The Misty Green Sky (2016)

The Misty Green Sky (2016)
2.5
  • 99
  • Genre: Sci-Fi
  • Release year: 2016 ()
  • Running time: 81 min
  • Original Title: The Misty Green Sky
  • Voted: 99

A young girl in another solar system asks an innocent question that sets off a chain reaction of adventure, destruction and tragedy.

#PersonCharacters
1Jeremy HarklessPlanetary Senator
2Tiffany LindstromGwen
3Maggie H. TaylorEmma Dante
  • I'm 90% Positive This Was Porn by 2

    There is no graphic sex scenes in this movie but through analysis, from a third party of course, this was quite obviously intended to be porn. Maybe not a movie, more than likely a download game with still images, but this was most definitely intended to titillate.Its easy to tell where the time went creating the models. Female models were made to look as attractive as possible. They wear very revealing clothes, have expressive faces, and aren't too unpleasant to look at. At one point the lead girl is running around topless. Then she puts on a shirt that is somehow even more revealing. Male models are ugly and likely stock. Neither was meant to be used in a motion picture. There is an attempt to make the characters expressive, but it was quite honestly misplaced. Their faces never seem to show the right emotion for any given situation and are often the most ridiculous aspect. When they move, its very twitchy and floaty. They aren't a part of the scene so much as they are an overlay that slides into place. Its like there is a constant physics glitch and at any point, the girl sitting in a jungle is going to slide away on her butt. Even the way they move is jank. They almost ragdoll when they run, their arms flailing ridiculously and their legs seem to go into business for themselves whenever they need to do anything else.The voice acting is a whole nother can of worms. The IMDB page lists three actors doing three roles. There are more speaking characters. The number of actors is correct. There is not even n attempt to mask their voices, every character sounds exactly the same as the last one. On top of that, the actors are quite apparently not to actors. Their voices are flat and lack any humanity, almost like they were voiced by a speak and spell.And then there is the pacing. It is unfortunate this isn't porn, at least then the filler would be something interesting. About 60% of this movie is simply exposition shots of the character going somewhere else. Either they are walking, floating, or flying and its never as interesting as it sounds. There is a scene where three characters are flying somewhere. You see the shot of them flying. Then a close up on one of the girls doing something. Then the other girl doing something. And this then cuts too, drum roll... them still flying. Followed by a close up on the first girl in a new position. And then the second girl doing something whule hanging upside down. None of these people have any lines or even names, this is to set up the main character getting a new job.

  • Extraordinary. by 1

    "If you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche.

    A true glimpse into the perversions and fantasies of a depraved, twisted, possibly p?dophilic mind. Prepare yourself for a mind-bending adventure, spawned by the machinations of a Jack Foster, that will truly have you questioning the nature of reality.Replete with madness, the costumes and appearance of our protagonist are constantly shifting with no discernible reason or cause in addition to bizarre physics. You will also find no sensible characters or reason within this universe.Seeking a deeper meaning or some semblance of a healthy worldview within this mess is akin to gazing at an Eldritch Horror. Nothing good will come of it. Simply submit yourself to this creation and behold.

  • The worst thing I have ever seen?????? by 1

    The story was distracting and was not worth the money

  • The Mostly Green Try by 3

    As much as I love amateur 3D art, I'm annoyed with this. The creators should get a grasp of film making and the technical aspects of cgi because this movie has writing, directing, cinematography, editing and a bevy of other visual issues. Instead of an organically unfolding story, we get exposition and poorly paced scenes, many of which are drawn out and pointless. There was enough story for maybe a short film, not a full feature.

    The visuals actually obstructed the storytelling. Most of the animation was so bad that I was unsure what emotions were being expressed. Plus with free and very capable programs like Blender available, nothing animated and rendered in 2016 should look like this, even if you are using lower end Poser/Daz characters. On a positive note, I did enjoy some of the music, particularly the ending theme.

  • Padded by 3

    Looking past the cheap CGI, There is about twenty minutes of actually rather good story in here, but a lot of sub-plots that go nowhere. scenes that just go on and vignettes that don't really serve the story (including a bit of gratuitous fan-service), all padding out the run-time.Were this a 15 to 25 minute short, it may have been worth watching, but even with state-off-the-art production values, I think I still would be bored with all the extraneous stuff.

#PersonCrew
1Jack Fosterdirector
2Jack Fosterwriter