Invasive

A Tubi Original that has nothing original in it cause it's not realistic, it's not frightening, it's not scary, has just mild mumbo elements of horror and drama in it. The parting of the boy and girl wasn't logical, could have benefited from more people in that house, at least two big dogs in it and flesh torn apart.

Instead of those, we have unrealistic cat and mouse chases and the wrong persons died. The tech was nice though.

• Screenplay/storyline/plots: 4.5
• Production value/impact: 4.5
• Development: 6
• Realism: 4
• Entertainment: 4
• Acting: 5.5
• Filming/photography/cinematography: 7.5
• VFX: 7
• Music/score/sound: 5
• Depth: 4.5
• Logic: 3
• Flow: 5.5
• Psychological/thriller/horror/drama: 4.5
• Ending: 4.

"Invasive" emerges as a poignant cinematic exploration, deftly weaving themes of class disparity and moral ambiguity into a suspenseful narrative. Set within the opulent confines of a wealthy pathologist's mansion, the film takes a refreshingly audacious approach to the traditional thriller while tackling weighty social issues. With an evocative plot, a commendable production team, and an atmospheric score, it captivates the audience not merely through its narrative devices but through its incisive commentary on the complex moral landscape of contemporary society.

At the heart of "Invasive" is the story of 18-year-old Kay, who, in an audacious leap towards autonomy, decides to squat in a luxury mansion owned by an affluent medical scientist. The central character's motivations are multifaceted; although she possesses a familial anchor back home in her estranged father, her need for escape propels her into this world of entitlement and affluence. This intriguing dynamic sets the stage for a riveting exploration of desperation and privilege, cleverly staged against the backdrop of an unyielding cat-and-mouse chase that ensues when the billionaire scientist unexpectedly returns prematurely.

The screenplay, crafted with astute precision by writer-director Jem Garrard, employs rich thematic contrasts to delve deeper into social hierarchies. The duality of good and evil is manifested through the behaviors of the characters: the wealth-driven malevolence of the mansion's husband juxtaposed against the desperate yet relatable instinct for survival exhibited by the protagonist. The writing shines in its thoughtful examination of power dynamics; the film oscillates between sympathy for the gritty reality of those on the fringes of society and abhorred fascination with the moral decay that often plagues the unfettered affluent. It is this sophisticated narrative design that allows its audience to engage with the film on multiple layers.

While the cast comprises relatively novice actors, their performances are commendable, conveying authenticity amidst their respective roles. The chemistry between the lead characters is palpable, grounding the film in a realism that starkly contrasts with the surreal opulence of their surroundings. The male antagonist, though presenting as the weaker performer, embodies an eccentric billionaire in a manner that skirts the edge of caricature, enhancing the film's psychological tension through his bizarre demeanor. The casting choices epitomize the director's keen understanding of his actors' strengths, as he navigates the murky waters of genre filmmaking and finds a fitting place for their eclectic talents. It is a representation of a director who understands where artistry emerges from discomfort, creating a compelling mischief that lingers beyond the screen.

Visually, the cinematography excels in crafting a visual narrative that complements the film's thematic concerns. Close-up shots imbue moments of tension with a harrowing intimacy, inviting the audience into the claustrophobic world of the characters. Such techniques ingeniously tether us to the protagonist's plight, evoking an unsettling sensation of being complicit in her transgressions. The artful framing is coupled with a deliberate pacing that accentuates the inherent fears of violation and surveillance-an apt reflection of the protagonist's experience as she navigates a space that is both luxurious and hostile. The visual language is persuasive, enunciating the film's overall sense of dread and entrapment.

A noteworthy aspect of "Invasive" is its aural landscape; the soundtrack brilliantly interlaces pulsating techno beats with eclectic soundscapes that heighten the tension of chase sequences while embodying the extravagant essence of the mansion. The juxtaposition of thrilling rhythms against the hollow echoes of desolation underscores the core themes of human experience and societal division. Such clever auditory manipulation serves to evoke not only the external chaos of the narrative but also the internal turmoil of its characters, creating a haunting resonance that sticks with the viewer long after the credits roll.

