Hungerford (2014) User Reviews

Good effort but...

[midnightmosesuk · 4/10 · 21 July 2018]

Can I just say that I fully understand that this was probably filmed on a micro-budget and I applaud the efforts of the team to get a finished project on to the screen. Also you can't help but admire the passion and commitment shown by these youngsters, they achieved something that is very hard to do.

That being said this is not a good film. Sorry but I have to be honest. The dialogue is badly written, the acting is sub-par and the plot is full of holes and terrible, unbelievably stupid decisions, for example the car. Plot spoilers coming.

Phil sneaks off to get the car in order to redeem herself after putting everyone's lives in danger. In doing this she causes her friends to go looking for her, putting everyone's lives in danger. Dumb idea. Both Phil and Cowen planned to go alone to get the car, early in the morning. Wouldn't it make more sense for EVERYONE to go for the car, providing some safety in numbers and, when they reach the car, they can just drive off without needing to go back to the flat? But, my biggest issue with this scene was that Hungerford wasn't full of abandoned cars. Are you saying that not a single one could be stolen? That, in the emergency, they couldn't just take a walk and find a house with a car in the drive, break into the house to find the keys and just steal the car? They were literally walking past parked cars and vans on the way to find the car at the council offices.

That's just one example, there are others. So, can I recommend this film? As a film, not really. But as an example of what some young adults can do with some determination and a camera, yes I can.

Found footage that I'd preferred to stayed lost tbh.

[Seth_Rogue_One · 3/10 · 8 April 2016]

I watched the trailer for this and then saw the rating on here, but couldn't really make sense of it.

Cause the trailer made it look like a pretty darn good movie for a found footage flick.

But while watching it it becomes painfully clear why the rating is the way it is.

No sense for tact and sub-par acting and characters that aren't particularly likable.

Starts off with a massive explosion in a building that lit up the skies, and what does our 'heroes' in the movie do? Well they throw a party of course!

There's countless of illogical acts performed by the characters through-out the movie, I will not disclose any more of them as that would kind of spoil it if you still chose to watch it.

But yeah put your brain on ice for this one if you necessarily feel like you should watch it, although I'm not sure that will work.

Nothing more to say about it really.

Hunger for ... less

[kosmasp · 3/10 · 9 August 2018]

Found footage and all that. Ah well, I mean there are worse movies out there and I guess if you accept the way this was shot and the fact it does not have a big budget (CGI looks ... well computer generated! I know - duh! But you get where I'm heading with this).

So it begins rather quickly, the inciting incident ... at least that is the notion we get after a couple of minutes ... but then it does take it's time to get going. And we get annoying people doing crazy (dare I say stupid?) stuff. Anyway, there is action, there is horror and there is blood. But there is also a lot of boring bits throughout and a lot of cliches ...

Almost as bad peeing out a kidney stone.

[mr-cook · 1/10 · 6 June 2018]

The basis of the film is of a student documenting his life for seven days for coursework. If however it had stuck with that premis and turned out that the student had hoaxed the whole situation for the footage it could have been slightly easier to swallow. Because that's exactly what it looks like. The opening 15/20 minutes is slow and uneventful as your dragged through the introductions of the sorts of characters you avoid at all costs. Not because they're mean or edgy in anyway but because they're just painfully unlikeable. Right up until the first death scene where a slightly disgruntled postman gets slotted with a bottle deodorant. The props look like they were stolen form a discount toy store, the special effects look like they've been added by a drunk six year old child using an etcha-sketch and the delivery of each line of script from all characters is about as engaging as the helium slowly seaping a funfair balloon. The last "we will fight" statement at the very end is just cringe worthy. It's not often you watch an invasion film that makes you actually root for the end of mankind.

God awful.

Just god awful.

Don't Waste Your Time!

[teamtoxicstudios · 1/10 · 16 May 2015]

I had hopes for this B grade movie but after watching 30 minutes or so I realized I was to generous with the "B Grade".

Bad acting, bad actors, especially the lead actor who was so over dramatic in some scenes it bordered on sickening.

