User reviews

We've seen it all before. The AI traps a woman in the house thing. We saw it in The Demon Seed and Vau and a few others as well. In this version of that story they intertwine it with a story of maternal abuse and imprisonment of the the protagonist in childhood.

It's an OK film, but that's all. The acting and production values are ok but the action feels padded out and I got rather bored about halfway through.

Maybe with a bigger budget and better directing talent it could have been something instead of the bloated short story it is.

Stop reading now. Ian padding this review out because I have to write six hundred words.

This film should have been called Writer Blocked and be an episode of an anthology like Outer Limits or Twilight Zone. Then the fact that it only had two ideas the entire length would have made sense and the titles should have been funny. I have no problem with the actors, direction or production values. It was just stretched too much to fill a feature film (much like the lead character should have done).

I can't even mention details of the plot because I can't avoid spoiling those two basic premises of the story. Given that it is either one of those Covid-made films or another thing inspired by Moon, the entire cast is one actress and four supporting roles. It really is barebones.

Bottom line: it might be entertaining if you are doing something else at the same time. Otherwise it drags a little too long.

There is one idea in the movie and it is stretched out for up to an hour too long. WE get it she can't get the door open. Oh no!!! Now lets keep hammering this same idea till the audience is sick of the sight of this movie. And where is tech support or some sort of manager of these units we're staying in? Ludicrous nonsense is what it is. The author writes the story of herself as a girl trapped in a house with her mother who is blind. Oh no, she's trapped in a house again, how dramatic this must be for her. We simply must keep watching this play out in parallel. It just goes on and on and on and on...

Right, well the concept of this 2022 sci-fi thriller definitely sounded interesting enough to make me opt to sit down and watch what writer Stephen Herman and director Natalie Kennedy had to offer.

Sure, I hadn't even heard about "Blank" prior to sitting down to watch it. So I didn't know what I was in for here, aside from what I had read from the movie's synopsis.

Let me just be the first to say that "Blank" is a slow paced and monotonous movie. While the concept idea behind the storyline definitely had potential and sounded interesting enough, then the movie itself was just a bland experience. Nay, a blank experience, get it? The storyline was too slow paced and mundane to provide me with much of any entertainment.

So it was good, at least, that the acting performances by Rachel Shelley (playing Clair Rivers) and Heida Reed (playing Rita) were good enough to make the movie somewhat semi-bearable to sit through. And I did manage to sit through the movie to the end, but I wasn't impressed, nor was I particularly entertained.

For a thriller, then "Blank" was devoid of anything overly interesting, exciting or thrilling. So it was a rather bland movie experience. And if you sit down to watch "Blank" with the hopes and intentions of being in for a thrill ride, then you'll be sorely disappointed.

While I managed to endure this movie to the end, I can honestly say that I am never returning to watch it a second time.

My rating of "Blank" lands on a generous three out of ten stars.

This movie is what is sometimes referred to as a slow burn, which is a show/movie that has very little story and doesn't know how to add world building or character development material. So instead it's a string of long, boring, drawn out scenes. Characters walking across the set, cars driving down a road, characters staring, and long pauses in dialogue. They are essentially trying to turn a short story into a novel by adding pages and pages of pointless filler material. A story that unfolds slowly can work, but it requires interesting characters and an intriguing premise to make up for plodding along. That is not this movie. This movie is trying to be a metaphor for the writer feeling like there's a script trapped inside their word processor. I think this movie would have been better left inside.

A good engrossing film spoiled by incomplete end. Although it becomes repetitive, the viewer is hooked to it just to see how it ends.

And that is it - The end never happens. The story suddenly ends leaving viewers with no answers at all for dozens of questions that are relevant and obvious for any film - How can an AI operated center stop working, and no one attends to it for one month or even more? What had happened if Claire didn't finish the story - would supplies have all been consumed and she die starving? There is bound to be some human supervisor somewhere keeping tabs on how long the supplies are going to lost and he/ she should have been worried about occupied rooms and should have come enquiring. Whether the novel get published? How was it received by readers? Did she publish it under her mother's name to make amends?

Actually, I had thought that the entire Rita's "I cannot open the door till the story is finished" thing is actually the center's method to force Claire to write up the story, to bring anxiety to her, to bring depression to her, so that she is forced to overcome her writer's block. But that was not so. The film just ended.

