Beyond the Trek

👌👌👌

Beyond the Trek_360P

The space effects here are good. I rather think they could have included them more often to build atmosphere, and as a breather from the understandably (only) slightly claustrophobic effect of the limited set. I think the makers realised that too and thus put thought into screen backgrounds, a nice touch. If you watch the movie, and you definitely should if you love intelligent sci-fi, then you'll see what I mean. The computer graphics effects were also really good and a plausible technological look forward. I just read the synopsis/blurb for this movie and, if you haven't read it, don't. You'll enjoy the movie much more if you go in blind. At first you may feel the acting is a bit stiff, even for corporate/military astronauts, but bear with it. I loved the story/plot. I would have given it more stars if the direction had heightened the tension of the big reveals. In my humble opinion that required a bit more effort. We want dazzling wow moments, not just how-about-that moments. More than that is the sets, which needed to be way more spacious and a tad grungy, as in Alien movies (it is a mining ship). There's some odd bits of editing too, too many shots of people's boots (very minor criticism). The image on the dvd cover is separate artwork from the movie, though consistent with the style of the cgi. There were some nice effects with luminous pieces of uniforms and light displays on weapons, especially during power outages. I would have loved to have seen more of that. Really cool robot as well. To be honest its hard to review this movie without spoilers. Intelligence over aesthetics, so it's a solid 8 stars from me.

The acting is about what you'd expect from a low budget film, the two main issues that really drag it down are the pacing and directing: you could easily remove 30 minutes of the film where the characters are just aimlessly existing on the space station. The time wasn't used to develop the characters - there are none - they just keep restating their mission, I almost turned it off during that time because it didn't seem to be going anywhere. The directing is something else entirely, 90% of the movie the camera just keeps swining side to side, like you're tilting your head left and right constantly, it started making me nauseous and it didn't seem to have a purpose to it either - they had artificial gravity the whole time - it was purely a stylistic choice and it sucked.

At first I thought this was a documentary on post Star trek science fiction. Especially with the rip off poster that looked like Julia Mao floating in space. While the idea behind this is decent the film itself is boring. From the emotionless acting where no one's expression changes, to the less than well imagined uniforms and sets. The X-, Files episode Ice was far better.

I saw this film at a festival with modest expectations, but it turned out to be a great surprise. Given its low budget don't expect a ton of action and special effects, but the film makes up for it with strong acting, intrigue and a story that keeps you guessing. I think some of the criticism saying it's boring must not be fans of classic Sci-Fi, which were more about atmosphere and making a statement about the future (or potential future) of humanity through the imaginary world of science fiction. For that matter 2001 or Blade Runner could be called dull, because there's long stretches without action. Teleios is dialogue heavy for sure, but it has strong pacing and wait for last 30 minutes when what you thought you knew what was going on gets turned upside down. The film was released under the name Beyond the Trek, which is a somewhat erroneous title as it has nothing to do with the Star Trek franchise. Still, if you like Star Trek, particularly the classic stuff, Teleios (Beyond the Trek) is worth a watch.

To be clear this film is not a slam bang action film, but is very thought-provoking and raises important themes. It draws you in with a mystery that unravels in unexpected ways. Apart from Michael Nouri you might not recognize the actors, but the cast is excellent and the visuals, given it's only 1million budget (according to IMDB), are also great.

In the beginning two things attracted my attention and caused me to examine this movie: the poster, which is graphically original, and the title which is incomprehensible, unless you are familiar with Greek. After looking it up I learned TELEOIS stands for "perfection". So, my artistic sense was pleased, my linguistic knowledge increased - so far, so good. Then the time came to watch the film. Knowing its budget was limited I did not expect fireworks of production values, but it not necessarily makes a good sci-fi picture an impossibility. One spacecraft with a crew of 5 is sent to investigate the demise of the crew of another space vessel. A premise more than satisfactory. A certain parallel with EVENT HORIZON (1997) may by seen here, though the Paul W.S. Anderson's work itself is hardly original, as it borrows heavily from NIGHTLYERS (1987). The rest, with very few exceptions, is sorrowfully miscarried. The direction seems to be almost absent, or present at its incompetent worst. Majority of the actors are so lame it seems their acting lessons had the form of a correspondence course. Especially Lance Broadway, T.J. Hoban and Christian Pitre deliver performances of abysmally bad quality. However, Ursula Mills makes Lulu AH 320 an interesting robotic character. And then there's is ravishing Sunny Mabrey who can act and can bring some conviction to her lines, her final speech sounds quite poignant and dramatic, but it is not enough to save the misbegotten movie. More than a decade passed since she appeared in SPECIES 3 where she had little to say and served mostly as a * window dressing. Now she is an accomplished actress and deserves much better roles. The costumes represent an utter lack of visual taste. And it would have sufficed to remove those hideous frontal brown areas, otherwise they are nicely female figure hugging. In summarum, this motion picture is worth viewing only for Ms Mabrey, other reasons are extremely difficult to be found. On second thoughts, some might be tempted to see Michael Nouri in his brief video transmissions to notice how he has aged since the time of FLASHDANCE (1983).

Well. Worth watching-yes, not a waste of time. multiple plots running throughout the movie, too many just stop-not end mind you- just stop. This leaves you think "what did I just miss?", nothing-it just vanished. You want to leave the viewer wondering what will happen next- sequel? but not with everything. Did she hit abort? Did he make it back to earth? what was earth like? Why did the early android do what she did? Why did she attach to that one crewman? When did that attachment happen? Some of the rescue crew seemed to "slip" faster than others-why? To end a plot line is not to just stop writing about it-put a bow on it. Some of the plot is very interesting and a quite good concept. If you get bored at the end-take a freaking break and write it well. Take at least a week off and then re-read it. Get excited again. If you are going to leave it open ended, then logically close off what you want and leave open threads to the logical future. Take the lid off for the ending-throw us into space going WTF just happened. WOW!

usually you understand if you like a film after first 10 minutes..... after 40 minutes of the film its still boring...... very bad language representation, as they took people who do not speak it. Could ask native speakers to read. I would not watch it again... i would agree with most people who left a review here.... like actors.. there could be anyone instead of them, there is no much dynamics. also a lot of foreign language what was not translated... it is a super boring detective...