Bad direction thorough out the film especially the car crash scene, and way to many more to mention.

The director who I just found out is the lead actor as well (That answers a lot of questions) should really look for another line of work as Directing is definitely not his strong suit.

I could keep going with what is wrong with this film but it's really not even worth my time complaining about it.

Watching paint dry is more entertaining

[orionhi · 2/10 · 21 February 2019]

There are so many things wrong with this movie. It's an interesting concept but that's it. The budget for this movie must have been $45 because so much of it is filmed in complete darkness with some sound effects. At one point it's totally dark for so long I found a spot I missed shaving while staring at my reflection in the tv. I think you'll get more enjoyment out of sticking a pencil in your ear then watching this movie. I do not recommend wasting your time with this

Whaaaat?

[zaplanc · 1/10 · 21 July 2018]

I'll be short... There should be prohibition to rent or sell equipment for making movies (bad home movies)... God help us!

boring and leads to massive plot holes in its own sequel

[phenomynouss · 2/10 · 24 June 2018]

I skipped over this title after seeing the inexplicable tag "Teen Screams", then went on to watch "The Darkest Dawn", which I only realized afterwards was actually a sequel to this film. So I went back to watch this film. As such, my experience with this film is colored by having seen the sequel first. Despite this, the two turn out to be entirely different types of movies, which leads to a severe disconnection between the two films.

While "The Darkest Dawn" focuses on being an alien invasion type movie all throughout, in this the alien invasion angle is only revealed at the very end, although the "bug" infesters are present from virtually the beginning. As such, the emphasis is entirely on the infested people, causing them to behave like zombies, basically, only with the intention of capturing people wherever possible.

Meanwhile, the "zombie" people are an extremely minimal part of "The Darkest Dawn" as almost all the real threats come from other humans struggling to survive. The zombie people are almost never present in "The Darkest Dawn", whereas in this film, they are practically swarming in many areas.

The backstory I got in "The Darkest Dawn" in terms of Cowen and the group losing Philippa and having encountered the soldier commander guy, was extremely minimal and thus was good for letting one's imagination run wild. With those events filled in by this film (which came first), it only causes even more massive plot holes in the sequel. Namely, we don't know how or why the soldier commander guy got separated from Cowen's group, or how Philippa just happened to end up reuniting with the soldier commander guy.

Another utterly massive plothole thrown by the film involves fighting the zombies. In "The Darkest Dawn", the only way to stop them, it seems, is a brief blood transfusion from someone with type O negative blood in order to prevent the alien bug from taking control. This also means the infested person needs multiple transfusions to continuously put down the alien bug.

Meanwhile here in "Hungerford", all it takes is a quick spray to the face with an aerosol deodorant, and not only is the zombie person incapacitated, but the alien bug actually leaves their body and tries to escape.

How they somehow forgot this fact between the two films is one that I feel could ruin the sequel for people who view "Hungerford" first. Since I saw the sequel first, this ruined "Hungerford" for me.

Beyond the links to its sequel, this film was just boring throughout. Nothing particularly new or interesting was done with its zombies or infestation methods. Events are painfully predictable, and none of the characters are strong or charismatic enough to carry the film. "The Darkest Dawn" made the wise decision to continue the story of "Hungerford" while framing it from the point of view of a new and unrelated character who is much more interesting and charismatic. Unfortunately, this film as it stands on its own, is just bad.

Cheesy At Times But Still A Lot Of Fun

[HorrorOverEverything · 7/10 · 28 April 2015]

So I'll be the first to say that most found footage movies are stinkers. It has become the genre that film makers go to when they don't have a very original idea and want to make a film for a low amount of money. I tend to avoid them but "Hungerford" caught my eye with it's trailer and I am very glad I checked it out.

The story starts off like most found footage flicks, we are introduced to our main characters and are given an explanation as to why they are filming everything, in this case it is a class project. I quickly noticed a difference in the characters in this flick as opposed to most films in this genre, they actually seemed like real people. It wasn't your usual group of beautiful people with wooden personalities, this actually felt like a real group of friends and it made me actually care about what happened to them.

