I have said before that if I had a dollar for every "auteur" indie (where the writer and director were one and the same) that aimed for the stars but kept hitting the floor, well, I could retire.

But for every dozen or so indies that hit a brick wall, one soars. This is the one that soars.

Indeed it aims high, turning what looks like a basic "sci fi experiment gone wrong" into an existential crisis of the soul.

But it succeeds, astonishingly, at being both entertaining and bemusing.

I was glued to the screen from the beginning to the end. That seldom happens.

The actors, the script, the direction, all remind me of Hitchcock at his peak. YOU CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO THESE PEOPLE.

And the editing, OMG. This is the first film I can recall where aggressive editing was used instead of complex SFX. The editing is beyond brilliant, it moves the audience at a visceral level from scene to scene.

Recommended.

A student scientist makes a world changing discovery, but to confirm her hypothesis she must experiment on herself, and it doesn't turn out the way she expected ...

Hmmm. This is real sci-fi, taking a plausible development and exploring what it does to humans, and the opening act is really promising. The first 25 minutes has a good balance between character and exposition, introducing interesting people, a bit of back story, and just about letting the audience keep up with the technical stuff through mounting tension.

After that it fell apart for me. The dialogue was flabby, with repeated questions-questions, and many scenes where the actors struggled to give the story direction. There's a two-shot in a restaurant where nothing the characters say adds anything to the story. And a chase scene which feels inappropriate for the character, as she plummets through a window and slides across the front of a car. That was the point I began to lose interest, and the dialogue added to the chore of watching through to the end. The final annoyance was when they explained the fabric of space-time with the space-time honoured piece of paper.

The performances by the two female leads are good, but I could have done without the mama and the alzheimers red herring. Also the animal rights angle with the police isn't necessary for the story. The writer/director really needed to cut savagely and reimagine the second act. In the end, it's just too talky and sentimental.

Nothing special about the photography, and the music is ordinary with a constant background radiation to maintain the mood. The outside locations were good.

Overall: Good start spoiled by incoherent drama.

Pop quiz hotshot, you wake up one morning and go see your friends. They are suddenly acting very evasive and hostile towards you. Do you a) ask them what is the matter and wait for an answer, or b) just ignore it and carry on as though nothing is wrong. What do you do. What do you do?

If your answer is a, welcome to the real world. If your answer is b, you will love this film. An interesting premise ruined by people deciding not to act as any normal person would do. Indeed, if they did act normally, this film would be around 30 minutes long and actually be a really good short film. Such as it is, we have to sit through an hour and a half of a mish mash of genres, to an ending that basically could've been tied up long before you get through your first handful of popcorn.

Anti Matter, or Worm, follows the story of 3 scientists who invent a wormhole, basically. I couldn't tell you any more because the first part of the film is so filled with scientific terminology that they could've been making anything, really. It then turns into scifi, a bit of horror, a random chase movie thriller, and a romantic drama. It's all well done all the whole, the acting is decent, directing is solid and the script is serviceable. So far, so 7 or 8 out of 10.

The problem is that the story, in order to fill a decent run time, becomes so convoluted that it begins to detract from the film's central ideas. The chase scene is so bizarre, it seems to have been taken from another film. The various red herrings are unnecessary and increasingly ridiculous, culminating in a comical playground chant that I genuinely couldn't work out was meant to be serious or not. There's even a gratuitous sex scene, which possibly ranks as the most shoe-horned excuse for nudity that I've ever seen.

It's so frustrating that a movie with an interesting idea and decent cast and crew would feel the need to keep adding more and more nonsense, and culminate in an ending which is nonsensical to the point of just kind of shrugging and going, "well, yeah, there you go". There's even a touch of ambiguity about it, which would've had me walking out if I wasn't comatose already.

How you like this film will depend entirely on my opening question. If you don't mind the fact that everything that happens could have been easily explained straight away, and not slowly dragged out, than give it a shot. I don't like it, but I respect it.

