Honestly...It is not such a bad film,a bit too slow and very predictable..
If you are like me and watched all the horrors in existence )it will not be a very satisfactory experience) one time watch,if there is absolutely nothing better to be found...
52 Reviews
Interesting Setting, but Uninspiring Plot & Weak Scares
TwistedContent27 September 2019
After the recent "Bloodline" I was looking forward to the next Blumhouse's straight-to-video feature, but this time it was quite the disappointment. "Prey" does have potential but I don't think it was aware of that.
For the first 15 minutes "Prey" kept me intrigued - right away the story smells a little cliché, but the interesting part is the setting of a string of uninhabited islands around Malaysia. The nature shown in "Prey" is beautiful and made me think of one awesome game called "Far Cry 3" - if it was made into a movie, these would be very fitting shooting locations. Other than that this movie had serious pacing problems, a plot that promises more than it delivers & a climax sequence / ending that falls flat and is simply painfully unoriginal. While the movie drags along and defies your expectations with unsatisfying twists, Logan Miller does what he can & props to him, a shallow character, but a decent performance. The rest of the cast were okay as well, 3 of the 4 other characters didn't have much to do at all. Really, it's hard to say literally anything about "Prey" because it's only entertaining enough to forget it 5 minutes after watching it. As for the visuals, not counting the qualities provided by the filming locations, the cinematography could've been more imaginative & gore is practically non existant.
I'd guess that "Prey" might appeal more to the less seasoned horror fans, but all I saw was something I've seen tens of times, just this time set in the jungle. My rating: 4/10.
For the first 15 minutes "Prey" kept me intrigued - right away the story smells a little cliché, but the interesting part is the setting of a string of uninhabited islands around Malaysia. The nature shown in "Prey" is beautiful and made me think of one awesome game called "Far Cry 3" - if it was made into a movie, these would be very fitting shooting locations. Other than that this movie had serious pacing problems, a plot that promises more than it delivers & a climax sequence / ending that falls flat and is simply painfully unoriginal. While the movie drags along and defies your expectations with unsatisfying twists, Logan Miller does what he can & props to him, a shallow character, but a decent performance. The rest of the cast were okay as well, 3 of the 4 other characters didn't have much to do at all. Really, it's hard to say literally anything about "Prey" because it's only entertaining enough to forget it 5 minutes after watching it. As for the visuals, not counting the qualities provided by the filming locations, the cinematography could've been more imaginative & gore is practically non existant.
I'd guess that "Prey" might appeal more to the less seasoned horror fans, but all I saw was something I've seen tens of times, just this time set in the jungle. My rating: 4/10.
Did quite ok I'd say.
Patient44412 October 2019
I wasn't expecting this, a movie with a plot, a direction, quite ok acting and all of that. Thus I was pleasantly surprised to find all of those above and a little more which I will let you discover for yourself.
Prey is a much better movie than it would appear to be at first. It has very good elements for a in the woods horror, and I love the change of direction it suffers. Prey is a good add-on to one's horror collection, so if you have the chance to watch it, go for it. Small budget horrors seem to get more creative lately, of course, excepting the ones that rely solely on gore.
Cheers!
Prey is a much better movie than it would appear to be at first. It has very good elements for a in the woods horror, and I love the change of direction it suffers. Prey is a good add-on to one's horror collection, so if you have the chance to watch it, go for it. Small budget horrors seem to get more creative lately, of course, excepting the ones that rely solely on gore.
Cheers!
Another semi-decent horror film poisoned with a garbage ending!
Count_Swagula20 November 2019
Seriously? Why every time there's an ok horror the knuckle-dragging directors have to ruin it with a stupid ending that gives zero closure and defecates on everything the film was building towards. The ending even contradicts the established mythology of the film's villain and undermines the intelligence of the viewer.
His mom and trauma doctor were stupid
draftdubya12 November 2020
Pretty pointless
micheleroncarati27 November 2019
I think this movie has some very few interesting moments and that covers all the good I can say about it. The biggest flaw is that the story itself is sloppy and quite mediocre. The ending, as others have pointed out, is pretty bad, but it's no surprise as you can literally figure out the entire plot after 30 minutes of watching this film.
