This movie was pointless and seemed to lose it's story line. The interviews throughout appear to try and tie the story together but even they can't save it from its self. Characters are introduced yet go nowhere. The only reason to even give this a view is to see Dan Thomas, his humour appears to be the only saving grace.
9 Reviews
Missing is the key word
ekwetherington18 February 2022
This movie is missing anything in the realm of plot or character development or scares or anything of any substance. The horror is your standard found footage set up and the humor boils down to the hotel manager rambling incoherently. The biggest shock is that said hotel manager is actually pretty funny. I would much rather have a movie just of him than what we got.
A good job of being a pretend documentary.
lisabecka5 September 2020
Which I enjoyed. But other than that it was supposed to be a comedy/ horror movie...that wasn't scary at all and not particularly funny, either. The acting wasn't bad but they had nothing at all to work with...or rather the 'documentary' parts were much, much better written than the 'horror' parts, and unfortunately that's not saying a lot. A great idea that needed a better script.
Horrible
chrisandmargie7 May 2018
Shadowy disappearances
TheLittleSongbird25 November 2018
'Shadow of the Missing' could easily have been watchable. The title does grab your attention. The cover is a creepy one. And the concept really interested me, not exactly creative but with those things on paper 'Shadow of the Missing' had all the makings of being a film with a creepy atmosphere and an entertaining enough mystery.
Neither were the case watching 'Shadow of the Missing'. Instead 'Shadow of the Missing' is yet another complete waste of a good idea, with terrible execution, with nothing standing out as remotely good, and the complete opposite of what it had potential to be. Not one of the worst films ever seen throughout my life, but 'Shadow of the Missing' is one of the most frustrating and worst recent viewings, which although variable actually on the most part have been above average or more.
Its least bad asset is the scenery, which did have some atmosphere. It was hard to appreciate it however because the lighting is too drab and goes too far on the dimness and darkness and the camera work lacks focus constantly, being blurred and chaotic. The editing is haphazard. The audio can be placed randomly and the over-obviousness, its tendency to be intrusive and how some of it is completely ill-suited in terms of how it's used and how it sounds really hurts the atmosphere.
Not that there was much atmosphere to begin with in 'Shadow of the Missing'. The deadly dull pacing, especially in the middle with some very long-winded stretches, kills it. Likewise with the lack of suspense and surprises. The mystery is never really that engaging and very routine at best, again containing nothing surprising and at times it gets silly. Too much goes nowhere, being introduced randomly and out of the blue and then dropped too quickly. The interviews are not illuminating, sometimes are pointless or don't say much of interest and value and also not particularly well written or acted.
Furthermore, none of the characters are developed enough to make them interesting. Neither do they have any distinct or endearing traits to make one root for them, basically they are all bland and annoying with vague motivations that never ring true and too many of them are ill-used. The acting is either histrionic or robotic and the directing is barely there.
Overall, terrible. 1/10 Bethany Cox
Neither were the case watching 'Shadow of the Missing'. Instead 'Shadow of the Missing' is yet another complete waste of a good idea, with terrible execution, with nothing standing out as remotely good, and the complete opposite of what it had potential to be. Not one of the worst films ever seen throughout my life, but 'Shadow of the Missing' is one of the most frustrating and worst recent viewings, which although variable actually on the most part have been above average or more.
Its least bad asset is the scenery, which did have some atmosphere. It was hard to appreciate it however because the lighting is too drab and goes too far on the dimness and darkness and the camera work lacks focus constantly, being blurred and chaotic. The editing is haphazard. The audio can be placed randomly and the over-obviousness, its tendency to be intrusive and how some of it is completely ill-suited in terms of how it's used and how it sounds really hurts the atmosphere.
Not that there was much atmosphere to begin with in 'Shadow of the Missing'. The deadly dull pacing, especially in the middle with some very long-winded stretches, kills it. Likewise with the lack of suspense and surprises. The mystery is never really that engaging and very routine at best, again containing nothing surprising and at times it gets silly. Too much goes nowhere, being introduced randomly and out of the blue and then dropped too quickly. The interviews are not illuminating, sometimes are pointless or don't say much of interest and value and also not particularly well written or acted.
Furthermore, none of the characters are developed enough to make them interesting. Neither do they have any distinct or endearing traits to make one root for them, basically they are all bland and annoying with vague motivations that never ring true and too many of them are ill-used. The acting is either histrionic or robotic and the directing is barely there.
Overall, terrible. 1/10 Bethany Cox
High school movie project?
tbuestrin22 February 2020
Unfocused, derivative, sleep-inducing
Armin_Nikkhah_Shirazi8 June 2023
SHADOW OF THE MISSING is a mockumentary/found footage film which depicts the last couple days of a documentary crew and friends, who entered an abandoned church in a Welsh town and went missing, before the church burned down the following day.
The most memorable aspect of this movie for me was that I dozed off during the second half. Already, this almost never happens to me, but remarkably here it happened exactly when the exposition was finished and the action was supposedly getting ready to go into high gear.
What struck me the most was how little the film invested in fleshing out the main characters who, I suppose in a nod to meta-modernism, are actually the filmmakers playing themselves. Instead, more focus is on all kinds of side characters of various utility to telling the story. The most annoying to me was the hotel owner, a character apparently introduced only for comic relief, but whose constant self-contradictions eventually became quite grating.
The story offers absolutely nothing new, the cinematography is bland, the pace slow and at the end we gain very little insight. Even for the found footage genre, filled with duds, this is close to bottom barrel. The best part of this movie is truly the poster, which I admit was a factor why I decided to watch this soporific.