This looks right up my street, a suspenseful sci-fi drama. Claire Rivers (Rachel Shelley) is an awarding winning fiction writer that's struggling with her next book. With her agent on her back and post it notes strewn about her office, she needs help. That doesn't sound very sci-fi does it, but the little futuristic details put us in a world slightly beyond our own. Screens projected on walls, QR codes on car number plates and... The Retreat, a country pad getaway run entirely by AI. It's a simple premise, writers need quiet, people make noise, remove people, problem solved. Something is going to go wrong though, delivering a film that's part Gattaca in its styling (it's very stylish), part Misery, with a dose of Invasion of the Bodysnatchers. Like Misery, Claire has an enthusiastic helper. Rita (Heida Reed) looks human, but is a bit cold, a bit... repressed. Like the 1950s housewife on which she's modelled, she's sort of blank. So is Claire's page, the writers block not solved by the isolation. There's something she's suppressing, something dark. It's beautifully shot, stark where it needs to be. Teasing its audience as the tension gently ramps up. Claire is damaged. Drinking every night, repenting with a morning run, flirting with Henry (Wayne Brady) a holographic assistant that would seem superfluous with Rita around, but he's much more engaging. At least he is until a glitch resets everything, leaving Claire trapped, with seemingly only one way out. Some cynics may question its originality, but they'd be only denying themselves the chance to get lost in a really fun film. One that takes all its component parts and assembles them masterfully. Keeping you on your toes, whist never pushing too far. With just three characters, this could struggle, but dream like flashbacks take us to another world, filling in the gaps and helping us understand Claire, as her memories and situation blur in a nightmarish battle for survival.

It's pretty rare that you actually find a movie that you just have no clue where the plot is going and is really unlike any of thousands of other movies you've seen before. There were so many ways the plot could have gone in this movie, but there was no way to predict the way it really would go. Any complaint about the ending is laughably simple-minded since after the path the story followed, the ending is truly a twist that, again, nobody watching this entire movie could predict.

You can't stop watching this movie if you believe what's happening, because it's a bit unbelievable. But, if you don't believe it, that means there's some incredible conspiracy going on. And yet, the longer you watch it, the more it goes on down that path you can't believe, the more it just seems like it really will never end, like maybe the truth is something else. So, you keep going back and forth from "it's a conspiracy" to "it's an apocalyptic coincidence" to "is this all in her head???"

The poor reviews and low rating of this movie are very predictable, the way most people sadly are, and the way this movie is in no way. The handful of people who made this movie really were incredibly brave.

Most people today just want something that is predictable and entertaining, quickly rejecting anything that is not formulaic, not a remake, not a sequel in an established franchise. This movie is none of those things.

It is unique, from beginning to end.

Blank: Yet another AI goes rogue on the near future. Clare Rivers (Rachel Shelley) has a problem, her mind is blank, seeing as she is a writer with a deadline and a pressing publisher, drastic action is called for. She takes up an offer of a month's residence at an exclusive writers retreat. Her unit is soundproofed, comes with a holographic host, Henry (Wayne Brady) and an android maid, Rita (Heida Reed). One day follows another with no progress on the book then one night while Rita updates something goes wrong and she turns into Clare's jailer. An interesting twist on the AI gone wrong trope. Rita won't let Clare out of the building until she finishes the book but she also becomes a critic deciding that the book isn't finished no matter what Clare writes, She also resets every morning believing that it's the first day of Clare's residency. Clare gets increasingly desperate as the months pass and she's trapped with an amnesiac android with a violent streak. In the midst of all of the advanced technology Clare insists on using a manual typewriter. There's a possible reason for this as in flashback sequences to Clare's youth we see her in a sort of mirror captive situation. One that is reflected in a warped funfair mirror though. Perhaps the film drags in places and might have worked better as an episode pf an anthology series or film, dropping the extensive flashbacks. Still, it's worth sticking with and is an enjoyable Science Fiction adventure. Directed by Natalie Kennedy and written by Stephen Herman. 6.5/10.

Sometimes I wish I could detect brilliance, masterpieces and complexities and whatever superlatives they use to describe their experience (assuming its not marketing only) that easy like many reviewers do these days. Blank is not bad, the production is okay, the acting good, but the idea and the story itself is nothing really new or special. We watched this kind of movie many times before, if we are interested in that kind of movies (whatever artificial intelligence makes its own decisions and so on). If you read your good share of sci-fi stories or you watch sci-fi movies on a regular basis, this won't deliver any great surprises but the creative equivalent of a solid made cheeseburger - nothing more but nothing less.

Have prefered to be waited and courted by the staff of downtown abbey, most of all to know whos superior after all, and dealing with human flesh robots are in forseeable time a utopian reality, so a film made on a lot of will wont work at a lowbudget this film have had.. having studied the human race in a professional careere as a staff nurse, i dont see the misery of being cared for at my latter days by robots at the nursing home, maybe the ones AUTOBAHN sang about in the 70's , all in all this small cast feature crawling at the pace of a butterfly larvae, where the special effected caracters are so out of reach of the vibe of the plot that every hint of belief flies away , and it a boring fight towards the end.

