VividSimon Simply Perfect

VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Ariella Broughton It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

majoraward-1 Maybe in 2039 an ISS will have gravity but I doubt that. I gave it a 5 as it was thought provoking but I don't know if he was seeing things in the end or if it was an explanation for everything before. On the other hand I have not written a review for ages so it did get to me and I think it should be seen by a wider audience and deserves better.

ged_b Confusing. Eratic. Emotionally charged for long periods with a huge expectation which never comes to fruition. Not to relax to, or laugh at, or get into, or wonder at (except perhaps for what the heck is happeing most of the time). It COULD have been a dynamite film, but it wasn't. It hinted, badly, at a great plot, while bashing my ears with mediocre trancelike musak, while cutting from one silly scene to another in an endless (or did t merely feel like endless) cycle of nothing to nothing shots of nothing but what we've seen before.We get instant gratuitous shot of the close up of a woman's arse coming straght from another unrelated scene. What does that signify? Nothing at all!We get a smoke alarm waiting until the entire ISS is filled with a toxic smoke until it rised in pitch enough to rouse this astronaut from his deep slumbers, from which he leaps, instantly awake, to dash across the entire length of the station, while clutching his tshirt to his face, to get to his face mask/respirator! Ugh!? Talk about adding stupid action/drama to break the endless boredom and FAILING!NOt sure why I didn't give this a 2. I remember someone once saying that "a true bore is someone who can go on and on about something which is the tiniest bit interesting." and this film sums it up perfectly. It always appears to be on the point of something better, revealing, telling, informing, happening, and nothing ever does. Until the last scene which is not explained or examined and does not fit at all.Perhaps the book is better? But I seriously doubt it.

nikkibarreca I love conceptual science fiction and I pride myself in having a pretty robust attention span, so I thought I would find this movie to be interesting. I was wrong. Most of the film consists of repeatedly detailing the daily routine of a man on a space station. You know, running on a treadmill, walking, sitting, typing things on the computer, leaning under things, pulling on wires, reading, thinking, looking at the earth out the window, etc. The beginning of "Love" is very similar to "Moon," minus a friendly talking computer. The middle of "Love" seems to draw a large inspiration from the movie "Solaris." The end of "Love" is the most BLATANT rip off of "2001: A Space Odyssey" that I have ever had the misfortune of viewing in my entire life. I know that there are few original ideas out there,, but most of the time they stop short of outright plagiarism. Interspersed in this movie are interviews and voice-overs of various people spewing mind-numbingly insipid, pretentious, pseudo-philosophical nonsense. The cinematography of the Civil War sequences is beautiful, and I respect the fact that the filmmakers were able to produce such a good looking and sounding movie on a shoestring budget. However, the fact remains that they had an idea for a 20 minute plot that they stretched out into 1.5 hours. Just making something "abstract" and "cerebral" does not make it "good." I happen to like cerebral movies when they are done well. Look at something like "Primer," another low budget sci-fi film. While it is at times confusing, it is very interesting, the plot moves along, it makes you think, and THINGS HAPPEN! Good writing does not cost any money, you either have it, or you don't. And "Love" does not.

Johan Dondokambey An extra effort to be able to convey the artsy value, this in the contrary film kind of fails to deliver a meaningful story. The movie starts out interestingly with the civil war sequence and the contrast move to the space age. But then it wears out its welcome when it takes the isolation scenes a bit too far then change to a crude reproduction of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. I've suspected such a move since early on with the all too similar opening scene of orbital shot of earth. But the later on redoing the whole significant parts of Kubrick's work; hallucination scene, the warped out light speed kaleidoscope scene, and even remaking its own black monolith, is a low effort indeed. Yes this movie gets artsy with all that abstractly reachable scenes and the great sound works. But that's just it; the story doesn't even do justice to all the viewers' curiosity successfully built. The acting is quite nice though. Acting alone Gunner Wright can handle those close up shots well enough with his varied expressions.