I don't spend a lot of time reviewing movies, but when I looked this movie up on IMDb and saw a few 'great reviews' I figured those folks were getting paid, so I wanted to add my thoughts.
My theory is that they made the camera work so bad (the camera is constantly shaking and zooming in and out) the viewer wouldn't notice the terrible character development and lack of plot. Seriously, if you have ever tried to take a photo with a camera while the the zoom/focus constantly is going in and out, then you will have a preview of what it is like trying to watch this piece of junk. Did they give an I-phone to a 2 year old to do the camera work?
As far as the plot, totally predictable and weak as water, and I felt no no connection to the characters.
Bottom line: if you were wanting to present a movie where nothing worked, this would be a superb example.
My theory is that they made the camera work so bad (the camera is constantly shaking and zooming in and out) the viewer wouldn't notice the terrible character development and lack of plot. Seriously, if you have ever tried to take a photo with a camera while the the zoom/focus constantly is going in and out, then you will have a preview of what it is like trying to watch this piece of junk. Did they give an I-phone to a 2 year old to do the camera work?
As far as the plot, totally predictable and weak as water, and I felt no no connection to the characters.
Bottom line: if you were wanting to present a movie where nothing worked, this would be a superb example.