Of course the film has a message, and the simple quote is that in the end you will meet yourself in the doorway, with all your past memories and that its more probable youll become like your psychopathic mum when growing up. Its also an essay about loneliness, isolation due to social media digital rather than real living being able to touch , feel and maybe kiss your communication partner.

Well im older than the digital age that grew and flew far beyond the reach of my understanding so bear over with a grumpy old man, if youre able to complete viewing this one, then youre probably lonely and depressed. I'm chronicaly so, just a 3, mostly for the main actress.

Claire has writer's block, is facing a deadline from the publisher, and can't finish. She decides to go to a retreat to finish her book. It is totally run by AI. Henry is her concierge, and Rita (android) is her personal servant. Everything is stocked in the way of food and wine as she requested, and the stay is for 30 days. Henry is a hologram. Then a glitch happens, and she is trapped in the unit. There are flashbacks, and she had a terrible childhood. Her mother considered herself a writer, but couldn't get any place to accept her stories. And she was locked in the house. That is the parallel, and the only way she can get out of the unit is to complete her book, and the AI decides if the book is finished, so tricks are not working. Might make a good 30 minute episode but not a full length movie.

No pun intended - how far will artificial intelligence take us ... or themselves? How much help do we need, how much assistance is enough and how much would be too much? Is it ok for them to tell us what is good for us? Or even make creative decisions? All things that will happen here ... the poster already suggests things will not be too peachy ... and what movie would we have, if everything is just without any friction and obstacles? Exactly.

The main actress does a good enough job, but I understand if some feel she is a bit annoying ... maybe she has to be ... just be aware of it all. And whether you already are wary of "computers" or not ... this will not ease your concerns ... on the other hand it is a low budget movie, I doubt this will sway too many people one way or another ... maybe there is a story in development here ... (is that a pun? Well ... you know it)

The only good thing about this movie is that it is laughably silly, but it is intended to be taken very seriously.

The bad: what do you get when you put C-listed actors in a movie in which the story requires dramatic acting capabilities? A laughable disaster.

These actors have to carry this movie, but they are nowhere near capable, which makes watching this story unfold a headache causing experience. Why? Because there is NO real drama to speak of. NO suspsense either.

I really had to struggle to watch it till the very end, because I got so incredibly bored by the lack of any spark or punch.

Here's a little gem of a movie. The simple, yet effective plot is about a writer who gets writer's block and goes to a retreat to help with that, but things don't go to plan as she is trapped inside with a psychopathic robot.

Be under no illusion, this is a slow burn and if you're looking for action, i'd advise looking elsewhere, but if you want an original, intriguing thriller, than look no further.

Yes, there is a very small cast and obviously low budget, but it doesn't really effect the movie too much and the acting, especially by Heida Reed, who plays said Robot.

What i liked most about this movie though, is the way it parallels the story the character is writing with the story the film is telling. Also watch for the credits, because if you have good eye-sight, there's a little cue to what it was all about.

Blank is sold as an AI sci fi-horror film set in the near future. In fact it is a low budget two hander, a paranoid thriller with a twist in the style of the Twilight Zone.

Claire (Rachel Shelley) is an acclaimed novelist with writer's block. Her publisher has sent her to a retreat run by AI to get her creative juices flowing.

As she arrives in the secluded retreat. Claire is greeted by the holographic concierge Henry. Then introduced to the android Rita (Heida Reed) who would cater to Claire's needs. Rita is dressed and acts like a suburban housewife from the 1950s.

Claire is slow to hit her typewriter until there is a glitch in the AI system. Now Rita has become menacing as she forces Claire to finish her book. In doing so Claire confronts some painful childhood memories regarding her mother who also wanted to be a writer.

There is a bit of everything here. Ex machina, 2001: a Space Odyssey, Misery and Metropolis. Claire starts to loose it as she is held captive. Getting overwhelmed by her memories of her controlling blind mother.

Both Rita and her other become one as Claire desperately looks for escape. It might mean writing a story with a true ending.

There are flaws. Like no one visited to check the house after the glitch. Especially as the food stocks in the house are running low.

It is a slow burn and intriguing movie. Both leads are effective in their roles.

Rachel Shelley, do I need to say more? She is just amazing and makes a brilliant lead. The whole cast were fantastic, I could not fault one performance. I read somewhere that someone did not know how the head piece works, if you watch properly its explained in a clever way in the adverts on the TV. The whole set up of the film truly is great (spoiler) how it mirror images Claire's tragic childhood. If you haven't seen it you really should.

The story and plot of this film is brilliant, all cast are brilliant, the images are amazing. This maybe a low budget film but the filmmakers really pulled out all the stops.

I really don't understand the negative reviews, maybe they didn't understand. The complexities of the film.