I had no idea this was a low budget/indie film until I read that it was. Keep in mind there are no high tech CGI gimmicks as far as I can tell and no famous Hollywood actors in it. Still, the film was good, much better than the usual low budget drivel. The acting was really good. The director must have made a choice to not use his limited budget on CGI and that must be a good decision because low budget CGI makes a movie look like low budget. Low budget usually also shows in the props and studio setting that is used. Again, good choices must have been made so that the low budget is hidden. Excellent work. I can only imagine what this crew can do with more $$$. Thanks

Anti matter is evidence that you don't need a massive budget, multi- million pound special effects or A list actors to carry a film if the plot and story is a good...

To be honest I'm the target for this type of sci fi and I really enjoyed watching it from start to finish, I look for films like this one and like to watch on my own without interruption. Time Lapse is another low budget favourite of mine.

I can't understand the negative reviews; I mean what were you expecting from a low budget, independent production? The story telling is solid and outcome satisfying.

I did guess what was going on quite early, but that's because its my genre, but it didn't spoil my enjoyment

I don't have a problem with low budget movies. But they have to have a good plot, twists you don't see coming and and ending that makes some sort of sense. The premise of this film is that a scientist discovers a way to create wormholes to move matter. Her two colleagues work with her to test the wormhole machine and keep it secret so they can patent the process. They test it on marbles, Rubik's cube, plants, worm, mice, cat. Oh gee, what will they feel they need to test it on next? If you can't figure that out and foresee what will happen when one of them is the test subject you must have never watched any sci fi ever. After that the movie relies on the type of plot where no one communicates with anyone else. After boring the audience at the beginning of the movie with all the science behind the wormhole process it has a very unscientific and implausible ending. The worse part is I paid to rent this movie on Amazon, based on Rotten Tomatoes rating and now I feel I can never trust RT again.

I need to tell you that I believe that independent movies still tell the best stories. It did a great job escalating suspense and it kept me guessing most of the way. Obviously, this isn't going to win an Oscar but it was very well done with the little budget they had. This movie is like Frankenstein meets Alice in Wonderland. I know it sounds crazy but those were the stories that kept coming to my mind.

When compared to blockbuster movies with an almost unlimited budget like The Avengers, Superman vs. Batman, The Mummy or the latest Pirates of the Caribbean where they have big explosions, massive destruction of property, this little movie stands out like a little beacon in a vast space. This movie and other independent films like it show us that creativity is not completely dead.

I can just suffice to tell you this film has a low-budget/student film feel in all of the movie's aspects (writing, editing, flow), so you'll need have patience with everything as you watch.

I guess all positive reviews (e.g. Rotten Tomatoes) seem to keep this in mind but this is not made clear, which has most likely lead to these (in my eyes) problematic recommendations.

If you are expecting a mature or commercial film like I was, move on, as I can tell you I went in with that mindset and was quickly bored here.

I see a lot of bad reviews for this film but you have to balance your expectations within the budget of the movie.

This was a low budget movie and didn't have the hundreds of millions; or even millions to spend so they did what they could within their abilities and this hearkens back to the great movies of John Carpenter and others like the original Terminator movies with special effects guys like Stan Winston and Rob Bottin who would use chewing gum and tomato sauce (The Thing) for many effects to save the budget - you don't have to spend a lot to make a good movie and although there are a lot of scientific holes and anomalies in this movie that the anal-brigade seem obsessed with pointing out; these are the kinds of people who have lost the inner child and cannot go to a movie and just shut off and immerse themselves in the fantasy and that's quite sad! I myself can still watch Doctor Who or Blakes 7 and believe its on a distant planet and not filmed in a wet quarry in Newcastle on a gloomy Sunday afternoon.

There seem to be two types of Scifi fans these days - the ones who expect lots of CGI and effects, poor acting and not much story (The new Star Wars franchise comes to mind) and it seems to be our younger generation - that says a lot about society in itself and then there are the old traditionalists who don't need massive CGI , effects and budget but want a good story, good acting and some interesting science; whether its quantum or singular and that seems to be us older Trekkies and viewers who can suspend disbelief!

If you are of the former you wont enjoy this film but if you are in the latter category you might just find this an interesting little film.

Definitely watchable, but no science fiction graphics like that in the poster. Like nothing. in fact I was sure the cover was incorrect for the film. Its essentially what I'd expect if I went to a talented artist and said i need a poster made up for a movie, its science & fictional, and called antimatter. And that's it.