I think it could have been quite original and somehow interesting. It's a shame that it turned out to be an awful film where the plot is just a mediocre blur. There are a few plot holes, but the real problem is that this film is unable to bring something scary and meaningful to the audience. It's a waste of time and you'll forget about it very soon.
I think it could have been quite original and somehow interesting. It's a shame that it turned out to be an awful film where the plot is just a mediocre blur. There are a few plot holes, but the real problem is that this film is unable to bring something scary and meaningful to the audience. It's a waste of time and you'll forget about it very soon.
Not bad - but a little slow
cfoz11 December 2019
Interesting idea with a few little twists - overall a good movie though a little slow at times. Good production values, locations, acting, and reasonable special effects. Not huge in the horror stakes, but thrilling enough for a evening movie.
Prey stalks its victims by offering a suspense-free horror flick that seems more idyllic than terrifying.
TheMovieDiorama14 November 2019
Y'know, when I temporarily go insane or witness a traumatic incident, I openly discuss my feelings with a therapist or spend the day watching films involving eternal happiness. Had I been referred to a behavioural rehabilitation programme that sends its clients to a supposedly uninhabited island for three days for the purpose of "finding myself", with only your survival instincts equipped, well I'd probably be a much different person than I am now. These are psychologically disturbed characters, granted the freedom of an entire island, to do whatever the heck they want. Build a campsite, create some intricate traps, slaughter the local wildlife and even murder each other. The insurance costs must've been catastrophic!
Khalfoun conceives a ridiculously contrived premise and, essentially, serves it to the demonic beast entity thing that prowls the luscious jungles of the island. What is a horror film without suspense? What is a psychological thriller without character development? What is a film without entertainment? Khalfoun irrefutably understands no element into adequate filmmaking. None! Cheap mundane jump scares that were predictable right down to the very second. More plot holes than a washed up sponge from the nearby capsized boat. Enough foreshadowing to plunge the island into everlasting darkness. Aside from Miller who atleast attempted to bypass the shoddy script he was given, the acting was weaker than a coconut branch surviving a monsoon. Expositional flashbacks, that resembled advertisements for a "hot rod" vehicle, clumsily spliced into the main narrative through inexplicably basic editing.
However, what truly makes Prey a bloodthirsty piece of life drainage, are the details. We are to believe that a young girl and her mother, have lived on the island for over a decade. That's fine and all, but when she looks fresher than a speared fish, something's not right. Eyebrows plucked, makeup on point, hair pristinely straight as she conditions using TRESemmé. You sure she didn't reside in a salon for a decade? Not to mention Toby transforms into Bear Grylls in a matter of days. Where the hell did that come from!?
Khalfoun attempts to fool audiences by leading viewers down the path of imagination. Inferring that the protagonist is in fact fabricating all this nonsense. The five minute self-conversational scene explicitly hypothesised that his lunacy was profound. Yet whilst that would've been clichéd and typically dull, that scenario would've fared better than the one devised by Khalfoun. Cult rituals. Voodoo shenanigans. Cave full of multi-coloured paintings. All culminating into an ending that made me want to squish some numbing berries onto the disc and serve it to the beast itself. What was that? Seriously! I loathe endings that make the whole ordeal pointless. Detest them. Especially when there was a perfectly available boat in the middle of the film! Where did the rescue raft go that was beached by the programme manager? The CGI demonic swine could obviously swim, considering that atrocious conclusion.
Urgh. No more. Atleast Robbins' cinematography made the idyllic island endurable. Prey exercises all of the worst traits found in uninspired low-budget horrors, and doesn't even attempt to hide from its predatory allurement, consequently cementing this as one of the worst of the year.
Khalfoun conceives a ridiculously contrived premise and, essentially, serves it to the demonic beast entity thing that prowls the luscious jungles of the island. What is a horror film without suspense? What is a psychological thriller without character development? What is a film without entertainment? Khalfoun irrefutably understands no element into adequate filmmaking. None! Cheap mundane jump scares that were predictable right down to the very second. More plot holes than a washed up sponge from the nearby capsized boat. Enough foreshadowing to plunge the island into everlasting darkness. Aside from Miller who atleast attempted to bypass the shoddy script he was given, the acting was weaker than a coconut branch surviving a monsoon. Expositional flashbacks, that resembled advertisements for a "hot rod" vehicle, clumsily spliced into the main narrative through inexplicably basic editing.