The action gets going very fast, and once it does the movie does not let up until the credits start rolling. Unlike a lot of other found footage films, a good chunk of this film takes place during the day which means they do not hold back on showing you everything that is going on. There are not a lot of camera cutaways or shaky running when things get going, you get a front seat view to all the bloody action. The effects were actually pretty well done considering the movies budget.

The film does have its flaws as well. There were some moments where the dialogue was very cheesy and felt unrealistic. Plus I felt like the last 1/4th of the movie felt a little rushed.

Overall though this was a pretty fun movie. It never dragged or felt dull and it didn't feel like another generic mediocre found footage cash in. I recommend giving it a go.

7/10

Why tho?

[stuartmconde · 1/10 · 31 October 2019]

This was literally one of the worst movies I've ever seen..and I've seen some proper clangers in my time. It's on Netflix of course ...the modern day equivalent of the dvd bargain bin.

It's not even good in a "so bad it's good" kind of way. It's just chronic.

Laughable acting, embarrassing effects and cringe worthy writing. See me in my office!

An absolute stinker

[mrphilharrington · 11 January 2019]

Awful acting apart from the girl who plays Phil. Terrible direction, unnatural angles, awkward blocking of scenes. Bad idea, bad plot, endless poor choices. The lead might be the most irritating performance I've ever seen.

A limited budget that was more entetaining than most of the big budget blockbusters of 2014

[harveysart · 8/10 · 10 May 2015]

I was lucky enough to catch this movie at the Sci Fi London Film Festival 2014, not only was it one of the best movies at the festival it was one of the best movies I saw that year.

It is impressive what the Director Drew Casson did on such a limited budget and this film is a credit to all the hard work he and his team put into the project. Though it was limited in budget every penny was stretched to make a glorious and entertaining result.

The plot itself is entertaining as is a nice blend of science fiction and Horror.

It is a film that is well worth watching and I certainly look forward to a sequel.

Very Self Assured Considering The Lack Of Budget

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 28 April 2015]

A bunch of housemates live in the English town of Hungerford . One day a strange electrical storm strikes the town . The housemates think nothing of it but a couple of days later the inhabitants start acting strangely

More found footage a subgenre this reviewer got bored with a long time ago . That said director Drew Casson and his co-writer Jess Cleverly have make a film that while it initially didn't appeal to me didn't have me scrambling for the off button when I got in to it . Indeed for a film that has no budget , an amateur cast and whose cinematography is confined to one single camera being waved about HUNGERFORD has much more entertainment value that it has any right to which says a lot about it . Much of the impact is down to the story starting quickly with an effective image of a storm of sorts which considering the non existent budget is very well done . The storm is an unexplained transportation method for alien parasites that take over their human hosts similar to THE PUPPET MASTERS then it's zombie horror all the way . Yeah it's far from original but what it does it does very well . Some things don't entirely work like deodorant being used as a bug spray and Casson and co miss a trick in not using radio reports for exposition in order to wrench up tension as more and more people succumb to the aliens . Since HUNGERFORD is so self assured I often found myself wondering if the production might have been better off doing a more conventional film and abandoning the found footage concept all together

Remember to bring a quilt and a pillow...

[paul_haakonsen · 2/10 · 8 July 2018]

I stumbled upon "Hungerford" on Netflix. I had never heard about the movie prior to finding it here, and nor did I know what it was about. I found it under the horror section, and thus I decided to give it a chance.

I shouldn't have.

Boy, this was a massive waste of time and effort. I managed to endure a staggering 45 minutes of the ordeal that is "Hungerford" before I gave up from several reasons.

First of all, the movie was just blatantly and downright boring. There was nothing interesting in it for me, so my interest was quickly waning.

Secondly, it is a handheld video camera recorded movie, one of those "documentary"-like movies. You know, the type of movie you could make yourself with your own digital video camera. That particular type of movie never appealed to me, because I want to watch a movie with a proper production value and a certain level of quality to it, not something I myself could go and make with my friends.

Thirdly, the storyline was just boring and uneventful, and it didn't really help that the characters were essentially one and the same. You didn't know where one character ended and the other began. Which meant that you don't care about them in any way.