I really don't want to insult anyone involved with this film but this was the definition of a waste of time. Misleading poster/cover (I think someone else posted about that), B-grade script/plot/acting, clumsy exposition, terrible cliche/caricature characters.. the list goes on. Do yourself a favour, if you haven't watched Primer yet, watch that instead of this movie and if you have watched Primer, don't waste your time on this.

It might be good for some - but dear gawd it dragged. That just about sums it up. The film has an interesting premise but even getting to the point of the film when you found out what the basic story was, took too long just to get there.

The acting was fine. Those involved clearly did their best. The writing at times was sadly appalling. It was simply dragged out far, far too much. Was this a very poor attempt to create some from of suspense within the film? If it was, it just left myself even more completely bored.

I genuinely would have liked to rate this higher but couldn't - and I am a avid sci-fi fan. Damn shame it went on ...and on ...and on... At one stage I actually started to nod off. Enough said!

WOW! This has got to be the best C-grade, fully amateur indie film I have ever seen!

Let me start off with the only flaw in this film, and that's the movie poster and tag-line. Very inaccurate and misleading and shocked why it even exists as it is deceiving.

Now for everything else. Keir Burrows, novice/amateur writer, director and producer of this film knocked it out of the ballpark! His only experience in film are a handful of short films. He has evolved to greatness with this film that I feel should become a legendary cult classic. This film needs to be submitted for award nominations. Aside from perfect directing and writing/screenplay, the cinematography, score and editing were all outstanding.

Even all the actors were on point having little to no experience and if any were primarily from a handful of short films.

Anti Matter blows away most of the big Hollywood blockbuster films that have been out lately. It has left me wanting more and I hope they come out with a part 2 very soon.

It's a must-see film and a perfect 10/10 (rating as an indie amateur film) from me for an overall outstanding and perfect production.

If you know too much about science, this movie will fall apart for you. As much as you want to like the characters, and to cheer them on, the lack of real science just destroys the experience. It just rubs me as a waste of potential.

The basic concept of this film is not a new one. It addresses the philosophical problem of "teleporting" a person by creating a copy of the traveler at the destination, while simultaneously, destroying the original. What happens if you don't destroy the original? Which traveler is the "real" traveler?

This movie attempted novelty by producing this philosophical dilemma in a different way. Sadly, the story writers seemed to go the direction of making up fantasy-science to fit their story.

The main character, Ana, is an American chemist who is conducting a physics experiment in a basement at Oxford (strange already). She's a strong independent woman. Her team also consists of what seems to be an engineer, Nate, and an undergrad, Liv. Nate is a caring and nurturing boyfriend to Ana.

We find out that Liv wrote a computer virus that infected millions of computers in order to aid their project in some way. All they care about is getting the patents to win prizes and get rich. The characters do way too many things uncharacteristic of "scientists."

Overall poor representation of women, science, and women in science. All in all, it could have been a great film.

Probably the stupidest movie I have ever experienced. They could stage the theory in a great way and everyone would love that. But this was very very cheap. Some people actually do not understand how to present something boring. Science is boring for most people on the planet but still they loved movies like Interstellar. The way they have played with physics, it became a joke! Total waste of time!!

I'm not writing any serious stuff here just what I felt about the twist and everything. Well, I'm already spent big part of my life watching movies, lately I saw nice movies, okayish movies and the 'whatever ones'. But this thing, although it's probably not the best movie I ever saw (no offense), this piece is already something. You were doing short movies, then this, and Sir, you just made it, twisted my head, gave me bad feelings and a warm surprise which I haven't felt some time ago - you put a real shining star up in the sky.

I don't know how soon you some smart Hollywood producer will give you a buzz but I may predict right here that someone want to do a bigger budget movie out of this; I'm pretty sure.

Great story, great job, great cinematography, little cracks in the story telling but nothing seriously negative. Do you realize that you are not a student anymore, right? As you got me, I'll keep an eye out for your movies and I can recommend this to anyone who's reading this.

One more thing: Yaiza is so cool and did such a decent acting! OF course, Tom and Philippa too but Yaiza was just wooow. So overall verdict for me is an 8 which is more like 9ish but surprise factor is 10.

I like low budget films in which I do not know any of the cast. I like science fiction that's not just some other genre dressed up in science fiction's clothing. I like my SF to have some science at the core of it.