Finally, the production quality of "Invasive" deserves commendation. The singular setting evinces meticulous design, cleverly repurposed to reflect the multifaceted nature of the plot. By utilizing the mansion as a character in itself, the film merges its aesthetic splendor with underlying dread, reinforcing its message of how appearances can mask dark realities. The coherence and cohesion brought forth by the production team transform what could have been a standard thriller into a resonant exploration of class conflict and personal strife.

Overall, "Invasive" captivates with its blend of rich thematic exploration, solid performances, and immersive technical execution. Earning a commendable 79% (4/5), it stands out not just as a genre piece but as an incisive commentary on the intricacies of human behavior within the constructs of wealth and morality. The film leaves a resonant mark, challenging viewers to reckon with the uncomfortable truths of social stratification while offering an exhilarating cinematic experience that beckons repeat viewings. In its sumptuous yet sinister aesthetic, "Invasive" is a reminder that sometimes, the most opulent facades conceal the darkest secrets.

I stumbled across this film and decided to give it a chance. At first, it does appear low budget and the first "test", which we would come to learn about later felt a little cheesy but passable. As the film carries on, we meet three lead characters, one of which is rich but has an odd, sort of dry humor/douche like dismissive nature to him. Strange but observant as you watch him. Then we meet the two other leads, one of which we learn some backstory on (female) and the other (male) we only learn little things about as it's revealed.

Now, watching this film you wouldn't really know what the plot is about but we see these characters live their best life by taking advantage of others with reason. And this is where things start to unfold because of what is first seen followed by what is eventually found. At this point, this is where the film feels more solid. The rich, odd man oddly resembles actor Jeremy Sisto and Christian Bale, and there's moments where you get a little bit of "American Psycho" vibes in the disturbing portrayal of himself.

When the secrets are revealed behind what's really happening in this house, the drama unfolds between multiple characters. The film holds your attention pretty decently to its end. I rate this one a 7/10.

IMDB should allow users to rate a movie 0.

Painful to watch seriously. Horrible acting, especially by the Kayleigh character. I saw this movie only based on the positive reviews for this movie on IMDB but sampling bias is to blame I guess.

There is no story to be honest. You could shoot this movie in 30 minutes and still it would be the same. The antagonist and his monologues are so irritating. The director wanted to make it seem profound but it was lame. He keeps on saying about people wasting his time and he keeps wasting his. After a point, it became predictable and I blurted out laughing.

This is the type of B-grade (or is it C-grade or even D-grade) movie which requires you to leave your brain at home. The first 5-10 minutes seemed promising and OMG did the movie go downhill after that or what. You cannot relate to any of the characters. Repeat any of the characters. Be it the two couples or the policeman or the experimental subjects. Predictable is another adjective which aptly describes the movie. I could predict the twists and turns (which seemed to impress some of the other reviewers) in the movie a mile away. Yawn !!

Sometimes you get the idea of a movie and do not make it. This movie belongs to the above category.

One of the things I love about Tubi being free is that I love bad movies. I go online to search for stuff I think is going to be bad and see if it is as bad as it looks or sounds. And sometimes I find a gem. Other times... I find something as unpleasant as "Invasive." It is not the type of bad that I am looking for.

I am surprised a lot of other reviewers on this site enjoyed the film, because I couldn't stand this movie. Through a combination of bad dialogue and poor acting choices, the characters in this film are unbearable. Special mention goes to our villain Pierce, played by Francis Chouler. Pierce is a tech bro, and he is written in a way that he is supposed to be hated. However, with his pretentious and nonsencial dialogue and Chouler's strange acting, Pierce comes across as a carciature of what the writer thinks a "detached" mad scientist is meant to be. Obviously, when Pierce says something that is supposed to be "profound," it is supposed to be arrogant and pretentious.

Unfortunately, for a film like this to succeed, your villain needs a certain charisma to them. Since this is a character you will be seeing throughout the film, he at the very least needs to be entertaining, even if he is irredeemable. And Pierce is not that. He is obnoxious. He is the kind of villain you want dead at the halfway point at the latest. Pierce bogs down the entire film, it is difficult for me to appreciate the good parts of this film that other reviewers seem to like.