And what was up with the oversized bugs that was controlling people? Interesting? Well, perhaps. I will give them that much. But was it something that helped to improve on the movie? Hardly so.

I have no intention of returning to watch the rest of "Hungerford" because it just had nothing to offer me in any way.

I watched so you don't have to

[chfellingham · 2/10 · 28 March 2020]

Wow, truly dreadful. The script, the acting, the story. I'm not sure why I watched it all the way through.

The story, as far as I can tell, is about cockroaches from space that take over your mind making you very angry. Yes, it really is.

Four drunken teenagers consisting of a long haired loser, bad boy on probation, an autistic and a girl, live in a flat and seem to spend their time drinking. Long haired loser is doing a BTEC project (?) meaning that everything is filmed. A storm happens over the 'old factory' and people start to act strangely. A man bangs his head on a window, a girl vomits blood and the postman tries to kill you. However, thank god for spray deodorant, as this seems to kill them and release the cockroach. Except, not always.

This is so bad, the story hasn't been thought out, there are conflicting ideas and the script is dreadful. I don't think the actors in this will get much work, so wooden.

A Mixed Bag

[pioneer64 · 5/10 · 29 June 2020]

It's really pretty good considering it's a small independent film, but there are some obvious issues that come from being a small independent film. More to the point, the film starts to get lazy towards the end, asking for far too much latitude and willing suspension of disbelief.

I wish I could give minus stars.

[FilmsOrFilm · 1/10 · 13 September 2018]

If you are reading this and you haven't yet watched the film, please, for the love of god, don't. It's mind boggling how this is on Netflix and the fact that £20,000 was spent making this garbage is hilarious. What was it even spent on? The awful and out of place CGI effects? The private Hungerford militia that show up at the end of the film that consists of 6 people? People are praising this film for being so good on such a low budget, but I'm thinking the exact opposite! The lighting is horrendous and a lot of the film is shot in broad daylight despite thing being a 'horror'. Maybe next time you could spend the budget on a time machine so I can un-watch this mess. This also somehow won two awards, so god knows how bad the runners were for this to win.

Save yourself the bother and avoid

[chao_dai · 2/10 · 15 August 2015]

A very amateur film.

The main characters are very unattractive and actually quite odd-looking.

I found the main character very off-putting. He has a very strange appearance which I found somewhat unsettling (and not in a good way). He's also overly dramatic at times, a particular example is when four of the characters are sitting on a kitchen floor and the main character is supposedly consoling a girl who has lost her father and does it so dramatically that it actually appears as though he attacks her.

At one point I genuinely wondered if this was some kind of project done by a high school drama club, utilizing the found-footage genre to cover for their lack of budget.

Very confusing and just gave me a feeling of revulsion.

Just awful. I made an imdb account just for this.

[jimwheeler-96553 · 2/10 · 31 May 2020]

Bad writing, bad overacting, bad effects. My goodness. I saw someone gave it an 8, I think they probably thought it was an 8/100. Watching this dumpster fire made me dumber, I can see how someone could have made that mistake. I don't know what Netflix paid to acquire the rights to this national travesty, it was too much. It was better than anything I could have tried though, so they've got that going for them.

Edit: I just watched Battle for Los Angeles which was impressively worse. I'm revising my rating to two stars.

Imagine Shaun of the Dead on a budget, without the laughs.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 7/10 · 29 March 2019]

Obviously this was made on a budget, but who cares, as this is actually a hugely enjoyable movie. I'm sure people will instantly point out its flaws, and yes it does have an abundance, but in contrast, it's fast paced, has a few jumpy moments, and boasts a pretty original beat story. Why on Earth are the goof people of Hungerford so angry, and what's making them behave so erratically? Watch the film and you'll find out. Some interesting characters, and pretty good acting.

Don't go in expecting a blockbuster, expect a B movie, that looks a bit clunky, and delivers a few decent scares along the way. 7/10

GCSE Film making, grade B

[andy_hbs · 1/10 · 23 December 2019]

For something thrown together by a handful of media students for their first year entry, meh, 6/10.

