Night of the Hunted

The whole movie is really good considering the story. However, Hollywood could not refrain from the government narrative. They portrayed anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists as the culprits, which is a pathetic approach to dismiss anyone with a different perspective on the mass delusions promoted by governments. I felt a sense of nausea after watching this propaganda garbage. Nonetheless, the story takes you to an unknown world where you must question if you are a good person and confront all your past sins. I'll give it a second star just for this aspect. I cannot comprehend why the producers are endorsing this sickening narrative.

I am a big fan isolation horror and really enjoy movies that take place in a single location. That is if the writing is good and the payoff is worth it. That was not the case with Night of the Hunted. A nihilistic, predictable and ultimately bland thriller set inside a gas station.

Without going into too much detail, the plot revolves around Alice, a selfish but resourceful pharma executive who gets attacked by a sniper while getting gas in the middle of the night.

What follows is a run of the mill cat and mouse thriller without any real original ideas. Alice is unlikable at best, though she does use some very clever ways of avoiding the shooter.

When you have an isolation horror movie like this, the script has to be really good and that is just not the case here. The movie never decides on what it wants to say. It's filled with philosophic monologues about trauma, personal loss, conspiracies and it just goes on and on and on. It's as if the writers couldn't decide which social issue they wanted to tackle, so they just tried to tackle all of them with vague conversations that go nowhere.

It's competently shot though generally uninteresting in it's cinematography. The acting is okay, with Camille Rowe giving a passable performance. The shooter was pretty bad all around with a monotone voice throughout that wears thin pretty quickly. It's not Keifer Sutherland, thats for sure.

One thing I did like about this movie was the practical effects. There didn't seem to be much CGI blood or gore, which is rare these days.

Again, another gas station movie. Again, another shooter movie. Again, at night. Again, nobody comes to the rescue. Again, same lame conversations. Again, the movie starts interesting but in 10 minutes everything starts to fell apart. Again, you know what is going to happen because you have watched this movie several other times. Again, this movie isn't realistic because people here act like robots. Again, the movie ends as many others. Honestly, I don't understand why independent movies are not risky anymore. This one is an example.

So, consequently you can skip this movie again, and follow with your life. Again. Happy Halloween.

What is it these days with making characters so unlikable, and so pathetically entitled, particularly in horror/thrillers where you are supposed to want them to survive!?

It fails in the basic task of creating a 'good' character you root for against a 'bad' character that you want to see fail and/or die.

The 'good' character here is actually written as a unpleasant, rude, obnoxious, man-hating woman who we discover is cheating on her supportive (apparently 'too nice') husband, who wants kids and thinks she's seeing a fertility doctor, with a co-worker who she appears to hold in equal contempt. She mentions on multiple occasions her disdain for men, and that is apparently her reason for not wanting kids, but lying to her husband that she does while cheating on him with another man - makes sense huh? She has no redeeming characteristics despite attempts to give her some redeeming situations, and at no point did I actually want her to survive.

Their idea for the 'bad' character was a feeling-hard-done-by right-wing anti-vaxxer conspiracy theorist who decides to kill innocent people and reinforce the stereotypes he apparently despises. It's almost comical how little effort was made, even if you find those kind of people ridiculous and dislikable. He isn't at all threatening or scary, just a childish idiot who got off Twitter and decided to kill people in a gas station in the middle of the night.

Some failed attempts are made to try to link the antagonist to the protagonist with her working for a pharmaceutical company and him hating "big pharma" companies and their employees, but it's all rather nonsensical.

Despite this, after switching off my brain, I weirdly found myself enjoying the overall premise of the film, and it could have been much better with more imaginative script-writers, but I don't think you'll find it particularly suspenseful or engaging so unless you can enjoy a film even when it's ridiculous you'll probably be more likely to dislike this as much as you do the characters within it.

The premise looked promising, but it quickly went downhill once the opening credits ended. When the film starts off with a woman texting her hubby about fertility clinics while her lover jumps in the shower, I'm struggling to understand how I'm supposed to root for her (not saying protags are saints, but at least build up to her flaws instead of smacking us upside the head). And speaking of smacking us, once the crazed sniper started ranting about every trendy social issue without taking a breath, I turned it off. I like scripts that are thought provoking, witty, deep, etc. This sounded written by a 20 year old undergrad at Berkeley who probably relies on his trust fund to pay for his "film aspirations." I could see this as a 30 minute episode (which is about as far as I got), otherwise it just drags and sucks my soul dry. Not to mention the plot holes and ridiculous suspension of disbelief required. I didn't care about any of the characters and certainly was in no mood to listen to a cheesy actor tick off every hot topic via walkie talkie. This was a wasted opportunity so I chose not to waste my time. Based on the reviews, I certainly didn't miss anything.