However, what truly makes Prey a bloodthirsty piece of life drainage, are the details. We are to believe that a young girl and her mother, have lived on the island for over a decade. That's fine and all, but when she looks fresher than a speared fish, something's not right. Eyebrows plucked, makeup on point, hair pristinely straight as she conditions using TRESemmé. You sure she didn't reside in a salon for a decade? Not to mention Toby transforms into Bear Grylls in a matter of days. Where the hell did that come from!?
Khalfoun attempts to fool audiences by leading viewers down the path of imagination. Inferring that the protagonist is in fact fabricating all this nonsense. The five minute self-conversational scene explicitly hypothesised that his lunacy was profound. Yet whilst that would've been clichéd and typically dull, that scenario would've fared better than the one devised by Khalfoun. Cult rituals. Voodoo shenanigans. Cave full of multi-coloured paintings. All culminating into an ending that made me want to squish some numbing berries onto the disc and serve it to the beast itself. What was that? Seriously! I loathe endings that make the whole ordeal pointless. Detest them. Especially when there was a perfectly available boat in the middle of the film! Where did the rescue raft go that was beached by the programme manager? The CGI demonic swine could obviously swim, considering that atrocious conclusion.
Urgh. No more. Atleast Robbins' cinematography made the idyllic island endurable. Prey exercises all of the worst traits found in uninspired low-budget horrors, and doesn't even attempt to hide from its predatory allurement, consequently cementing this as one of the worst of the year.
A bit slow, but enjoyable enough and worth the watch
JJgrey0827 September 2019
I decided to watch the film without looking at the rating first. After watching it, I was surprised and somewhat shocked to see a rather low rating here.
Okay, so it's not a blockbuster (and it's not trying to be) - the plot is slow and yes there are plot holes, but compared to what's out there, 'Prey' is a decent movie.
I genuinely got a fright a few times. At one point I even found myself squinting because I was too afraid to watch.
If you're looking for a horror adventure that doesn't rely on clichés and unnecessary gore, 'Prey' is a must see.
A jungle flick without a Global Warming message? How dare they.
fedor89 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
The movie decides to be annoying early on. It doesn't wait. It goes for the annoyance straight away almost.
First it offers us an incredibly dumb premise: some kind of half-witted, absurd, unrealistic juvenile delinquent program that actually intentionally strands teens, one by one, one per deserted island, for THREE days. Count 'em. Three. Not just overnight. A kind of Naked & Afraid except no naked. Is this ridiculously far-fetched program run with any safety precautions at least? No. Are the kids able to alert the woman Kay for help if something happens to them? No, they can't. How are they supposed to survive three days and nights without proper skills after just two weeks of "training"? Kay has no clue, she just dumps them there. Why are they being dumped on islands that aren't deserted? Kay wouldn't know, she's part of a moronic program which doesn't take danger into consideration, at all. Well then, how many people run this program? Just the one, Kay, it seems. She dumps them on islands, then comes alone - at night - to pick them up several days later in a crappy tiny boat which apparently she alone inhabits. So she's program boss, skipper and counselor? Yup. In Toby's case, she actually arrives EARLIER than planned - which is stupid, because how is dopey Toby supposed to meet her? He'd been expecting her in the morning. Sillier still, she calls out his name upon arrival, as if she'd just landed into a house, not a vast island. That's how smart she is. That's how smart this movie is.
Hence, logically, this dumb program must be setting kids on RANDOM islands. If that weren't so, then Kay would not have chosen the dangerous horror island - which the program couldn't have used before, because if they had then Kay and some other kid would have been killed earlier. So it's a Juve program that not only endangers teens but doesn't even use the same - hence more reliable - islands every time... Wow. Now, that is so idiotic.
Why is dopey Toby even in this program? It's supposed to be a Juve program, yet where is the evidence he ever did anything criminal? There is none. His father got killed by masked men, so obviously he gets sent to a Juve program on the other side of the world, run by a daft woman called Kay. Makes so much sense.
But hey, the lost and confused writer-director needed an isolated setting in which a lost and confused dopey Toby could get no help hence where he could be easily killed off.
