plot movement and development. The dialogue is also quite bad. The most disappointing thing was the low effort put towards writing good reasons for plot points to occur. This kind of movie also really shows how difficult it must be to write believable and natural-sounding dialogue, because these people do not speak to each other like normal humans would speak to each other. Events happen because they have to happen, not because any character has a realistic reason to make something happen. The amount of time spent "walking around looking befuddlingly puzzled" is WAY too long. They truly did not have to spend so much movie time watching each of the 3 characters walk around not knowing what is going on.

Having said that, none of the shortcomings take this movie down to a 1 or 2 star level. It looks absolutely gorgeous, and every shot adds to the general atmosphere of the serene setting. The basic idea is also pretty good. Without spoiling anything about the ending, it's not quite fair to say that "nothing happens" or that the ending is a non-ending. I would have preferred if less time was spent during the "we don't know what's going on" phase of the story, and the movie spent maybe 20 minutes at the end exploring what they are introducing as the explanation for the event. Again, no spoilers, but while I think they were going for a purposeful cliffhanger ending, I think it comes across more like a "lazy, no time to write plausible, real answers" type of ending.

I won't watch it again because it was too boring throughout without enough of a satisfying ending for the viewer. However, I wouldn't stop a friend from watching it if it came on TV.

Breathtaking and Creepy

[Ceronomus · 8/10 · 26 February 2022]

I wasn't certain what to expect going into this movie. It isn't a horror film in the traditional sense, more of a psychological thriller with a few horror elements. The opening is fun and Rune Temte steals each and every scene he is in.

Once we settle into the main story, the isolation feels real. Without needing a single jump scare, the desolation of the film's location sets up an atmosphere of mystery and dread. Another reviewer compared this to the Twilight Zone and, in fairness, I think this stacks up alongside some of Rod Serling's best.

While I've also seen some people claim that the ending of the film is ambiguous, I found it to be quite clear, chilling, and disturbingly realistic.

Nick Donnelly's music is also worth mentioning. Some of it really sets up expectations counter to what will occur - adding to the impact of those moments, while at other times heightening and really driving home the creep factor.

Is it a perfect film? No. Is it a movie that I'm going to watch again in the future and still greatly enjoy? Yes. Frankly, this is better than many so-called classics. If you have the chance, don't miss Arctic Void.

Was great until it wasn't

[zamboni-36633 · 7/10 · 12 August 2022]

At the end of this movie it says This film was shot in 16 days by 16 people. That's pretty amazing considering it had an interesting plot, a very unique location for filming and the acting was just fine. The camera didn't bounce all over the place and the movie wasn't shot in the dark so you couldn't see what was going on. I enjoyed this movie quite a bit and cared about the characters. Then, the ending. Or lack thereof. I don't know who thought up the ridiculous ending, but someone, anyone should have laughed and said, "No, really. How are we ending this story?"

AVOID the Void

[Dar Star · 4/10 · 8 July 2023]

Huh??? What was that??? The reviews and ratings for this stinker are pretty accurate. Beautiful scenery and a promising start are totally wasted on the lack of any semblance of a plot and a nonsensical ending. By the end of the film you are watching the clock and counting down the seconds till it mercifully ends.

The actors are actually not at fault in my opinion. They seem to deliver as much as they reasonably can. The writing, or lack thereof, is the real culprit here. Indeed it seems like a waste to have traveled to such a remote place on Earth and have zero idea about the movie you're trying to make.

Skip this cinematic brain freeze.

Ridiculous

[Draysan-Jennings · 4/10 · 15 January 2022]

The trailer looked ok so I decided to give it a shot. Bad idea! That was a total waste of time. I didn't expect this film to be great but man that was terrible. Literally any film school dropout could of filmed this. It's a movie about 3 guys walking around a small abounded mining town looking for people. That's basically it. 4 stars.

Doesn't deliver

[orkneyislander · 3/10 · 15 January 2022]

Started off well but faded out at the finish as if they didn't know how to end it.

Major loophole with an 'attack' cause that completely vaporised people and their clothing but left all other surrounding material (including the clothing of the survivors) completely intact. Gave it a three for the scenery and the performance of the ship's captain/tour leader.

Good Start but bad or stupid ending..

[homeflash · 4/10 · 25 January 2022]

In my book, to determine whether it is a good movie, they can be separated in 4 categories.

1. Best - Good start - no boring moment - Surprise/good ending 1. Okay - Not so good start, but not boring - Surprise/good ending.

