Prisoner X

1. Cheap effects; what few there were. Cheap production with basically everything filmed in typical underground concrete bunker type room and lots of quick videos & photos of humanity doing harm to itself. So old & overused. Tiresome; not original. 2. So cheap they have no subtitles coupled with poor English enunciation and poor audio level control.Not that it matters that much since the dialogue was created by scientifically illiterate writers to sound scientifically intelligent. 3. Acting was soooo scripted robotic - stereotypical prisoner and interrogation methods. 4. Dumb science: Time traveler here to warn humanity; shows up out of nowhere and convinces interrogators by listing location and times for astronomical events. Cost to show us such overwhelming time traveler advanced capabilities - a piece of paper and a observatory photo. That's it for a civilization so advanced to just show up.

I don't understand the low ratings? Maybe it's because there's only 19 reviews? People probably won't watch due to the low rating... BUT YOU'RE MISSING OUT! This movie is truly original. I've watched it twice now, and still found little pieces I didn't pick up the first time around. If you're looking for Hollywood effects - cars blowing up, and people shooting 30 rounds from a .22 revolver, this is not for you! If you are looking for something that stimulates the mind, adds suspense, creates many 'what-if' scenarios - this is for you. RECOMMENDATION: Highly recommend watching if you are looking for a well-written intellectual semi-futuristic (near future) film that will hold your attention - THIS IS THE HIDDEN GEM OF THE YEAR!!!

War and civil strife rage all over the world. Determined CIA interrogator Carem (a sturdy performance by Michelle Nolden) must crack captured terrorist Prisoner X (well played with twinkling menace by Romano Orzari), who claims to be a time traveler from the future who might be responsible for all the chaos. Writer/director Gaurav Seth relates the complex and compelling story at a constant pace, generates a considerable amount of tension, maintains a dark despairing tone throughout, and makes good use of the gloomy underground base main location. The rock-solid acting from the able cast helps a lot: Julian Richings as no-nonsense facility head Jefferson, Nigel Bennett as concerned president Charles Turner, and Damon Runyan as the desperate Fischer. A real nail-biter.

I wouldn't mind the lack of sets, heck I'd even give the poor acting and directing, but the Editting was shocking (thus irritating the story flow), but worse still was the story: obvious from the get go what was happening and going to happen, and the poor character backgrounds being told in obvious flashbacks. If the editing, directing, and acting was good, then maybe the film could have been okay despite the weak story... it could have been distracted from by subplots or something (and not the cheesy "you killed my sister" ham). In all an inoffensive film if you're bored during lockdown... but don't expect much from this school kid written story

I read a review by another user complaining about low budget production cost. I'll remind him, 'Twelve Angry Men', was filmed in two rooms, with no special affects. I have seen tremendously budgeted films that have sucked *alls, 'Battlefield Earth', comes to mind off the top of my head. This was a minimalistic film with the most recognizable actor being 'The Grim Reaper', from Supernatural. But I enjoyed the story.

This is a bad, bad movie. It starts out bad and just gets worse. The dialogue is atrocious, trite and full of tropes. It's like a college student movie. From what I can tell so far, it seems like an interesting core of an idea, but the movie is just too awful. I can't wade through this to see how it turns out.