Secondly, the writer-director decides to annoy us with the usual, by now standard and expected, liberal propaganda. Yes, even in a remote-island monster flick we don't get spared the usual PC nonsense. Dopey Toby mumbles something about "Robinson Crusoe" being "very progressive" for its time because it pushed the gay-rights agenda. And, apparently, because the book addresses "western colonialism" i.e. the film manages to throw in a little bit of white-guilt too. LGBT and white guilt: cute. Because the writer-director is genuinely brainwashed or because he wants to suck up to Hollywood's Establishment? It's no secret that the capital of American cinema hires only politically subservient sycophants these days. Find me a Hollywood director or writer younger than 50 who isn't a liberal and I'll find you Hangars 18, 19 and 20, all full of goofy-looking aliens. Reverse McCarthyism? It's because McCarthy wasn't allowed to do his job that we have what we have now...
Besides, if the writer-director wants to suck up to Unholywood, then he should have included Global Warming too. Doesn't he realize that EVERY movie now has to include at least one message about the impending Armageddon? Manbearpig would definitely NOT approve of this blatant omission. Sure, gay rights and white guilt are all well and fine, but to fail to include THE trendy agenda of the moment is a pretty ignorant move from this director. He needs to be more aware of Global Whorening, if he wants to successfully who-re himself out to UnHolywood.
Thirdly, the movie presents us a dopey Toby who is initially introverted, depressed and glum. He doesn't say a word on the boat. And yet, as soon as he is dumped on the island by Kay, he goes into "comedy relief" monologue-banter, being uncharacteristically jovial. So why this sudden, absurd transformation? I was half-expecting a third Toby to show up, one who was a martial arts expert. Well, why not? After all, they already gave us two Tobys within just 10-15 minutes! There should have been at least 5-6 more Tobys by the time this pathetic film mercifully ends.
It gets dumber. It always does in such films. He comes across a lanky fashion model, very much a jungle version of Lara Croft. She turns out to be the monster. We find this out in a very silly exposition scene in which a woman gives us the whole story... while being freshly impaled by a tree-trunk. Any explanation as to what these Americans were doing on a remote Asian jungle island in the first place? Of course not. Any explanation how people can talk on and on while being freshly impaled by a tree trunk? None. Admittedly, no such explanation exists, at least not in this universe.
The girl's appearance is totally unconvincing, looking like she walked straight out of Vogue magazine. She doesn't remotely resemble a "feral child" from the jungle who'd spent a decade there. I half-expected her to ask Tobey whether he had some coke stashed away somewhere. Her character isn't much smarter than a fashion model either: she never figures out that she's the monster, in all those years, which is fairly far-fetched - yet so typical of this inept writer-director.
Very predictably dopey Toby gets the woman killed before she could tell him the truth. WHY couldn't Toby have listened to her before escaping?! It's so dumb. They get involved in an absurd jungle chase (because clearly this writer-director has only been in special plastic jungles with built-in running tracks hence believes people can just run, skip and hop freely there at great speeds). She runs into one of her own traps - which is so dumb on so many levels, i.e. yet another lame plot-device. As if we hadn't realized that she isn't the killer. Far too convenient the way the director shows her coming out of Kay's boat carrying Kay's belongings. It is obvious audience manipulation, obvious plot-devicing.
Nor is it clear where from the black Rasta kid suddenly appears. He mumbles something about him and Toby going back to his island. This would imply he SWAM all the way to Toby's! Did he? How did he do that? Why did he do that?
Actually, it's totally irrelevant. It's a dumb movie. If the writer-director doesn't know, how should we.
I wish the director all the best with his Hollywood-hunting. May he land a dozen big-budget movie deals there. Just as long as he finally includes Global Warming propaganda in his next awful flicks, because NOT including Global Warming these days - i.e. just years before we all get cooked by the effects of unbridled capitalism when Earth hits temperatures of 1500 C - is really just not on.
