The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

I barely write any reviews, but since this movie seems to have a very good score, I've decided I'm going to write a review as to why I'm giving it such a low score.The main issue with this movie is that is very slow, we are 30 minutes in and nothing has really happened. Two guys driving with this special kid around. Apart from two somewhat interesting scenes with the cop shooting and then when a guy was looking into the boy's eyes and some beam coming from them, there was nothing else.Even after the first 30 minutes, it's just very slow unfolding, the characters do a lot of needless and boring talk, the scenes are all drawn out, etc... So yeah, it was very slow and boring.Another issue I had is the darkness of the video, it was just too dark all around, there was barely any light, the whole movie seemed like it was dimmed and darkened to "set the mood", but all it did was make it less enjoyable to watch.I like the premise of the movie, the actors are decent as well, but the first 30 minutes of the movie could have been done in like 10 minutes. The first hour in like 20-25 minutes. The whole movie could have realistically be done in 40 minutes. That is probably why they stretched it out so much, why everything was so slow.Ultimately I ended up being way too bored trying to watch this movie.

Midnight SpecialThis is a mere peculiar discussed topic rather than an astonishing tale like a good old E.T. and maybe this is the reason it stands alone on its extraordinary point of view.

At 111 minutes, this "Midnight Special" turns into an endless experience, watching something that you have seen many times before with variations and different casts, including Martin Stephens in "Village of the Damned", Jeff Bridges in "Starman", Haley Joel Osment in "A.I. – Artificial Intelligence", and a rubber puppet designed by Carlo Rambaldi. My admiration for Jeff Nichols' films grew every time he released a new title, from "Shotgun Stories" in 2007, to "Take Shelter" in 2011 and "Mud" in 2012. However, this time he has gone the way of the big scale special effects frenzy with unfortunate results: it is so silly and simplistic, so lacking in finesse and humor, that I could not believe that it was the work of the same director. Nichols had previously been so delicate and perceptive of human condition (including "Take Shelter", a movie about ESP), and dealt intelligently with the innocence of boyhood, and the benign, naive side of manhood. This time again there is something similar in the core of the story, but the father seems too dumb and the kid too foreign to any credibility. If Nichols did not intend this story as a metaphor of Jesus Christ's passion (my goodness!), leaving the Holy Spirit out of this plot, then it also leaves an open door: how did this human-like E.T. end up in this world, having too earthlings as parents? I do not know who cares for a sequel, but I do not. The best thing in the film is Joel Edgerton as Lucas.

Huge potential in a scifi story that didn't explain it self very well. To many lose ends, very small development of the history and a quick end that leads to a lot of unanswered questions. Personally i think the movie didn't evolve as it suppose to. I like to give a short review and not a huge lecture about my point of view. if you agree with me after watching this movie hit like and follow my short reviews :). (in fact i am writing this because i need a minimum of lines to post.)