User reviews

Honestly, the movie wasn't bad. I didn't mind it. But the acting took me out of it. The acting was just bad, but it was really the only bad part of the movie. The rest wasn't terrible. I'd recommend this to anyone who doesn't mind amateurish acting.

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.

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.

I've never seen such boring actors in my life. Expressionless to the nth degree. Whether it's a calm scene, dramatic scene, arguing, doesn't matter they just deliver their monotone lines like robots. The girl cuts herself and barely reacts to it. The guy loses track of her one night and his words are what you say in that situation but his Expression was non existent. Just do yourself a favor and skip this or take it to an acting class and use it as a what not to do teaching tool.

Bad story, bad acting, bad script, bad movie, bad decision to watch this. DON'T WATCH THIS!

A decent first hour spoiled by an absolute sh@&show of a third act that features actors that totally forget how to act and hilarious special effects. It generates laughs while trying for chills.

The only actor with a picture next to their bio is "Mr Cates," a minor character. It's almost as though they didn't use real actors. In fact, it kinda feels like a homemade video skit.

At first, I forgave it's obvious no-budget predicament as well as some glaring plot holes. It was a half decent set up for a little indie project and I was rooting for it!

But audience goodwill couldn't save it.

Pretty bad ... even with the above mentioned filters.

I never leave reviews but i wasted time watching this horribly acted 'movie'. It was bad. The acting for both main characters was cringey awful. The plot could have been good but it turned into a poopfest of epic proportions.

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.

This was a terrible movie about aliens planting their wormy life forms inside humans, creating a 'cohabitation'. It was really bad. There is a small percentage of the population that will believe any conspiracy put up on the internet! But you can trust the government! LOL 2/10.

Don't expect anything fancy, this is a low budget film. But the story is very interesting to consider in light of the year it was released and the funny coincidences to what was actually taking place in the world during the time. All a bit creepy, really - who is the writer/director and why did he make this movie? So many comments judge the movie as though it's supposed to compare to high budget Hollywood films, but if that's what you expect out of every movie, you'll never see one like this - and the lack of general appreciation just shows how shallow and unimaginative most people are. I highly recommend this movie, especially to "conspiracy theorists"!

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'.

Coming out in 2021 and being set in 2019, the comparisons with COVID are inevitable and pretty obvious in many places. At first it seems prescient how many aspects of the pandemic were reflected here, including the constant insistence by the only sane man that "This is not over" while everyone else around him is just obnoxiously blowing him off and trying to go back to normal, including a very over the top performance by the actor portrating the head of the CDC, in one interview basically suggesting this LV pandemic is going to be the end of "western civilization" then in the very next interview almost giddily blowing off any concerns about it, saying a vaccine isn't needed, and giving the most ridiculously cartoonishly evil grin while saying the best course of action against the virus is to intentionally expose yourself to it.

But the further you get into this movie, the more this starts to seem like a case of accidentally getting stuff right while in the course of telling a pretty dumb story that is let down not just by its obviously bad acting, but by it's immature writing.

The story is of a couple who are recording themselves (or rather just the wife) due to her sleepwalking. Almost immediately it's incredibly suspicious that it's not just normal sleepwalking and the husband slowly starts to dig deeper into it.

I was initially impressed with what I thought was basically an Invasion of the Body Snatchers-type story with a COVID setup, marred only by the obviously bad acting all around. If this was the first time for everyone involved, this would've been fairly simple to overlook.

But the further along it goes, the more it starts to show that this isn't a case of just bad acting, but really bad writing. A whole lot of the dialogue and exposition is written the way a child would write about the real world, without a full understanding of how things work, or the complexities of people's emotions and how they react to traumatic events or confrontations. It does a huge disservice to what could have been a promising enough story.

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.

LOVED IT!

Lots of "Easter eggs": 1. Same low cost production values (REAL low cost) as "Night of the Living Dead". Single house in empty surroundings. NO sets!

2. Cast and extras in regular daytime clothes. No fancy costumes. (Same deal.) 3. Extras: nearby neighbors? (" Get to be in a movie!"). Off scale. (Same deal?) 4. SMALL unknown cast. (Saves money.) 5. Stock mosquito and spaceship pix. (Round, of course.) Most scenes at night.

6. Tiny band of resistant survivors. (Spin off?) 7. Token Black guy the only one with any brains.

8. Early Star Trek episode. That time it was flowers that got everybody stoned.

9. Compromised followers simply VANISH w/o explanation at film end. Saves $ on writer's plot resolution, production values, special effects, etc. "Just pull the plug!" Update additions with closing credits: voter fraud, trust our government, CDC reliable, etc.

Overall, a fun film! Loved it! Gives me courage to make a film on MY cellphone! Move over, "Plan 9"!

Thanks again!

Jim Bergen Philadelphia

PS - Extras for special subscribers:

"DOD lists Raid as WMD. Proctor and Gamble indicted."

"Fly swatters listed as lethal weapons. Prohibited In Starbucks."

"Worm costume sales skyrocket at Walmart."

Just some suggestions...

Is it a "B" movie? Sure

Is it a low budget movie? Sure.

Is it a pretty decent movie for a low budget B movie? Yes.

It's easy to pull it apart, tell you what's wrong with it, or why and how it can be better. But I can't creat a movie, so I don't throw stones at someone else's effort. It is not high-end, big budget, special effects galore and stunning. But it is entertaining enough, and it's better than most of us could offer.

It's not something I would re-watch, but it's not something you need to run screaming from your television from either. Who knows, it could be the first effort of someone it ten years time who the" movie icon of the day; everyone starts somewhere, right?