Year 10

There is no dialog at all. Apparently people forgot to talk after 10 years. The plot holes and all the things the director missed to many to count. Would be surprised if he got to work again. Very lazily laid out and took short cuts because they had no clue on what they were doing. I would expect something like this to be written by some college kids looking to get into the business with only a $1000 budget. Not sure what else i can write in this review. I have put more thought into the review than the director put into writing this script. The overall concept wasn't bad. Just didn't have enough brain power to put in speaking rolls.

Think 1984 "Threads" (YES People would lose their language, Long term PTSD will do that) Also this reminded me of."The Survivalist" 2016, which is excellent if you haven't seen it. Others have said "The Road" and its true it is like that movie a little bit.

I also wondered why they were not hunting dogs, there sure were a lot of dogs for eating The acting in Year 10 is excellent , the production is low tech , and its low budget film making at its finest. Its also well directed.

Give this director $5million and he could really produce.

Its gritty, suspenseful and not cheesy at all I really liked it.

The story of this post-apocalyptic thriller is rather one-dimensional: a young guy follows the path of the (cannibalistic!) thugs that killed his father, there's a lot of running and chasing and harsh fighting, before we get to a satisfying closure. But it's nonetheless pretty involving, the pace is for most of the time high, with a fair amount of suspense and action, and you more and more root for the main character, hoping to see him get awarded for all his tireless efforts.

It's obviously a low-budget production: the settings hardly vary, there are just of few actors, and no special effects or CGI (as far as I could see), and there was certainly no need for a dialogues coach, because there aren't any dialogues. I have no idea why not, it impressed me as an arty director's whim, for why would all surviving mankind within 10 years after the apocalypse loose their ability to speak?! But to be honest, after some 20 minutes you get used to it and don't miss it anymore.

The young hero is played by Toby Goodger. Since the director is Ben Goodger, they are probably brothers, or at least family. According to IMDb Ben Goodger made a short movie in 2010, called "Coming of Age", with as synopsis: "A young boy battles with new responsibilities in a brutal post-apocalyptic future". So apparently the premise of this full length feature already originated 15 years ago. And guess who the main actor was in 2010: young Toby Goodger! And I have to say, that the mature Toby Goodger in 2024 looks awesome, he has a great screen presence, and he did an absolutely fine job in his difficult and very physical role.

Wow, a dystopian thriller that actually missed presenting the obvious and best thriller fight sequence, and after setting it up so well, but then nothing. It could have been great, really great, but no. Nothing.

Oh well, mustn't grumble, it's not like this film was actually making that much of an effort to be convincing. The protagonist was presented as a clumsy idiot, stumbling around and generally messing up. Go figure.

I can't say I've ever seen a film with plot holes in it so large and so obvious. Quite bizarre. Who on earth thought this up and who directed it?

The best element was the soundtrack.

No pun intended - not sure if this sprang from the pandemic. Actually probably many things - and while the (dystopian) future is a quiet place ... it is not like the one you may think of.

People can be mean and crazy ... and there are quite a few examples in this one. Not sure what to think of the ending - or where it ends up. But the road to get there is quite nice - well anything but. Still .. good to watch or interesting ... if you suspend your disbelief and give this some slack ... decent acting and cinematography ... the locations also work like a treat ... just don't (b)eat it.