Anti Matter delivers both.

I'm sure any 1st year physics student could tell you in seconds why the science in this film would never work but that's where the 'fiction' part of 'Science Fiction' comes in; take a not too incredible 'what if' and play with it.

If you want a pretty smart bit of sf that doesn't degenerate into the usual deux ex machina, polarity-inverting, SFX driven, gun battle, light show explosionfest at the end, this is well worth a look.

While we guessed what was going on before the reveal, we were still glued to the screen and needed to know more. We weren't sure if our guess was right. It's a good thriller. If you're considering watching this movie, go ahead and watch it, it's suspenseful but not too slow, and a bit refreshing.

I do however agree with other commentators that the movie poster/cover was misleading. And acting was the main reason of my overall rating.

As for social impact, I like that a) there was a female lead b) female lead from a different heritage c) female supporting actresses on two accounts. d) featured two strong female scientists e) the male lead had no backstory and was simply the boy-toy, also the softer one of the three. This alone doesn't please me obviously, it's more in regard to how it's usually the other way around.

Basically a good refreshing cast, featuring intelligent scientific women, one of whom is a Latina.

(I'm not the most eloquent but I hope you get my point)

I watch a lot of movies on Netflix and Amazon Prime that apparently were released direct to cable/DVD/streaming sites or sank without a trace before they ever made it to the theaters where I live, and this is pretty typical of what you get from that level of film making. But there's plenty to enjoy if you keep your expectations appropriate to the budget.

"Anti Matter" is pretty good. It looks good, it sounds good. The cast is interesting and attractive and works well together, and the screenplay sets up an enigma that it tries hard to play fair with.

But the writing lacks the final level of polish that would make this a great movie.

It isn't quite clever enough to live up to the premise it sets itself about what happens when a human goes through a teleporter and then wakes up with no memory of the event. Or rather, the screenplay builds the sense of creepiness and unease (and is about 15 minutes too long), but the solution, when you finally get to it, is unsatisfying (though I will admit it took me by surprise.)

I blame a lot of that on the obviously tiny budget and the semi-pro level of writing that got a lot of good moments into the movie, but just couldn't go deep enough with the time and budget they had.

That said, this was still worth watching, and I would happily try another movie from this same group or these actors.

A better than average sci-fi movie. I read some other reviews about how the move starts out with a lot of confusing science jargon so I hunted it down for viewing with high hopes that maybe for once someone with a science background had written a complicated science script for a movie, this is NOT the case.

The catch science phrase for the movie was 'hypothesis' and was a little overused. "Lets use a word everyone who has taken science has had drilled into them", but admittedly it was better (the science script) than most stuff that people write for their sci fi movies..

The acting was very good, direction was quite good. The gratuitous sex stuff was a let down in that two people having sex somehow meant they were very much in love. I felt the movie would have been better served with some meaningful flashbacks mixed in with the bed scenes of the couple sharing some quality time together instead of numerous sex flash backs, for me it took the movie down a notch and started to align itself with the predictable movie with some nude bar pole dancers thrown into it. The creator should of seen this movie as being better than that and worked harder at keeping to a theme of thoughtful insight.

There was some symbolism in the movie with mirrors I very much appreciated, its too bad the creators did not do anything else in that direction, but it was nice they did toss in that one scene

Good science fiction movie that was scripted out with at least a little bit of thought for a change

Plot spoiler for Trekkies.

A group of college kids playing with an algorithm controlling an electronic pulse create a device that opens a wormhole. In a rush for funding, the decide one of them should go through the machine. Ana (Yaiza Figueroa) is selected. However soon things go weird for Ana as her memory keeps failing her.

This is a low budget science fiction film which geeks will hail like "Primer." The big difference between the two films is that this one managed to have a woman in it. The acting was okay, and I pretty much nailed the mystery being a Trekkie, having watched "The Enemy Within." The film has two main issues. One is that any wormhole shuts down as soon as something is placed inside. Having it stay open too long is not an issue. There are other wormhole issues, but I will spare you. The second problem is the title. Technically there is no "anti matter" in the film. A positron is antimatter. A photon is not.