Unless you are using this film to treat a sleep disorder, it is a waste of time.
The most memorable aspect of this movie for me was that I dozed off during the second half. Already, this almost never happens to me, but remarkably here it happened exactly when the exposition was finished and the action was supposedly getting ready to go into high gear.
What struck me the most was how little the film invested in fleshing out the main characters who, I suppose in a nod to meta-modernism, are actually the filmmakers playing themselves. Instead, more focus is on all kinds of side characters of various utility to telling the story. The most annoying to me was the hotel owner, a character apparently introduced only for comic relief, but whose constant self-contradictions eventually became quite grating.
The story offers absolutely nothing new, the cinematography is bland, the pace slow and at the end we gain very little insight. Even for the found footage genre, filled with duds, this is close to bottom barrel. The best part of this movie is truly the poster, which I admit was a factor why I decided to watch this soporific.
Unless you are using this film to treat a sleep disorder, it is a waste of time.
Nope
thedarkestshadow-3278517 January 2024
I turned it off at "Trump Critic". I HATE when filmmakers put their political bias into a movie that has Nothing to do with politics. There was absolutely ZERO reason to have that line In the movie. Also, in case anyone is wondering yes I would have had the same reaction if he had said Biden critic instead.
I watch movies to be entertained. I don't give a flip about your political leanings. Save that for your blog or whatever.
Judging by the other reviews here I dodged a bullet and I am not missing anything anyways.
That's all I have to say about this movie so the rest will just be filler..
I watch movies to be entertained. I don't give a flip about your political leanings. Save that for your blog or whatever.
Judging by the other reviews here I dodged a bullet and I am not missing anything anyways.
That's all I have to say about this movie so the rest will just be filler..
Stick with it!
perkin200019 November 2020
Right-o', here we go.
I heard about this film on one of the Smersh podcasts. Three very funny people, including one cast member, talking about Shadow of the Missing.
Yes, it's cheaply made, tonally uneven, visually wobbly and largely Welsh. However, if you ask me, all of these things add to its unique charm.
The first half-hour is the weakest, although the film fest joke-off is a genuinely funny highlight, as are the scenes involving Dan the hotel manager, a man who appears to have as much concern for his missing friends as he does the day-to-day running of his establishment. Big fan of Quincy though, apparently.
The last half-hour is where it comes into its own. The people stuck in the haunted church convey a genuine sense of confusion and fear, the priest viewing the footage of their (assumed) final moments is performed very well. As with all found footage films, the camera is shaky first-person stuff, events on-screen poorly lit and ambiguous but, well, what kinda ghost film is brightly lit and blessed with full narrative clarity, eh? (Ignoring the ones that are, but they're really bum-hole.)
The actor playing the priest is called Doc Benson, if anyone's writing a TV show about a rural 1950s vet, there's yer character name. Just post him a few quid for royalties etc.
Anyway, look, it ain't Spielberg alright. It's low-budget fun that makes good use of limited locations, gets the best out of an amateur cast (one or two scenes aside), and has makes an earnest attempt at giving you some laughs and spooky stuff.
Is my rating of 8/10 too generous? Perhaps, but it also deserves better than its current score so I consider it a fair attempt at addressing the balance.
Also, it's free to view on Amazon Prime, so ain't gonna cost you anything.
As I've said on my film blog many, many times, I'd rather watch a flawed low budget film made with a little passion and ingenuity than a megabucks effort made only for profit.
Also, Dan the hotel manager REALLY deserves his own TV series. How else will people learn that burning faces float upwards or that amorous dogs can easily be mistaken for a witches coven?
Go in knowing its flaws and enjoy it for what it is.
Cheers!
I heard about this film on one of the Smersh podcasts. Three very funny people, including one cast member, talking about Shadow of the Missing.
Yes, it's cheaply made, tonally uneven, visually wobbly and largely Welsh. However, if you ask me, all of these things add to its unique charm.
The first half-hour is the weakest, although the film fest joke-off is a genuinely funny highlight, as are the scenes involving Dan the hotel manager, a man who appears to have as much concern for his missing friends as he does the day-to-day running of his establishment. Big fan of Quincy though, apparently.
The last half-hour is where it comes into its own. The people stuck in the haunted church convey a genuine sense of confusion and fear, the priest viewing the footage of their (assumed) final moments is performed very well. As with all found footage films, the camera is shaky first-person stuff, events on-screen poorly lit and ambiguous but, well, what kinda ghost film is brightly lit and blessed with full narrative clarity, eh? (Ignoring the ones that are, but they're really bum-hole.)
The actor playing the priest is called Doc Benson, if anyone's writing a TV show about a rural 1950s vet, there's yer character name. Just post him a few quid for royalties etc.
Anyway, look, it ain't Spielberg alright. It's low-budget fun that makes good use of limited locations, gets the best out of an amateur cast (one or two scenes aside), and has makes an earnest attempt at giving you some laughs and spooky stuff.
Is my rating of 8/10 too generous? Perhaps, but it also deserves better than its current score so I consider it a fair attempt at addressing the balance.
Also, it's free to view on Amazon Prime, so ain't gonna cost you anything.
As I've said on my film blog many, many times, I'd rather watch a flawed low budget film made with a little passion and ingenuity than a megabucks effort made only for profit.
Also, Dan the hotel manager REALLY deserves his own TV series. How else will people learn that burning faces float upwards or that amorous dogs can easily be mistaken for a witches coven?
Go in knowing its flaws and enjoy it for what it is.
Cheers!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
