seeing them dirt road trials off into the distance mind tricking when they see the start of them vibrant flash flash rivet oasises lingering on into the horizon. every now and again they see bushes of growth. over there while walking driving through the dessert while seeing and witnessing on how them oasises are with them vibrant bushes of growth. then you see them meadow pastures where growth would trial paths while walking driving. yeah them good old rustic dirt filled meadow pastures where growth only grows near. like any minute couple years later it'll be someone some groups entitlement program where the application will be good old auto cad going on a internetworking for that entitle programs on a lesser land labeling subdivision probably couple refabed trailer houses with sheds combined and or seperated for them warehouse residential districts. got the old trial path where one once was got even the double triple there yet gone gone meadow pastures even the ones where growth only grows near. then clustered yet seperated for that entitlement program of a facotry warehouse application internetworked with trailer houses and shed. so they are walking driving through the dessert seeing them desserlt bound comunities. down them trial paths walking driving threw and path them meadow pastures where growth only grows near ....

I thought that concept of the movie was really good and all and the writer/director had this idea of a person returning back to the time we was from or something like that, but the that just it, if one does not know who to put things together, me in this case, you can get lost fast. Or at least towards the end of the movie. But overall I thought it was a really good movie that many people underrate.

Seems as if the director and writer had an interesting if somewhat familiar concept (the "identity crisis" and "things are not what they seem" tropes), but had no ability to follow through. It meanders along with no apparent sense of the gradual unfolding process they seemed to intend, shoe-horning in some forced ain't-we-clever interpretations of Dreamland and Rachel, NV. Finally the camera batteries died, they ran out of film or tape or memory cards or alien storage pods, and the director never got around to deciding on an ending.On the plus side it's a good looking film with above average production values. The three main characters were mostly appealing (apart from the outta nowhere tantrums) and the actors seemed competent but misdirected. I got the sense they could have put in more persuasive performances but weren't given much in the way of coherent guidance or a script to work with. I've seen far, far worse in the psychological genre, which Dreamland is under the thin veneer of sci-fi trappings.

First off, I'm a bit of a critic! Second, I'm astonished to see such bad reviews for this film.
I thought it was very intriguing and a bit haunting to say the least.
Independent film making at it's finest. I love to see new faces giving good performances.
If you didn't like this film, perhaps you should stick with the Hollywood blockbusters with celebrity performances, because this film was an amazingly well done independent sci-fi thriller. Perhaps a bit too clever for today's fluoridated audiences! A personal recommendation to those who enjoyed this film is "The Objective".