The Thing Inside Us

This is clearly a movie made by someone learning the film industry - as it is not polished like what you would see in a movie theater on the big screen.

However, I could have gotten over the B-filmmaking if the acting and the storyline was better. The 2 main characters were decent, but the supporting characters were really rough in terms of acting abilities. You were very aware that the acting was forced and not natural.

This can be seen in some of the dialog, as the conversations don't feel like anything people would really say in real life - it was very clear that these conversations were used as a means to inform the viewer of specific information. This can be seen in the first interaction with the landlord (whose acting was god awful - sorry). Just really unnatural dialog in several places.

But like I said, this is a good first effort for someone likely going through or just out of film school. However, it's not scary in the least. At most I would describe it as a "thriller" or "suspense." Don't go into this movie expecting to be scared.

Only partially found footage, it goes off the rails in terms of quality when it stops being found footage, I think this was a mistake. The acting was only okay to begin with, and when things should be ramped up emotionally, the poor acting is only exposed more. However, the acting is still better than "Witchtrap", which is my bar for bad acting. I found it interesting and suspenseful and I wanted to know how it would end, but due to the amateurish third act, there is no way I can recommend this to most people. Yes, obviously inspired by paranormal activity, but not a rip-off in my opinion, it goes in quite a different direction.

In fact, it is very obviously a cautionary tale, and it becomes pretty obvious the creators at least have some idea about the sham that the last 2yrs were in regards to the virus that starts with a C and ends with a 9. Nice to see filmmakers who actually know what is going on, so this film becomes a bit heavy handed sadly, but I see where they were trying to go and the allegory, I just don't think they had the skills to really make it what it should have been, and because of this, I can only give a soft recommendation to those who enjoy no-budget films that try to do something different and can overlook the some of the poor acting and bad lighting in the last 3rd.

The concept was OK. The movie was... so so. It had some decent suspense. I knew the ending was gonna be disappointing. I didn't think I'd create an imdb account because of it though.

They could have made this, atleast semi decent as a wrap up but, it felt like they were running tight on budget and wanted to finish the film. I felt good with the Blair witch project feel was good. Until you conceptualize what was going on and hoping for it to be wrapped up well.

In all seriousness, it was decent for what it was. The acting felt like it was being recorded on home cameras from people not trying to record themselves. The suspense was there. Just don't expect a big payoff or that big payoff when things conclude. If you feel like you have a theory where it's going, dumb it down some and you might be close.

A good example of a well-intentioned and relatively talented crew working with no budget to make something just outside of that budget.

Interesting core concept that could have been fleshed out better had the writers/producers consulted more. It's like a vegetable soup broth without the vegetables. Much more could have been done with the ideas presented, but it looks like the creative didn't seek others' opinions.

Acting was okay between the two primary characters, but the other actors were clearly not well directed. In fact, the last 20-30 minutes look like a home movie (and not in the intended sense - it's like they shot in sequence and ran out of time/interest/money).

Cinematography was inconsistent. Was this a 'found footage' film? Hard to tell due to the weirdly fortunate and story-breaking insert shots. Also, please diffuse your Fresnels, or you'll end up with hot spots on white walls.

Film students on limited budgets: maybe check it out Film buffs: avoid Film weirdos who like bad movies: sure, but it's not Toxie-good.

This movie is surprisingly well done, and while it's obvious that this is an inexperienced film maker, it's a pretty good entry into the found footage genre. Honestly, this is exactly the same quality of film we saw from so called 'classics' from the past and if you just want something that's pop-corn watchable or you're feeling like binging some goofy horror/sci-fi then this is definitely a movie for you.

The main actors are pretty convincing, but much of the supporting acting is a bit rough. The cinematography isn't awful but honestly, I think the director would have been better served using actual security camera footage for a lot of it -- the difference between quality would have been a lot more convincing. Obviously, the special effects, when they appear, are pretty rough, but they're not awful. I think the director put a lot of heart and soul into making this and it shows, even if it's a low budget COVID movie.

Unlike a lot of found footage movies, this one doesn't leave a lot of loose strings, which is nice, and it has an ending that also leaves room for a potential sequel should the director ever decide to expand the 'universe'.