3. No good - Good start, keep you thinking , but stupid ending 4. Bad - Bad start, bad everything and bad ending.

In this case, this move does have a good start; however, it does not know how to end the movie. It is quite stupid to my opinion.

I wish the producer or story writer could put some aliens in the end, and that may make the story interesting... but this really is big disappointment.

Artic Avoid

[mrofficial34 · 2/10 · 23 January 2022]

Avoid this movie like it's COVID-22. Don't bother what a terrible ending they should've finished the movie SMFH! I gave it a shot and regret wasting my time period.

After 30 minutes it was terrible

[ernestomellado-97404 · 2/10 · 19 February 2022]

The first like 30 minutes where pretty good, there was a lot of tension. But after the point where they landed on the abandoned town, nothing made sense and there was a lot of useless suspence. I was always expecting something to happen, but nothing did. Also the ending was so terrible. We don't even know what happens to them... I was so disappointed with this movie, and it 2as honestly a waste of my time, and I can't recommend it to anyone.

Great Sci Fi Low Budget Mystery with a few flaws

[damorejj · 7/10 · 1 March 2022]

So apparently there's lots of people hating on this film. Unlike many, I don't need constant action and jump scares to keep me entertained. I also don't need everything explained to me. While it's nice not to be left guessing, I like a film that makes me think. This movie definitely did that. And while I think the ending could have been better, I don't think it's difficult to figure out and I'll offer my theory.

So three American men go on a Norwegian tourist expedition in the Arctic, leaving port on a boat from Longyearbyen, Svalbard, which is on a large group of Norwegian islands extremely north near the northern tip of Greenland. On this trip, there's a few German tourists, 2 scientists, a few Swedish people, and the 3 Americans who are there to film an episode of a travel show. One of them (the camera man) was hired last minute because the regular camera guy was unable to get a visa.

All is well as they embark, and they have a funny Norwegian host who makes the tour welcoming. Things start to seem a bit odd when Ray notices a seagull that's missing its eyes. Shortly after the tourists witness a walrus kill its child, and they're all in shock. Not long after that the people try to forget the gruesome scene by trying a local delicassy (whale meat). While Ray and Alan are inside, the rest of the tourists are on the front deck. They come out to discover that everyone on the boat has mysteriously vanished. Panic ensues and they eventually take a life raft to a small town they see from the ocean.

The town appears to be a small Russian fishing or oil town still with Soviet signage. But it's abandoned. As the mystery deepens Alan begins to get sick. He has noticeable legions on his skin and coughs up blood at one point.

Now here's the questions...the camera guy was filming when the people vanished. He lies to Ray and Alan about it claiming he was in the bathroom when it happened but Alan eventually discovers the truth when it was caught on the German girls camera.

The big reveal comes and we learn that the camera guy is actually working for a top secret agency to document an experiment. Some sort of sonic weapon is being tested in the Arctic that causes a vibration that cannot be heard. This experiment caused the people to vaporize, except for people who have listened to some weird humming on a tape recording in the camera guy's lunch box. Since Ray listened to it longer than Alan did he doesn't seem to be effected by the experiment like Ray was. We also notice a deer and polar bear suffering from the effects of the experiment. In the end rescue is supposed to be coming when the camera guy is suddenly shot by an apparent sniper. Alan passes away from the illness brought on by the experiment, and Alan is freaking out by the gunshot and a phone ringing.

Here's my theory...the camera guy was never going to be paid for documenting the experiment because of its extreme top secrecy. He was just being used. So when the people behind it found their location they arrived and took him out. Then they called the room Ray was in to tell him he needs to come out and they'll kill him as well or let him die.

I thought it was a great slow burn film on a very low budget. The acting was good and it kept me thinking. There were a few flaws though. I'm not sure why we saw a man's ears bleeding and the walrus and seagull before the experiment started. Unless it was already building. And one major flaw was I don't understand how the clothes vanished on the people who disappeared. It should have been just the people. Even on a small budget they could have had their clothes on the floor. Otherwise the 3 Americans would have lost their clothes as well. Listening to whatever was on those headphones would'nt have protected clothing. So why did theirs stay? That makes no sense.

And one flaw in the story. The camera guy was filming the vanishing. Alan and Ray discover this but never demand to see the video. I assume this was because it was on a low budget but they could have shown the characters watch it without showing it. They never even asked. It would have been the first thing I did if I knew he filmed it.

Anyway, I enjoyed this movie. Not perfect, but very well done for such a small budget. Not deserving of the hate.

Film actor attempts to write a film and get it done for $10k.