Guide: F-word. brief sex and nudity (Yaiza Figueroa)

At first, I thought that it would be interesting. Then I lost my interest on the way. What can happen more after three lunatic students from the Oxford University discover how to teleport things from point A to point B?. I mean, seriously, what other thing could make you stick to it after you know the whole purpose of these guys from the very beginning? It isn't even appealing, it's just a cheap video tool that cuts scenes and makes you have the desired effect. Of course, there are other things, like the one where to woman loses her mind, but that doesn't change things at all. After all, it was worse than I thought.

A goth chick with a pierced nose works on the biggest scientific breakthrough in the history of mankind? I don't think so. These nose-pierced types are lucky if they get can add and subtract one-digit numbers. (With appy polly loggies to the smart Goth chicks that take out their pins and needles soon after clipping them on, and then re-join the human race.)

The entire movie is based on the premise, or at least the implication, that this amazing project needs to be tested on a human in order to get financial backers: fairly asinine. Already the disappearing act with marbles would have hundreds of companies and banks falling over each other trying to finance this. These kids would have been stinking rich way before the first human were to be teleported - and under much safer conditions.

Sure, there'd be no movie without this dumb premise - or perhaps there would? All the writer needed to do is get off his lazy derriere and come up with a credible way why the trio decide to take such a huge and unnecessary gamble. But instead he took the Hollywood route of treating the viewers like idiots. Or perhaps he really does believe that a scientific project that has successfully teleported mice and cats can't get financial backing?! For one thing, Putin would have had them all shot and stolen all their secrets - right after the first marble. (Obviously, he wouldn't have done it personally.)

Already those absurdities acted as strong hints early on that the film won't exactly win prizes for tight script-writing, because how can I trust such a klutzy writer to untangle the mystery in a logical, reasonable manner? I knew all along that whatever the explanation, it would leave many logic holes. It turned out I was right.

The ending isn't awful by any means, but does not explain the bizarre behaviour of the cops, nor does it explain that absurd, impossible chase after the masked intruder during which the main character defies all laws of physics and biology. (Those silly "Transporter" movies come to mind.) The less said about her boyfriend getting shot in the neck and just waltzing off back to the lab as if he just had a scratch, the better. If I watched the film again, I am convinced I'd find even more nonsense.

But what annoys me most is that the writer/director CHEATS the viewer blatantly by HIDING the real Ana from us until she comes out of the locked room - as if she'd been THERE all along. Now, that's really dumb.

The flip-side of that twist is that the revelation (that we were watching a sort-of-clone version of Ana) is thought-provoking and original (if perhaps already seen before if you read enough pulp fiction). Hipsters should love its "existential" themes. It just makes little sense from a logical viewpoint for us to only follow her adventures, and not those of the real Anna as well. You don't construct a clever mystery by withholding information from the viewer in such a brazen way.

Oh well, at least there's no cop-out non-ending such as we get in that amazing piece of hipster trash "Primer". That was a truly idiotic, boring movie devoid of a single redeeming quality. If you want a truly original and non-stupid indie sci-fi flick, "Coherence" is the way to go. (Independent film-makers have been the only hope of good, intelligent sci-fi for some years now, what with Hollywood having reached that Idiocratic Miley Cyrus stage where you can only expect amoeba-brained dross from them.)

Despite an OK first act and a solid conclusion, the film fails because the mystery section is way too long, offering no clues along the way. I'm all for an intriguing plot that baffles the viewer, but the plot - no matter how confusing - does actually have to move rather than stagnate. We literally know as much about Anna at the outset of the mystery as we do just before the conclusion, hence we have a bunch of needless scenes that appear to be pointlessly repetitious.

As for movie science, people sometimes nitpick way too much about the impossibility of certain things. Well, duh, that's why it's called sci-fi: it's meant to have impossible science, it's just a movie, not a dissertation for MIT. Sometimes I get the impression that science-focused nit-pickers want the science to be 100% fool-proof, as if film-makers have to ACTUALLY devise a REAL way of teleporting people in order for the script to be kosher enough! "Hey, the science is all wrong! They don't give us a real way to beam people to other dimensions!"

Recommended only for sci-fi freaks. Others will not be able to overlook the flaws with such ease.

First of all, the title has nothing to do with the story or the plot. There is no antimatter, not even mentioned anywhere. The worst part? Not having antimatter in this film just makes it better (or less horrible).