First it offers us an incredibly dumb premise: some kind of half-witted, absurd, unrealistic juvenile delinquent program that actually intentionally strands teens, one by one, one per deserted island, for THREE days. Count 'em. Three. Not just overnight. A kind of Naked & Afraid except no naked. Is this ridiculously far-fetched program run with any safety precautions at least? No. Are the kids able to alert the woman Kay for help if something happens to them? No, they can't. How are they supposed to survive three days and nights without proper skills after just two weeks of "training"? Kay has no clue, she just dumps them there. Why are they being dumped on islands that aren't deserted? Kay wouldn't know, she's part of a moronic program which doesn't take danger into consideration, at all. Well then, how many people run this program? Just the one, Kay, it seems. She dumps them on islands, then comes alone - at night - to pick them up several days later in a crappy tiny boat which apparently she alone inhabits. So she's program boss, skipper and counselor? Yup. In Toby's case, she actually arrives EARLIER than planned - which is stupid, because how is dopey Toby supposed to meet her? He'd been expecting her in the morning. Sillier still, she calls out his name upon arrival, as if she'd just landed into a house, not a vast island. That's how smart she is. That's how smart this movie is.
Hence, logically, this dumb program must be setting kids on RANDOM islands. If that weren't so, then Kay would not have chosen the dangerous horror island - which the program couldn't have used before, because if they had then Kay and some other kid would have been killed earlier. So it's a Juve program that not only endangers teens but doesn't even use the same - hence more reliable - islands every time... Wow. Now, that is so idiotic.
Why is dopey Toby even in this program? It's supposed to be a Juve program, yet where is the evidence he ever did anything criminal? There is none. His father got killed by masked men, so obviously he gets sent to a Juve program on the other side of the world, run by a daft woman called Kay. Makes so much sense.
But hey, the lost and confused writer-director needed an isolated setting in which a lost and confused dopey Toby could get no help hence where he could be easily killed off.
Secondly, the writer-director decides to annoy us with the usual, by now standard and expected, liberal propaganda. Yes, even in a remote-island monster flick we don't get spared the usual PC nonsense. Dopey Toby mumbles something about "Robinson Crusoe" being "very progressive" for its time because it pushed the gay-rights agenda. And, apparently, because the book addresses "western colonialism" i.e. the film manages to throw in a little bit of white-guilt too. LGBT and white guilt: cute. Because the writer-director is genuinely brainwashed or because he wants to suck up to Hollywood's Establishment? It's no secret that the capital of American cinema hires only politically subservient sycophants these days. Find me a Hollywood director or writer younger than 50 who isn't a liberal and I'll find you Hangars 18, 19 and 20, all full of goofy-looking aliens. Reverse McCarthyism? It's because McCarthy wasn't allowed to do his job that we have what we have now...
Besides, if the writer-director wants to suck up to Unholywood, then he should have included Global Warming too. Doesn't he realize that EVERY movie now has to include at least one message about the impending Armageddon? Manbearpig would definitely NOT approve of this blatant omission. Sure, gay rights and white guilt are all well and fine, but to fail to include THE trendy agenda of the moment is a pretty ignorant move from this director. He needs to be more aware of Global Whorening, if he wants to successfully who-re himself out to UnHolywood.
Thirdly, the movie presents us a dopey Toby who is initially introverted, depressed and glum. He doesn't say a word on the boat. And yet, as soon as he is dumped on the island by Kay, he goes into "comedy relief" monologue-banter, being uncharacteristically jovial. So why this sudden, absurd transformation? I was half-expecting a third Toby to show up, one who was a martial arts expert. Well, why not? After all, they already gave us two Tobys within just 10-15 minutes! There should have been at least 5-6 more Tobys by the time this pathetic film mercifully ends.
It gets dumber. It always does in such films. He comes across a lanky fashion model, very much a jungle version of Lara Croft. She turns out to be the monster. We find this out in a very silly exposition scene in which a woman gives us the whole story... while being freshly impaled by a tree-trunk. Any explanation as to what these Americans were doing on a remote Asian jungle island in the first place? Of course not. Any explanation how people can talk on and on while being freshly impaled by a tree trunk? None. Admittedly, no such explanation exists, at least not in this universe.
The girl's appearance is totally unconvincing, looking like she walked straight out of Vogue magazine. She doesn't remotely resemble a "feral child" from the jungle who'd spent a decade there. I half-expected her to ask Tobey whether he had some coke stashed away somewhere. Her character isn't much smarter than a fashion model either: she never figures out that she's the monster, in all those years, which is fairly far-fetched - yet so typical of this inept writer-director.
