Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Micransix Crappy film

BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

markkbranson I happened onto this film after watching several apocalypse movies and this one is certainly worth my time. Tho' the acting is a bit amateurish at times, the plot is engaging throughout.I am reminded of Jean Paul Sarte's "No Exist": essentially that hell is other people. This theme seems to run throughout. I don't know what else to say because I don't want to slip into any spoilers. Leave it to say that if you have some time, this film is worth it for the pace, the camera work, and the the theme. . .

russmillerwy-957-682439 Five people penned in a box, supposedly for their own safety, but with lots of room for doubts about what's really going on. Shelter isn't an action scifi movie, it's more like a tense little play. The scenes have been shuffled out of order to keep the reality of the box and the fates of the characters mysterious for as long as possible, much like Lost. And it succeeded in keeping me curious about that until the very end. The characters are believable. The acting was good enough to keep me immersed in their reality. I get the comparison with The Divide, but I wasn't able to stay interested in The Divide's mysteries long enough to finish it. And even though The Divide has many more recognizable faces in it, I didn't find its characters to be plausible or even likable. The writing in Shelter is much better, more like real life than a science fiction comic book. I look forward to seeing more of what the creators can do. It's obvious they don't need big money and fancy actors to do something compelling. Rock on.

sir_humpslot The only reason I watched this turd was because it's on Amazon Prime and was "recommended" after watching 2012's "The Divide" - which is far superior in terms of low budget filmmaking and cuter lead actress. It's similar genres, but the production value is completely lacking on this one and there's no story plot to speak of.Albeit there's some suspense as you want to know what happens to the survivors, but alas it's a total snoozefest until then and the payoff isn't worth it.I'm sort of interested in these types of movies because as an aspiring filmmaker these one location projects are the only stories that can be made at the ultra low budget level and still have some sense. But this movie has no point and isn't even entertaining enough to keep your interest as you fast forward just to get to the end.A total waste of time.

ndigitaz This movie felt longer than it is, the emotions of the cast and the situation they are dealing with is well conveyed and felt throughout the film, the logical inconsistencies in the movie were distracting.Had we never seen the person monitoring the camera feeds at the end, it may have felt more complete actually. Its hard to reconcile that the experiment the "subjects" are a part of has no defined purpose. For example, if it were about survival, they proved they could survive. If it is about human morality, the operators/experimenters were in fact the most amoral characters in the plot. I had a lot of trouble understanding how each of them really got into the vault, why they spent so little time dissecting who each other was on the outside, and why they didn't challenge the surroundings more. They found the cameras in the grates after a full year and 3 months.The relationships between the people were downplayed, but would have had a lot to do with their actions and/or their fate. We saw the marriage of the couple dissolve, somewhat callously but there was not a great explanation or portrayal of what happened. The chronological skipping made for a lot of suspense throughout the film, but sort of left an out for the filmmakers to not tell the entire story and fill the holes left in the skipped time.The mirror scene at the end and finally a response by the experimenters/shadow company (of locking the door) proved to be the final inconsistency. The film was interesting as a thought piece, but proved hard to digest and not get caught up in more of the details.