Doomtomylo
a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.
Brennan Camacho
Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.
Haven Kaycee
It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film
James
To get things straight from the outset, "Hangar 10" (aka "The Rendlesham Forest UFO Incident") is NOT a cheap and useless Turkey, filled with daft dialogue and illogical sequences of events, notwithstanding its presence among the cheaper supermarket movies on DVD.Rather, this is a film that takes itself pretty seriously and tries hard - a fact that is made all the clearer by bonus materials featuring British director-writer Daniel Simpson. The piece took two years to make in the course of 7 visits to the real locations in Suffolk (Forest and disused MoD/USAF bases likewise). Interestingly, efforts to make all seem gloomy and inhospitable were apparently thwarted somewhat by the film crew's rather regular encounters with bright, sunny weather! But those who doubt (as I did) that rural East Anglia can really play host to the kind of deserted desolation shown in the film may take heart from the real-life fact that Rendlesham Forest covers 1500 ha - that's quite a large area (certainly by British standards), and easily enough space to get lost in. While Rendlesham village has some 3000 people, the area south of it that includes the Forest and base is on a kind of peninsula between river estuaries with just a few (mostly tiny) villages, plus a lot of forest and heath.To get something else straight, the "Incident" here is not the world-famous December 1980 one (which may or may not have been anything unusual), but "a fictional" one involving 3 young adults out (semi-legally) with metal detectors in 2013. "Fictional" it may be, but also very similar to the "real" 1980 descriptions from US military personnel, in that lights and noises and assumed alien presences are involved.It's then a reasonable enough topic for a sci-fi film, and it's also a reasonable enough candidate for the kind of "hand-held/found footage" work we (and our balance systems and stomachs) have tried to get accustomed to thanks to offerings like "Cloverfield". Indeed, like the latter film (and indeed the trendsetting "Blair Witch Project"), "Hangar 10" has as its raison d'etre a faith that audiences will like to experience, to fear, and to fail to fully understand, events of a magnitude and nature well beyond human ken.Though rather little actually happens here, and though we have seen far worse things in many other films, this work DOES achieve its goal of disorientation, and a surprisingly high level of scariness for that reason. It also pursues a plot line that becomes clear enough as the film proceeds (clearer still if the alternative ending is consulted). If that story looks implausible or ludicrous (as well it might, obviously) that is more a reflection of a refusal to accept sci fi premises on the part of the viewer than it is any real failing on the makers' part.That leaves the one remaining question of whether one (and more specifically a sci-fi-appreciating one) would actually want to bother.I did, and on the whole I don't regret it. This film has more integrity and cohesion than a great many other filmed pieces of science fiction, including many that had hugely greater budgets at their disposal.
rich52
This movie makes the worst movie you have ever seen a potential Oscar nominee. Here is yet another installment of a complete movie done with hand-held video cameras. The characters of the girl and her friend with the video camera are alright, her boyfriend is a total jerk. Ninety percent of the movie is spent wandering through the woods and the ending is terrible. There is no real story-line, the dialogue is terrible, the acting is marginal (to the negative side), and it is boring. I will admit that the special effects in the last 5 minutes of the film are pretty good, but that is the only good thing to say about this abomination. If you enjoy wasting your time, this is the movie for you.
Adam Marks
Hangar 10, the most poorly edited film I have seen in years. How the hell has this film been made and released. The cinematography is so bad as is the cheap sound design... cheap post production rubbish. As others have said on IMDb this is a terrible excuse of a film. Nothing feels or looks real even the acting. What an outrageous attempt into the sci-fi/horror world. This film is appalling in every way. No Horror, No thrills, Not scares = Pathetic.It's getting poor reviews all over the internet and I can see why. Never again will I watch, buy or even recommend such a poorly made film. IMDb should introduce minus Stars... this would get -9.
don-44-221669
There is an easy way to sum up this movie. Say you have a budget of $2,000US and you live near a field. All you need to do is buy a $50 camera at Walmart, ask your friends, "Hey want to be in a Movie and be Famous?" and Adobe CS5.For the movie run around in the fields and record yourselves screaming for one hour. Then put the video on you laptop and edit.WAALAA! Instant sensation! Make a commercial of the movie and only show the audience getting scared. Then make a scary cover for you DVD.Let the sheep buy it! On a lighter note, this is a terrible terrible movie. Please don't torture your eyes and waste your time watching it. Go outside for an hour instead and thank God your alive...
