IMDb must find a way to quell these deliberately manipulated movieratings. Find out how the rating system is being exploited and put anend to it before users lose all confidence in it. Those who cheat thesystem should know there's backlash, for every false 10...their filmwill receive numerous 1's, and neither fairly assesses the movie beingreviewed. <br><br>Is this an 8 star or higher film? In my eyes, no. A few may believe so,but I believe the vast majority of honest opinions would place itbetween 4-6. The premise is intriguing and executed moderately. Theacting is mediocre. Mostly though, we aren't observing performances,but observing scenes and listening to the accompanying dialogueinstead. Thus the editing, CGI and set are of primary importance and Ibelieve the filmmakers did a decent job of it, earning a solid B-. <br><br>It's primarily seen through the eyes of our protagonist. She's one ofthree young adults (in financial straights) who accepts a mysteriousassignment to supervise a group of highly gifted children in a topsecret advanced learning program. She enters an underground facilitywhich is completely pitch and is given a set of glasses which operatesmuch like Google Glass, only then is she able to see her surroundingsand receive any information. This alone kept me questioning what wastruly real throughout the film since technology of this nature cancontrol ones perception of reality. It can be programmed and designedto manipulate a person so I was never certain who or what was reallyhappening. The feeling was much like watching films like Black Swan,Vanilla Sky or Inception in that it is somewhat disorientating and onecannot be certain about what's experienced. To be clear, this film isabsolutely nothing like the 3 films I've mentioned and it cannotcompare; the air of disorientation and uncertainty is all that is incommon. At its' core, this is the best thing about the film. <br><br>Our protagonist soon realizes that the children are far from average.They are mentally and intellectually far more advanced than most adultswho may be considered genius and these prodigy's only pause from theirstudies to eat a highly regulated diet and sleep a precise amount oftime. She alone feels pity for them, voicing it by saying that childrenshould be allowed time to be children, to have recess and play. Heropinion proves to be a critical point to the plot. <br><br>I think that more tantalizing visuals and dialogue would have doneabsolute wonders for the production value of this film. The set was tooclaustrophobic and lacked ambiance. It reminded me a bit of the lowerlevels seen on the set of Ex Machina, except a bit more like (as onereviewer stated) "a concrete submarine" meets inner city ravernightclub. Some imagination, space, and attention to detail would havegone a long way since the set was such a critical part of theproduction. There's no background on the female protagonist nor herco-protagonists which leaves the audience with no concern about theirplight. They are nondescript and we learn nothing about them, it didn'teven benefit the story to have the co's present. A backstory and someamount of character development was critically missing. <br><br>There were some tense moments, more of them would have made the filmsomewhat thrilling but the run time is fairly short and there's notmuch in the way of building suspense. One freak-out occurrence and ourprotagonist is already exiting the facility. She's compelled to stayhowever, then there's only the second occurrence which is our climax.Throughout the climax you are on a POV trip through darkness andconfusion. Terror is intended, but it's mild since it's not conveyed aswell as it could have been. I loved the ending. It was a bit confusingbut if you're paying close enough attention and processing it then Ithink you'll appreciate it to. Is it brilliant? No, but it'ssatisfactory.