Hangman

hangman is a scared little bitch who prey on the innocent

Good movie!

source: Hangman

Hangman (2015): A serial killer who invades homes, hangs and stabs his victims, we see this in an opening sequence. Then a family goes on holidays, leave their car parked at the airport. The killer breaks in, accesses their home address from the GPS, burgles their house and sets up cameras, moves into the attic. Mind games follow as he gaslights the family, moving things, turning them against each other. There is gore and violence in the film but the psychological horror is much more effective. Written and Directed by Adam Mason. 6/10.

Was drawn into seeing 'Hangman', with a cool poster/cover, a promising trailer, an intriguing premise and as someone with a general appreciation for the genre it fits under. That it was low-budget, which from frequent personal experience is rarely a good sign due to that there are so many poor ones out there, made me though apprehensive. It is sadly however yet another film seen recently, hence some reiteration because the exact same strengths and flaws present in those films are here, that to me was incredibly disappointing considering its potential which it doesn't do anywhere near enough with. 'Hangman' is really quite awful, with so many huge flaws and doesn't do enough with its potential, which was hardly small. There is very little to recommend in 'Hangman'. Lets start with the positives. Kate Ashfield is decent and the only person in the cast who tries or is halfway credible. 'Hangman' also starts off reasonably promisingly, it does intrigue and it does have creepiness. Going on to the negatives, the story does feel over-stretched and some of it comes over as vague and under-explained in the last third where the film especially became duller, more predictable, more senseless and less unsettled and never gaining momentum. All the characters are too sketchy and with nowhere near enough to make one want to endear to them. Their annoying and illogical decision making and behaviours frustrates. The chemistry is bland and unfocused. Making the film feel bland and forgettable with not enough heart put into it. The sound quality is obvious and utilised cheaply (being too loud in the build ups and people's reactions) and all of the acting is lacking severely on the whole excepting Ashfield who shares no chemistry with a rather wooden Jeremy Sisto. Dialogue can be stilted and rambling while the pace and film drags on forever after such an intriguing start and doesn't recover. The ending has a little intensity but felt very unresolved and unfinished. Found too many of the supposedly shocking moments not surprising or scary and the supposedly creepy atmosphere dreary, due to the excessive obviousness, a lot of dumb and vague moments and explanations and the lack of tension and suspense. Thrills are none, thanks to stodginess and excessive over-familiarity, and found myself never invested in the drama, which tended to be overacted and statically directed. A lot of 'Hangman' has underdeveloped plot elements and often nonsensical and confusing character motivations when the characters weren't used randomly with no point to them, while too many of the things to make you shocked are far from creative or unsettling. The villain is neither scary or interesting, no development and too derivative, while everything is unimaginative and are more odd than scary, completely failing to show any sense of dread. The thriller elements fail to thrill and are very predictable and the drama is overwrought. Some badly sagging momentum too and a lot of weirdness. The direction is leaden, got the sense their heart was not in it, and the music is ill-fitting. 'Hangman' is very amateurish visually, making one feel nauseous and actually did feel a headache coming on. Altogether, very, very bad. 2/10 Bethany Cox

HANGMAN is a low budget found footage horror inspired by the PARANORMAL ACTIVITY series. The most impressive thing about it is that it masquerades, successfully, as an American film, even though according to the IMDb it was made in the UK. The story sees a vacationing family returning home, only to discover that a burglar has trashed the place. Somehow, they don't realise that he's set up covert cameras throughout the property, so that he can spy and stalk them constantly. This film's pretty much indifferent, lacking the kind of tension I'd expect from the premise despite the director's best efforts, and with boring performances from the cast members. There's the occasional shock scene which works well but overall this is both routine and lacklustre.

I kept checking how long id been watching the film for and thinking surely something is going to happen soon! It doesnt, its pointless, and boring. It could have been good if more had been done with it, if it had more of a background story.

A movie about a deranged psycho hiding in the family loft - sounds familiar. Just watch Crawlspace (1986), or even the 2013 remake, instead. This employs found footage style camera work, so zero points for originality. The constant zooming in and out, plus camera shakiness, meant that I was in danger of getting a headache. Apart from the brief but violent opening scene nothing horrific actually happens until over an hour. Perhaps the intention was to build tension slowly but fails miserably as this film is just boring as hell. Nothing to recommend here.

You don't really need to know how or why this guy came to be in the house. Actually why is pretty obvious - he's a psycho driven by control, power and sexual perversion. You can accept what he does,safe in the knowledge he will pay for his crimes in the most terrible way by the end of the film. That should be the point of a film like this, the realisation of the family of what has actually been going on, the sadistic crimes that can only be cancelled out by an even more sadistic end for the perpetrator. The film might have been acceptable if that had happened. But no, there is no point in the suffering and ultimate death of the happy parents, the boyfriend, the handyman, the murderer survives to kill again. Who on earth writes an end like that, what sort of a viewer enjoys the fact he gets away with it and indeed is seen to be lining up another set of victims? Perhaps someone who looks forward to making or watching a sequel, perhaps with the same disappointing ending, maybe a real-life serial killer who thinks that the guy is a hero? Like other recent films with similar endings, what would have been a sensible and satisfying end for most of us is sacrificed in favour of a 'clever' ending that leaves you feeling you've just been cheated out of a couple of hours of your life.

Zero originality whatsoever is to be found here. Follows the mold of every single found footage stalker movie made just a little more oversimplified is all. With a 30 minute plot (40 at the most) stretched out to 81 minutes and most scenes mainly being day to day scenes of the family doing regular things at home this movie is far more boring than it is disturbing. The acting is... okay I guess, the family does act kind of like a family does. The stalker we only see from time to time and he's weird I guess, which makes sense. I just looked at the credits and saw that Amy Smart was in it which surprised me, she was in it in retrospect but you couldn't really see it was here because she was only in one scene sitting by a table with the "hidden camera" being very far away. So yeah if she is what makes you want to watch this don't bother. But then there is no real reason to bother watching this period.