For a film I watched on Netflix, an absolute joke.

Hungerford ... Hungry bugs

[pradvertisingco · 8/10 · 29 April 2015]

Phillipa gone missing in that part. I think there probably be the second part soon. Well the story is nice. Very nice camera effects and visual effects though the budget was low. sometimes its creepy, sometimes it shows flaws because of low budget. But overall the movie is awesome if you like that shaky camera movies. It could be better if they had a big budget. The acting was reliable and good at points. Drew looks good, he'll get good movies after that movie. just nice and entertaining movie with a bit short in time. It could be 15 -20 minutes more lengthy, but good movie. waiting for it's second part.Direction was also good. The new idea of Deodorant to kill bugs was stupid but LOL .

Hungerford(2014)

[robfollower · 7/10 · 27 September 2020]

Part "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" mixed with "The Crazies" and "Night of the Living Dead," "Hungerford" is also "found footage."

The lives of a group of teenagers are turned upside down when their town is taken over by sinister forces.

Director: Drew Casson Writers: Drew Casson (created by), Jess Cleverly (created by) (as Jesse Cleverly) Stars: Georgia Bradley, Sam Carter, Drew Casson

"Hungerford" creator Drew Casson was only 19-years-old at the time of filming shouldn't be a factor in influencing an evaluation of his film's execution or its entertainment value. Except the fact of the matter is it actually makes his movie come off as that much more impressive when you consider how much he accomplished at such an early stage in his career.Part "Cloverfield" meets "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" mixed with "The Crazies" and "Night of the Living Dead," "Hungerford" is also "found footage."

The main trio has terrific chemistry as friends. Usually, a young filmmaker gathers available pals for a project like this and it reads exactly as they played it: a group of friends futzing around for fun over a few weekends. Here, the young cast puts genuine commitment into their roles and that is what sells the coming of age aspect of "Hungerford" as an engaging human drama.

At its heart, "Hungerford" is an ambitious project that looks incredibly good for its scope. The story's framing is not as buttoned up as it could be, but for a sci-fi/horror spectacle on a shoestring, the execution is impressive.

More hand held madness

[iamtherobotman · 2/10 · 20 October 2019]

This is not a great film. Let me start with that. It makes very little sense in all honesty. So it's meant to be a student filming his week and starts with him waking up after a night on the tiles. He states what he's doing ( a college project) and tells us he thought 'today' was as good a day as any to start recording... So to get this straight, before he crashed the previous night, he looked out his camera and laid it on the table next to the couch he's sleeping on? Not only that but has the wherewithal to immediately grab the camera and start recording directly after wakening up after a night out on the lash...Cool! Anyway he records nothing in essence until that is the Postman burst in and start attacking everyone in the house, he's eventually subdued and indeed killed when sprayed in the face with deodorant ( of all things ). Our students then fly into a panic about the Police finding out WHILE RECORDING THE WHOLE THING!!! Allow that to sink in for a moment... That's right. They're worried people/Police will find out they killed a man by spraying him with deodorant but record the whole thing... Would the killing not be the time to stop recording?? Maybe delete the incriminating footage?? I love/hate these films as they make absolutely no logical sense whatsoever. Time and again we see our hero( in whichever film ) flee from a mad axeman or a hoard of Zombies all the time filming it. Certainly were I ever to be in a situation where I was in real danger of losing my life, I really don't think i'd care much about my camera, i'd just get the flock outta there as swiftly as my wee legs could carry me. I mean at one point they even film themselves supplying weed to the local Constabulary. There is just so much about this film which is just nonsensical. I haven't finished the film yet, but I have to see just how bad the ending is...

You know what it is

[yuzuruizawa · 2/10 · 15 April 2018]

Zombie movie+ found footage = you know what you get, you have seen it before many times

As expected when I saw the first zombie, no budget, amateur acting, shaky cam, fighting, copying better movies, filming when should be helping or in life or death situations, you have seen it all before.

But I wasn´t exxpecting some 10 reviews here, I think we are grading on a curve nowadays