Old man: what should we drink to: Love?

Ellen: No, how about morality, and to live one day longer?!

This is not a usual moral play. The old man is apparently being very upfront about the plans of the aliens, as he is able to relate them, and there might not be very much to do about them - but he's got a plan C: Teach them human emotions and simply hope that will be enough to sway them away from enslaving or eradicating the human species.

(Even if the old man keeps saying the human "race", and she does too, and it's annoying the s**** out of me. Human SPECIES, please! WE are a species, not a damn political object of equalising different colours, all genders and all ages, what have you. Species!)

For how can it be a moral play - the best and most right thing to do winning over the lesser solution, the lesser way out - when survival is all you have to come up with as a reason to live...?!

Even so, Ellen is doing the noble thing, which is doing the ONLY thing that is bigger than her self, as a hopeful gesture towards the survival of the species: She gives up her memories and experiences, she bares her soul to the only thing that can eradicate any chance of perpetuity; SHE is the only thing that can make this into a moral play - and we don't even know why she as a person would do that, contract killer and all. This action has not been predicted as part of her character in the way of normal drama, she just wants to do it, do it for the only right reason, as a risk of sacrifice to save all from enslavement by alien overlords, who can never care nor understand what humanity will loose - what the galaxy will loose, if the human species is stripped of its freedom to learn from mistakes caused by emotions. Even if we do not know Ellen's motives, it is the logical, the ONLY thing to do, when everything is at stake. She is channeling our WHOLE species, and what she does is right!

She is neither rewarded nor tasked for her action, it is simply who she is and was all along and the reason for everything from then on and since the dawn of existence, it could have been everyone, except it is not, because she is the center of focus right this instance.

Enjoy.

1/10 - or 10/10 - it doesn't really matter. You will watch it or you will not. You will find yourself in it, or you will not. You will agree with the focus or you will not. You will watch it to the end. Or you will not. If you do, maybe you will have a thought. A recognition. Everybody deserves that.

The review by dtacinelli, who gave this film 10 out of ten points, is ridiculous. Obviously he is somehow involved with the production of the film.

It's a cheap small production with a very small ensemble. It looks amateurish from minute one. And when the professor states that he is an alien from Alpha Centauri, the film loses every bit of seriousness.

The whole background story about the motives of these aliens is turbid and illogical. The end is disappointing like in many films that had no idea how to finish the story.

What dan-162-268581 wrote about the special effects in the car is absolutely right. The effects were totally outdated and primitive. The whole production looked very amateurish. And it's way too long.

I give it a rating of four out of ten.

Liked the plot. A bit hard to grasp from start but eventually became clear.

But those in-a-car scenes cracked me up completely. Haven't seen worse since good old days with Humphrey Bogart.

Point is to make it look as if the actors actually sits in a car that's moving. Throughout decades this have been done in numerous ways. From having real cameras in a car and the actors actually driving to having a "car" on a trailer equipped with cameras and microphones.

Past 20 or so years it's been CGI, computer generated imagery, green room, etc.

I haven't a clue how the producers managed to create these ridiculous "moving backgrounds" to the in-a-car scenes. I tried not to bother first half of the film but since they are several and timely, I gave up about half way in.

I'm baffled. How can producers and others NOT see this?