Very predictably dopey Toby gets the woman killed before she could tell him the truth. WHY couldn't Toby have listened to her before escaping?! It's so dumb. They get involved in an absurd jungle chase (because clearly this writer-director has only been in special plastic jungles with built-in running tracks hence believes people can just run, skip and hop freely there at great speeds). She runs into one of her own traps - which is so dumb on so many levels, i.e. yet another lame plot-device. As if we hadn't realized that she isn't the killer. Far too convenient the way the director shows her coming out of Kay's boat carrying Kay's belongings. It is obvious audience manipulation, obvious plot-devicing.
Nor is it clear where from the black Rasta kid suddenly appears. He mumbles something about him and Toby going back to his island. This would imply he SWAM all the way to Toby's! Did he? How did he do that? Why did he do that?
Actually, it's totally irrelevant. It's a dumb movie. If the writer-director doesn't know, how should we.
I wish the director all the best with his Hollywood-hunting. May he land a dozen big-budget movie deals there. Just as long as he finally includes Global Warming propaganda in his next awful flicks, because NOT including Global Warming these days - i.e. just years before we all get cooked by the effects of unbridled capitalism when Earth hits temperatures of 1500 C - is really just not on.
This movie is so lame
Neptune1658 October 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Don't waste your time on it i repeat don't waste your time on it. waste your time watching some cartoons instead. What a load of boring, uninspired trash. Stuck on an island her whole life. perfectly shaved, plucked and manicured. Yah, ok Blumhouse?!! A few unknown actors on a island, How cheap must this movie cost, It must be beyond a budget movie. A another cheap movie!! the chick is demon possessed. I kinda knew it was her, there's foreshadowing here and there.
The twist at the end was absolutely sick though I don't understand the role of that fruit to subdue her cuz it didn't work well at all. Story is pretty wild with lots of weird twists so as to seemingly impress the audience ,as it is with many movies nowadays. Lots of plot holes. Honestly I don't know what's up with horror movies nowadays trying to impress us with all these fantastic twists and turns, It kinda makes the movie less interesting
I loved it
philip-0917529 September 2019
I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. It gave me everything I wanted - jungle adventure, island escape, horror & thrill. If this movie had a stronger cast, it would be more popular, but honestly, the actors didn't disappoint me. Thumbs up!
Mediocre
r96sk21 April 2020
A mediocre horror flick. 'Prey' isn't all that bad but there isn't anything all that good either.
Logan Miller, who I know from his 'The Walking Dead' days, is decent in the lead. Kristine Froseth plays the role of Madeleine, to solid effect. Both of them are fine, I've seen better but I've got nothing negative to note about them; nor Jolene Anderson, another face from the television world in 'Harrow'.
It's really just the writing and overall execution that I didn't like much, they could've done a smarter job with the first half of the film which is slow; should've used that time to go more in-depth with the premise/characters.
An average film.
Logan Miller, who I know from his 'The Walking Dead' days, is decent in the lead. Kristine Froseth plays the role of Madeleine, to solid effect. Both of them are fine, I've seen better but I've got nothing negative to note about them; nor Jolene Anderson, another face from the television world in 'Harrow'.
It's really just the writing and overall execution that I didn't like much, they could've done a smarter job with the first half of the film which is slow; should've used that time to go more in-depth with the premise/characters.
An average film.
Total Garbage
JakubBednar27 September 2019
I'm 35 at the moment. This was definitely a suspenseful movie for me. The suspense was there but nothing ever happened. The ending is a disgrace to film making worldwide. Whoever wrote this should spend the rest of their life on a small island eating just coconuts and cooking fish on fires lit with a magnifying glass. Avoid at all cost.
I Turned It Off!
flowerstardust197913 November 2019
After sitting through Sweetheart, which is basically the same movie, released the same year, and equally as boring. Pretty sure that it was also under the same production company as this. After 35 of Logan Miller stumbling around on a dessert island and that was it! Bit of suspenseful music, with nothing suspenseful happening. Off it went. I have no desire to find out what didn't happen for the other 60 minutes.
I'm a huge horror fan. I watch everything. I can't remember the last time I turned something off for being so bad. And recently, the horror films have been very disappointing, but rarely do I turn them off.
I'm a huge horror fan. I watch everything. I can't remember the last time I turned something off for being so bad. And recently, the horror films have been very disappointing, but rarely do I turn them off.
