OK let's get the bad stuff out of the way first, it's a low budget film, the actors aren't great and generally quite bad a times but that is easily forgiven.To me there is a lot of truth within this film and the story is good which is ultimately what makes this film good and it's a great example that you don't need millions to make a decent film as well as the artistic feel (at times) it's just let down by some terrible acting, corny moments because this could have been a masterpiece if they worked on those things.They are actually working on a sequel and I for one am very exited, hopefully they'll work on the aforementioned negatives and make a brilliant next movie.

I came to this because it was Australian, a first film and supposedly risky. It has been some time since a young Australian filmmaker has affected me, and I always put then toward the top of the list.This, dear friends is simply some yelling. It is no "Ink."But it got me wondering. Movies are all about satisfying urges. Well, everything is, but the tokens are explicitly here for you to see. But the constraints of the medium and market morph those urges. So what you see is not what you wanted, but what you can get. Over time, you build this dissonance because you live in the world created by constraints.Here is what I mean. We all wonder about how the world works. So we want cosmologies in our art, grand organizing principles. We want to know what the rules are. So we have stories with grand conspiracies, or mythical worlds with an order, usually bad and good. Or even just a guy with super powers or abilities who wins because he is attuned in a world where justice flows.But the medium has only a few human activities that are cinematic. One of these is fighting, especially with guns and knives. If you are making a movie on the cheap, you'll have to forgo the standard fireball explosions, usually with the hero walking away slowly.As a result, we end up with bizarre situations where cosmological forces are shoved into fight movies. This is not the worst example; I saw this with "TMNT," but it is pretty obvious because the movie itself is so unrewarding.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

I will tell you truth, Michael the archangel would not rebel against The Lord. Now not because he has no free will or he is not capable of rebellion, but for the fact that he has been so rooted in righteousness for so long this has become who he is... perfect! Michael was the ONLY archangel who helped The Lord in Daniel chapter 10. Where was Gabriel? Where were the other six archangels? Michaels character shows strong courage and obedience when he contended with Satan over the body of Moses in Jude 1. Michael disputed with Satan without bringing against Satan a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. Michael did not get personal, he kept it professional and Let Satan know Satan's fight was with The Lord. The Lord honors Michael in Daniel 10, But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holder with me in these things, but Michael your prince. In Daniel 12 you see Michael standing up for all the Lords children (kids)and is honored as a great prince. Then in Revelation 12 you see Michael and his angels stand up and fight Satan and Satan's angels. The Lord trusted Michael to command his own angels. Michael has fought the fight of patience and endured unto the end. Where in the scriptures do you see Michael rebelling against The Lord? There is NO where at any time Michael rebels. This movie is made to discredit and dishonor the great name of the ONLY archangel and chief prince who honored and glorified The Lord unto the end. Here are five references:Dan 10:13 But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. Dan 10:21 But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holder with me in these things, but Michael your prince. Dan 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which stands for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. Jud 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. Rev 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels.NOW Gabriel has rebelled against The Lord and dishonored The Lords name. When you see Gabriel in Daniel 8 ad 9 he shows respect unto Daniel. Then you see Gabriel later in Luke 1 getting easily provoked to anger and being a striker, striking Zacharias dumb and not able to speak. Now Gabriel did this to a weak man for asking a question. Not only did Gabriel get easily provoked to anger, he also glorified himself (I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God). Who cares who you are, deliver the message that The Lord sent you to speak. Thats all Gabriel had to do was deliver the message. Not glorify himself, not get easily provoked to anger, not get personal and strike Zacharias dumb. Whats it to Gabriel whether Zacharias listens and obeys. Just deliver the message and let the man decide whether to obey or not. Let The Lord punish Zacharias if it was needed. I know fora fact The Lord DID NOT command Gabriel to strike Zacharias. Test(Try) all Spirits: 1 Jo 4:1 Love is NOT EASILY provoked: 1Cr 13:4 Works of Evil or the Flesh: Gal 5:19 The Spirit of The Lord: Gal 5:22 So now lets test Gabriel spirit out to see whether he was led by The Lord or by his own self righteousness or Satan. Look at the conversations between Gabriel and Daniel then study the conversation between Gabriel and Zacharias and see if he could had been more patient and self controlled, more mercy. Read for yourselves: Dan 8:15 thru Dan 8:19 Then another conversation with Daniel: Dan 9:21 thru Dan 9:23 Now compare and read the conversation with Zacharias: Luk 1:11 thru Luk 1:22Now I will leave you with another food for thought. It is widely known that Gabriel was the archangel who came down from Heaven and gave the Muslim prophet Mohammed the Quran. (Quote from Wikipedia: At some point Muhammad adopted the practice of meditating alone for several weeks every year in a cave on Mount Hira near Mecca. Islamic tradition holds that during one of his visits to Mount Hira, the angel Gabriel appeared to him in the year 610). Now if this is true (and I strongly believe it did happen) why would Gabriel do this? according to scriptures:KEY scripture: Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed

The battle for Purgatory is waged by angels and fallen in landscape that resembles a city of night. Purgatory is hidden from the dark and the light and until Gabriel arrives he has no idea what he's gotten himself into, or what the rules are. The six angels that have gone before him have either been killed, wounded or become mortal. If there is any hope for the souls that pass through the land Gabriel must find some way to defeat the fallen who now rule the land and allow the dawn to come.This is a dark brooding film that looks like its been cribbed from any number of other films, but it works on its own terms. Those terms include a bit more style over substance, with the look of the film seemingly geared toward creating the dank mood that pervades the film. The mood seems to be what the film is about since the theology is more the excuse to have super humans running about firing guns at each other.(I'm still not sure why the place looks at it does, or why there are "mortals" but I guess thats the film's conceit and we have to go with it).In all honesty I had to watch the film twice before I could come up with anything to say about it. The first time, early this morning it struck me as kind of a purely form over content film with the look of the film trying to make the film seem hipper then it really was. The second viewing just a little while ago made me feel better about the film since I got a sense that perhaps there was more then just the look. I think the problem is that the film is actually trying to do too much with the result being that the film has to stop frequently to explain things.Several times the film stops dead so that someone can explain to Gabriel the way things are. This would be fine in the real word but not in a film where it slows things down.(I don't know why the filmmakers created a story where this was necessary-actually I do, the premise that the Light can't see purgatory and doesn't know whats going on or the rules is a clever one, the downside is it requires endless explanation) Ultimately though this is a good little movie. Personally I think it could have and should have been better. Its worth a look especially if you like the dark brooding look it has.Between 6 and 7 out of 10 with bits much better then that.One last note-I really hated the eyes of the fallen.