That just doesn't necessarily mean that what they were going for was GOOD. "The Void" essentially presents itself as a kind of send-up, in some fashion, to the "Apocalyptic" horror films of John Carpenter, among others. The influence from 1982's "The Thing" is blatantly obvious. The "plot", what phantom threads there is of one, concerns an only very vaguely defined cult, which seems to worship some manner of HP Lovecraftian style "Outer God" or somesuch, a being form beyond who they are hoping will come and more or less destroy the world. Now mind you, I'M telling you that, the film doesn't entirely. Not fully, or coherently. It is one of modern breed of horror film that I have noticed cropping up more and more in the 2000s, but 2010s especially, wherein the focus is either on being as fucked up as possible, to be "shocking" and to thoroughly disturb the viewer. And then there are films which basically provide you with the barest hollow shell of a plot, which they then proceed to fill with what equates to a pile of spooky imagery and sounds. A series of scenes, one after the other, which hold little to no actual relevance, and often enough h ave no real purpose. In other words, a film that itself basically has no ultimate point. This movie is a a little of both, in all honesty, but the difference is, that it DOES have a point. I GET it, as a view. I GET what they were going for. They wanted to make a "shocking" barf-bag movie, with some pretense at deeper content hidden behind some vague imagery and a few throwaway lines about Hidden Ones and shit like that. But really, the filmmakers were concerned with gore, which, in all fairness to them, they nailed. They wanted to make a grossout film, that was basically one fucked up moment after the other, trying to create bigger and bigger "shocks" for the audience, until it reaches it final, futile crescendo. And if gross out gore is your thing, then by all means, have at it. This is your kind of movie. But for me, not only am I NOT a huge fan of excessive gore, and CERTAINLY not simply for the sake of BEING gross and disturbing, but I also happen to hold story in very high regard. To me, no matter what kind of movie you're making, the most important thing the movie can do, the most important job the filmmakers have, is telling you a story. Hopefully, a GOOD story. This is not the type of film that is terribly concerned with telling you a coherent, complete story. Its focus, clearly, is imagery, most of the budget very obviously went into the gory special effects, and that's that. I've certainly seen worse films in my day. And I've even seen films MORE ultimately pointless. In fact, I just finished watching "The Open House", which while I found exponentially less offensive than "The Void", in some ways it honestly made me more frustrated to watch as a viewer, because it had NO POINT. "The Void" at least has a point. It has its purpose, and its place. I just don't happen to be a fan of what it was going for. I'm sure, for its day (and hell, even now), John Carpenter's "The Thing" was a shockingly gory, disturbing film. But the key difference there, is that by and large, while he has produced a couple of duds in his day, Carpenter is a master storyteller, and he CARES about telling a story to the audience. "The Thing" is vague, and gives you little to go on, and has plenty of gore, yes. All of those things are true. BUT, the point of the film is NOT the gore. The gore is there, first and foremost, because of the amorphous nature of the alien. The real POINT of the film, the is oppressive sense of tension form beginning to end, and the sheer level of paranoia the film elicits. And it still tells you a STORY, the film gives you just enough nuggets of information, so that you aren't lost, you have enough to go on, to feel like you ARE being told a story, and not merely being shown a series of scenes. The film forms a complete whole, which I cannot say for "The Void".