Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

Btexxamar I like Black Panther, but I didn't like this movie.

Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Edwin The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

majoraward-1 Maybe in 2039 an ISS will have gravity but I doubt that. I gave it a 5 as it was thought provoking but I don't know if he was seeing things in the end or if it was an explanation for everything before. On the other hand I have not written a review for ages so it did get to me and I think it should be seen by a wider audience and deserves better.

Glenn Walsh I read online that the budget for Love was $500,000. At a personal level this would be a nice lottery win, but in the film industry just a catering budget. The result is impressive to say the least, especially the Civil War scenes, which are incredible, a bravura piece of inventive film-making and editing that looks like it cost millions. The story isn't entirely original, but it is handled in an interesting way that maintains interest to the last frame. A good companion piece to Solaris (the Soviet version) for a sci-fi double bill.

nikkibarreca I love conceptual science fiction and I pride myself in having a pretty robust attention span, so I thought I would find this movie to be interesting. I was wrong. Most of the film consists of repeatedly detailing the daily routine of a man on a space station. You know, running on a treadmill, walking, sitting, typing things on the computer, leaning under things, pulling on wires, reading, thinking, looking at the earth out the window, etc. The beginning of "Love" is very similar to "Moon," minus a friendly talking computer. The middle of "Love" seems to draw a large inspiration from the movie "Solaris." The end of "Love" is the most BLATANT rip off of "2001: A Space Odyssey" that I have ever had the misfortune of viewing in my entire life. I know that there are few original ideas out there,, but most of the time they stop short of outright plagiarism. Interspersed in this movie are interviews and voice-overs of various people spewing mind-numbingly insipid, pretentious, pseudo-philosophical nonsense. The cinematography of the Civil War sequences is beautiful, and I respect the fact that the filmmakers were able to produce such a good looking and sounding movie on a shoestring budget. However, the fact remains that they had an idea for a 20 minute plot that they stretched out into 1.5 hours. Just making something "abstract" and "cerebral" does not make it "good." I happen to like cerebral movies when they are done well. Look at something like "Primer," another low budget sci-fi film. While it is at times confusing, it is very interesting, the plot moves along, it makes you think, and THINGS HAPPEN! Good writing does not cost any money, you either have it, or you don't. And "Love" does not.

Mork_the_Borg Sorry, but I don't buy in to the line that this movie was so well made for its budget. I found it a horrible cheaply made rip off of one of the best movies ever made: Space 2001 a Space Odyssey. What the heck is wrong with the physics of this movie? Did the makers ever hear of zero- gravity or micro-gravity? Mmmmm... well maybe just maybe, the lack of any form of close to reality physics would have been okay if the story would have been superb, but the story is even bigger crap than the lack of physics applied to the ISS. This movie is most definitely not about 'love' or 'relationships', but more about how can I make a name for myself by copying Stanley Kubrick's genius cinematographic insight! Even some of the shots were direct copies of the original 2001 movie - makes me wonder if they got sued for copyright infringement. It's a shame, as I'm such a huge S.F. lover, and this cheap rubbish should be banned from ever being published to DVD or BD!