The story goes like this: a chemist runs tests on battery stability to electromagnetic interference and accidentally discovers a whatever-that-doesn't-matter-plus-pi (unfortunately, yes, literally, she adds pi to the "algorithm", although her friend warns her that she "can't use pi this way", ouch!) that creates a mini super-portable garage-made wormhole... Who needs to align collapsing stars to create a wormhole, right?! Just a few volts of electricity and petaflops of computing power can do the trick, for sure...

If your brain survives that initial nonsense, then you are for a roller-coaster... Of boredom! It plays like this: main character enters the wormhole as a test subject, to make a video to get funding for the project. The experiment goes wrong, leaving a photonic trail/copy/doppelganger of main character behind, which has long term memories, but for whatever reason cannot keep new memories (but also doesn't age, tire, eat, sleep etc., although it can bleed, also, for whatever reason). The photonic leftover thinks it is the real thing and runs loose, trying to find out why her friends are acting weird, not knowing/remembering that it is just a "thing" made of photons, not a "real person".

Cutting all the drama down (and is is about 99% of the film, the rest is that agonising crap-fiction), the photonic copy finds her original in the laboratory, where it hears the whole story of what it is (again, because the characters tell it they've been doing it over and over again, but she always ends up forgetting and redoing everything). It is convinced to let itself be destroyed by the wormhole machine, because it is the right thing to do and that will end all the suffering (and because the main character also incorporates her doppelganger's memories, somehow, or so she says, maybe just to help to convince the photocopy to kill itself).

The photoganger jumps into the machine and simply disappears. Everybody happy, they leave the lab and... Camera zooms in on a cocoon (a caterpillar from an earlier experiment with the wormhole) and... Credits roll...

Does anyone remember a cheesy series named "Automan"? I enjoyed that series, for three reasons: it was (baffling) cheesy (even for the 1980's standards!), Cursor (Automan's sidekick, a blatant copy of Bit from "Tron") was amazingly entertaining (mainly considering it couldn't even talk) and it had zero Science on the fiction!

That's exactly the opposite with this film, it tries to bring Science to the dumbest of fiction. The explanations are stupid even without taking into account the distorted Quantum Physics mumbo-jumbo. In the end, the effect is exactly the same as in Automan: a character made of light that can interact with the real world without needing powerful hologram lasers constantly pumping photons to keep it "alive".

Why the photonic doppelganger has long term memories but is unable to keep short term ones? If it cannot keep short term memories, how is it even able to "live" (e.g., suppose it is walking, then a second later it should forget that it was walking and would simply stumble and fall, not even remembering that it was even standing a second before, much less walking, and so on for everything else). The character remembers and forgets things on the convenience of the plot, which literally goes nowhere (it starts in the lab and ends in the lab with nothing changing or even interesting happening in-between).

That's just one of so many things that make no sense in this film. Why does the photocopy bleed, as it doesn't eat, i.e., its body has no metabolism (and if it does, why couldn't it find blood cells in the microscope when it tested itself)?

I resisted the temptation to check the clock every minute, because that made time pass much slower. 1h45min of useless chases, pseudo-scientific crap and boredom, so much boredom! Why didn't the photonic copy die when people started turning on their toasters in the morning, like Automan thankfully did?

The best part of this film is the title, it's very exploitable for jokes... Unfunny ones, for that Matter...

Nothing special about the movie - except the very idea! And exactly that's where this movie move most people, assuming that they get the (popular) science presented. One must praise the effort of the production team (esp. the writer/director) for coping well with the quantum physics paradox on macro-reality level in the story. What is soul? Is it merely "a light reflection" and has weight (as do photons, relativistically eternal)? That difficult job is exactly what they achieved and made it nicely emotional and mystifying. Good acting on the behalf of young cast for that manner. Without much of budget or special effects, but there it is: a fine piece. I found it subtly touchy.

Made me wonder-off and far-out - for the cosmic and multiverse miracles against one's soul, memory, love... I expect at least some people also to spend a bit of time contemplating and reflecting about our reality, quantum paradoxes, (observer) soul and more and more accepted concept of multiverse upon watching it. It is confusing, esp. on very end. But it's how quantum micro-universe is (today at least) confusing to the best physicists and cosmologists there are too.