FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

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.

Bessie Smyth Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

bowmanblue Oh, dear... where to begin. 'Scavengers' is a case of something trying to be more than it actually is. The special effects are pretty blatantly computer-generated which doesn't help, but, if it had a decent story or something, I'll wager that most science fiction fans could forgive it its shortcomings.Basically, you have a good ship and a bad ship, both vying for the same salvage in deep space. How do we know which ship is good and which ship is bad? Because both a equally as close to the precise definition of 'good' and 'evil' as you could get – making them both pretty clichéd. The 'good' ship has nice, attractive, kind people who live in a brightly-lit ship with white walls. The 'bad' spaceship is filled with creepy, Gothic-looking people who only want to kill people (and the walls of their ship are black and dimly-lit).The 'story' (for what it is) is just bouncing back from one ship to the other while they try to fight over the salvage (which is worth something... by the way). And it's not just the effects that are a bit shoddy. The script is pretty tired and the actors don't seem to have enough enthusiasm in them to lift the dialogue above its mediocre roots.It has a real 'made for TV' feel to it. It's not the worst movie ever made, but it's far from being the best. If you like you sci-fi a little sparse on the sets and effects department, watch Dr Who – it also has a story and reasonable actors.http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/

ladybug2535 An uneven if entertainingly bad film, hurt considerably by it's obviously low budget as well as outdated CGI (I can't believe this film was done in 2013! Did they run out of money?) that look half-finished and ignore basic physics. Continuity and script problems undermine what could have been an interesting story. The music is notable and the most successful part of the film. Most of the acting is actually fine with a few exceptionally good moments--and some bad ones. "Indeed" the actors are undermined by bad dialog and directing--but they get the blame. Exceptionally awful is the lead "bad guy" (Sean Patrick Flanery!) who plays it way over the top (and what's with the southern drawl?) However, it is likely his character was (unnecessarily) deliberately drawn that way given the blatantly obvious dichotomy between good and evil throughout the movie, and given that he is usually a half-way decent actor. Overall I was more bothered by some of the off the wall "sciency" stuff spouted by the characters that wouldn't make sense in any universe. The scriptwriter obviously didn't bother with the most basic background research--"Indeed", an absolute sin for a serious science fiction film. Does the writer know what a clone IS? Why wouldn't a clone use his real name? And given the attributes of the clone character--why wouldn't EVERYONE have clones? This was a potentially interesting (and humorous) plot point (that might have saved the film!) introduced then ignored. I'd like to point out (since several reviewers have brought up this specific scene) that given who he was, the crew had reason not to react to his misadventure(s) as they might otherwise have done with someone else--this was true to the logic of the story and not bad acting. "Indeed", though there are a LOT of problems with this film, I was entertained--especially with the unexpected payoff at the end.

TheLittleSongbird The idea for the movie did seem decent enough if not exactly original, and I was willing to forgive any shortcomings providing that it looked that effort was made. Unfortunately Scavengers or Space Soldiers didn't seem to show much if any effort. The best thing about it is the music, which was fitting and had a sense of dread but once the movie was over I couldn't remember any of it at all. So if that was it for a redeeming value, that doesn't say very much now, does it? Scavengers/Space Soldiers is made cheaply to the extent that it was a real eyesore to look at, with choppy editing, too darkly-lit and green-screen like sets and special effects that looked like they were made out of the least expensive plastic they could find. The writing sounds incredibly forced and inane, the worst of it even intelligence-insulting, I agree that the villains' cheesy nick-names are indication enough of how bad the writing is here. The story is plodding and predictable with nothing suspenseful, thrilling or fun. If any kind of heart went into making Scavengers/Space Soldiers I for one certainly didn't see it. The direction at best is amateurish, while the acting is just terrible. The actors do have truly bad dialogue and cardboard characters to work from, but I don't see that as much of an excuse to act miserable throughout. Sean Patrick Flanery over-compensates so badly that it was really embarrassing to watch him, if an actor who has shown before that he can be good can be bad as well that is also an indication of the quality of the acting. All in all, utterly wretched in almost every way possible excepting the music, considering even that asset wasn't that great either that is faint praise. I personally don't think it's the worst movie ever made or the worst I've ever seen, but it is one of the worst I've come across in a long time and probably the worst movie of 2013 I've seen so far. 1/10 Bethany Cox

rushknight I actually had a good time watching this movie. For me, that is a huge piece of criteria in judging a film. Acting, setting, special effects and production value aside, if I enjoy the film I give it some slack.Overall it's a poor film. The computer generated space flight scenes are very poor (there's even a scene near the beginning where the background "stops" during flight). The character development is ham-fisted at best, and the acting is overkill. They are attempting to be dramatic, but fail to carry the viewer into the illusion. I felt as though I was supposed to care, but didn't understand why I should. That's a huge negative, because in a low budget film like this the writing needs to carry the show when the setting and special effects can't.I think the setting is my favorite part. It's ridiculously two-sided. For example: The "good guy ship" is well lit, clean, has a good warm atmosphere, is filled with hot blonds and handsome young men who are affectionate and humorous with each other, and a captain who is like the gentle father figure of the family.The "bad guy ship" is dark and brooding, messy, with dark haired ladies and gruff mercenary men that like to kill people, and a captain who is not only cruel and violent but CLEARLY (and enjoyably) insane. Almost every word he says ranges from ridiculously over-dramatic to completely nonsensical. I loved it. While his acting was atrocious and the writing was horribly overdone, you could see that he was doing his best to get into it, and having a good time. Oh, and the ship has a "crew" of masked men (who I suspect were all played by the same guy) that is utterly expendable and easy to kill and never voices a complaint; an important accessory for any evil space pirate.Also, the music is worth noting here. While not an amazing soundtrack, it does a very good job of setting the tone that the director was aiming for. It is very atmospheric and pulls you in nicely. That, and the few moments of humor that are inserted are enough to turn a potential disaster into a moderately enjoyable experience.Good or bad, I can honestly say that I wasn't bored watching it.