65 million years ago, prehistoric Earth had a visitor.

Thriller Science Fiction Action
93 min     5.7     2023     Canada


After a catastrophic crash on an unknown planet, pilot Mills quickly discovers he's actually stranded on Earth…65 million years ago. Now, with only one chance at rescue, Mills and the only other survivor, Koa, must make their way across an unknown terrain riddled with dangerous prehistoric creatures in an epic fight to survive.


Simon Foster wrote:
"65 is a taut 93 minutes of sweaty tension, appropriately scaled action and surprising tenderness..." Read the full review here: http://www.screen-space.net/reviews/2023/3/9/65.html
mooney240 wrote:
**65 had so much potential but couldn’t overcome its weird story restrictions.** 65 is not the horrible movie many recited claim it to be. It’s a decent sci-fi survival thriller with a handful of fun, suspenseful sequences but a slower pace and some strange story decisions kept the film from being the stand-out it had the potential to be. Two major writing choices held the movie back: *SPOILERS AHEAD* 1. Killing every other person on board the ship leaving only the pilot and a nine-year-old girl to survive the dangers of prehistoric Earth minimized the threat and tension of the film. The audience reasonably assumes these two characters will survive at least to the end of the film and prevents the dangers from having any real bite (literally). Allowing for more survivors would have given more characters to fall prey to the terrors around them and raised the tension and the pace of the film. 2. Why did the writers choose to make the only two characters of the film speak two different languages? It reduced the dialogue to clunky and rudimentary exchanges that were annoying and mostly irrelevant. Having the young girl in shock and not speak at the beginning but slowly say more and more as she trusts the pilot would have been a better way to show development. 65 wasn’t a great or even a good movie, but it wasn’t bad either. I wasn’t disappointed with seeing it once on $5 Tuesday at the theater. It could have been epic, but a limiting screenplay and a lack of on-screen action prevented 65 from being anything better than decent.
MSB wrote:
FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/65-review "65 is as unimaginative and predictable as anticipated, only even less entertaining and far more bland. Adam Driver and Ariana Greenblatt try their best, but apart from the climactic ending that delivers one of the best visual executions of an asteroid colliding with a planet in recent years, there isn't a single memorable aspect in this movie that’s part of an already packed subgenre with many stories worthy of more attention. A dinosaur flick this uninteresting should be considered a cinephilic crime." Rating: D+