Another worst horror film! Too many boring conversation, and annoying overuse scene! Avoid at all freaking cost!
kwenchow22 June 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This film start with a series of picture taken from the Polaroid, and a father of a man "Toby" kill by the man with monkey mask scene! As turnout, this film is about Toby need to survive at the island live by a young female "Madeleine", who possess by ghost! Entire film full of boring conversation, and super annoying overuse scene! Such as, overuse of the flashback of Toby's father murder scene, overuse of the dreaming scene, overuse of the blackout scene, overuse of the super slow searching things scene, and overuse the flashback of young Toby start the car engine scene! Make the film unwatchable! All the killing scene, also not show to us! At the end, Toby burn Madeleine to kill the ghost! We think Toby survive at the end, but instead is Madeleine! Toby surely kill by the ghost! That's it! Wasting time to watch!
For undemanding teenagers only
t-rexx-568-1968258 June 2020
This movie is all about deja-vu. A boy - what an irritating character at that!! - is trying to find solace on an uninhabited island off the coast of Malaysia by taking part to a survival program called "Lost & Found" after having experienced a traumatic event. The tropical setting is beautiful, the shooting and photography are top notch. But the acting is just meh. Everything is predictable, the balance between slow and fast-paced events is very unequal. And the scenario is full of blatant errors or non-senses which, after a while, get on anybody's nerves. There is some material in it, but just not enough to give it a good review.
Decent B-horror movie.
lord-blade25 October 2020
It's what you'd expect from a Blumhouse movie. It's low budget, but decently put together. Surprisingly good acting. And an interesting if somewhat predictable plot.
All in all, an enjoyable little horror movie. Not so much scary compared to a lot of things out there, but a good movie none the less.
All in all, an enjoyable little horror movie. Not so much scary compared to a lot of things out there, but a good movie none the less.
odd one
davet-152759 April 2020
It had good moments and low moments , the acting was ok , but the story and editing was a bit allover the place. There were alot of FFS moments and it did annoy you as it was slow , it could have done so much more,let down by a bad ending ,reality and no common sense, it is what it is.
Nifty teen version of predator
rivertam263 May 2020
Blumhouse produced this nifty teen version of Predator. It centers around a young man who goes on a sort of survival retreat after his father is murdered. After arriving solo he soon discovers hes not alone. He gathers up his strength to try and survive until the boat comes back. It's a suspenseful little horror flick even though it's a bit underdeveloped. More character and story work would have really hit the concept home. All in all not a bad watch.
6/10
6/10
Have seen worse
rhofik18 November 2019
Story is actually not bad but movie and ending quite predictable. Toby is honestly not very smart guy and did annoy me first half of movie. good effects though.. Overall average movie with clumsy and fathead main character, but I do not regret to watch it.. have seen worse :-)
Well that's a plot
kylerayner-690221 May 2020
The story starts off very slow and you don't feel sympathetic towards the protagonist as he's a spoiled and somewhat privileged. But the plot quickly thickens during the climax of the movie as the towards the ending the movie seems to move faster.
Part Survival Horrow, Part Supernatural Horror, Part Creature Horror
timothygartin7 October 2019
I enjoyed this movie. I did not like the end twist because I thought it trivializes the rest of the movie, but that isn't a disaster. The story is hard to pin down to a particular genre. It has elements of a lot of different types of horror movies: slasher, creature, supernatural and the like. I liked the acting, especially from the lead actor playing Toby. The actress playing Madeline was less believable, but still ok.
The setting was beautiful and was used effectively throughout the movie to build tension in the forest, underwater or in caves.
The main issues I had were related to the end where the lead character suddenly becomes uncharacteristically capable of doing anything. One character calls Toby "Rambo" and I think this is a good characterization. It comes from no where and it seems unreal.
I also did not like the twist ending. However, I still think this is a good one to watch.
The setting was beautiful and was used effectively throughout the movie to build tension in the forest, underwater or in caves.
The main issues I had were related to the end where the lead character suddenly becomes uncharacteristically capable of doing anything. One character calls Toby "Rambo" and I think this is a good characterization. It comes from no where and it seems unreal.
I also did not like the twist ending. However, I still think this is a good one to watch.
Background noise
kathmummybear9 April 2020
Boring!
amgee-8955110 February 2020
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