[Xavier_Stone · 1/10 · 16 January 2022]

The main actor does a vanity project and self produce a mystery film. Perhaps he's hoping for the next Paranormal series using an ultra low budget and getting 10x his investment back.

It starts off with a decent hook, being in the arctic filming a nature show. Then people disappear and it just gets bizarre from there.

This is what happens when a non writer attempts to put together a film. They have a good idea but have zero clue on how to actually make it work. In this film nothing makes sense, nothing works and it's just one big fail.

Maybe he spent $10k of his own money on this. Nothing more. I doubt he gets his money back to break even. Incredibly bad. Poorly acted. Tons of plot holes.

This is the definition of a 1 star movie for film students.

Profound ending - ignor low stars

[OneAnjel · 8/10 · 20 July 2023]

Okay, I really wanted to rate this with a six but I gave it a couple of extra to make up for the unintelligent people who left such low stars. If you don't like edgy, Syfy indie films why did you push play? This is actually an amazing film. I kind of hope someday someone with more money and more experience does a remake but I wouldn't change a thing. For everyone saying they didn't like the ending or that there was no ending I think the truth may be that it's simply not your cup of tea. Not understanding a film is different from it being a bad film. I thought the ending was extremely profound and shocking. If you were looking for a feel-good ending then, again, I would ask why push play in the first place. This is clearly a low budget film but I thought the actors all did a great job. The CGI wasn't very good but if you ask me that was the only Telltale that this was not a high budget film. I mean other than the fact that we've probably never heard of these actors before, the filmography was wonderful and the location was absolutely amazing. I mean what sci-fi or thriller producer wouldn't want this location for their film? Someone said that you can't really leave a review for this film without giving away some spoilers but I'm not sure I agree. However I do feel compelled to explain to the low intelligence or anti scifi audience- whichever the case may be - what happened in the ending. But for me the biggest question was why did he throw that in the ocean? And then in the end we realize that of course at least someone will find it someday despite whatever military or scientist was trying to remove all evidence and witnesses. I thought the film was definitely worth watching and the only thing that I'm disappointed in is having gone to see the reviews before finishing the film. Because it did intrigue me but there was a point when I thought to pop over to look at some reviews and saw so many people saying that it was a waste of time and that the ending was so unsatisfying that I almost turned it off. But I went ahead and let it play. I felt there were no real questions unanswered unless your mind w as trying to force a different premise or diff ending. Very profound and shocking film. But please don't watch it if you don't have the kind of intellect that can allow you to leave behind your expectations. And then if it's still disappoints you please have the courtesy to leave a five or six star review due to the fact that criticism that a film didn't satisfy you is not a good reason to give a one or two star review. You have to review a film based on what it is. Leaving a one-star review for a low budget film who just wanted to get his story out there is just rude just because you don't understand it.

Contrary to others here expecting something else, I enjoyed it.

[curtd-49392 · 6/10 · 15 January 2022]

A movie should fulfill it's promise. The script, acting, direction, lighting, and photography are better than most foreign films, and even the sound holds together. Americans (myself included) prefer more closure than the ending provides. And I'm still unsure whether or not I understand the ending. But the truth is that for a Saturday afternoon on a cold winter day, it was beautiful to look at, held attention, better crafted, and far, far, better edited than much higher budget productions. The credits state that it was filmed with 16 people in 16 days and there are some interesting names in the 'Special Thanks' credits that are encouraging, and might explain that success. So IMO the movie fulfills its promise even if the crew didn't carry the story to a comforting end.

Slow and confusing

[trueblucanadian · 2/10 · 14 January 2022]

Slow and confusing . The acting and writing was not great. The scenery was spectacular. To be honest it was vary slow paced and did not live up to the trailer.

I was expecting an edge of your seat thriller.

LOST 55.0

[Silicone54 · 2/10 · 15 January 2022]

How many more Lost remakes will they try come up with? Another sci-fi mystery thriller that's as exciting as watching the arctic ice melt.

3 Americans are filming a documentary in the Arctic. While they're on a tour boat, people literally vanish into thin air leaving these 3 soy boys as the only survivors. It appears something they ate caused the people to disappear. It appears as people are hallucinating visions of zombies. It appears there is a secret government experiment going on. It appears they're trying to confuse the audience with twists that lead nowhere.

The plot of the movie had potential but like the show LOST it gets lost in its own effort to mislead the audience with red herrings.

Garbage that had potential

[ctufan24 · 2/10 · 16 January 2022]

Bad writing with mediocre acting. Premise was promising but poorly executed. 3rd wheel almost reminds me of a "mice and men" situation... just an unnecessary character addition slowing the story down with filler.