Just so...so bad

Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

The Three Acts: The initial tableaux: Boyfriend Gus, girlfriend Sally, and Sally's old friend Jake set out with metal detectors and the like to discover some missing gold in the Suffolk area in England. They stop at a pub which Gus had used as a base when he found a Roman coin sometime back. Fliers at the pub note UFO activity. Right. Just before they start the actual search, Jake mentions that a military helicopter has been circling the area near them for hours.They start in nearby accessible plowed fields. They find nothing, so the meandering continues.Delineation of conflicts: Gus is a jerk; Sally and Jake put up with him. Jake is a jerk; Gus and Sally put up with him. They do much of the search in the dark, and have some navigation difficulties in the woods (Rendlesham Forest). They are in a spot of danger from hostile forces that discover them.Resolution: Will the aliens get them?

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.

I have watched Hangar 10 and I think it sucks big time. To me it feels like a 10 minute student movie made in 48 hours and then dragged out for 83 minutes. 83 minutes of nothingness. No scares or anything close. The editing is haphazard resulting in loss of interest, the camera moves all over the place making it hard to see what's going on, but on a plus point the acting is not too bad but nothing more than that.This must be a film students attempt at a horror movie. But the movie is the horror.Don't bother paying $ to see it, watch it on youtube if your bored and need to learn how not to make a UFO movie.SIM.

OK, first off, this is a found-footage film. Don't like them? Then don't watch the film. A lot of criticism here simply because people just don't like/don't seem to understand the genre. You wouldn't criticise a rock song just because you don't like or understand rock music, would you? Same thing here, basically. It's been edited to look like it's unedited, "found footage". That's the genre. Yes, the camera-work is shaky. Yes, it is meant to look amateurish. That's the point. You're meant to think it wasn't made by a professional film crew but is just unedited footage shot by the characters in the film (who aren't meant to be a professional film crew) as the events occurred. It would be a bit weird if they'd just happened to shoot a perfectly orchestrated, steadily-filmed, scene-by-scene mainstream Hollywood movie completely by accident while they are under threat, when that wasn't even their intention in the first place.Secondly, the comparisons to Blair Witch. Well, it's a found-footage film set in a forest, so of course it's going to have similarities. It's set in a forest because the original Rendlesham UFO Incident took place in Rendlesham Forest...where the film is actually shot. Should it have been filmed a few miles further down the road at the pizza place, perhaps!? Maybe you'd have preferred that. And if it hadn't been a found-footage film, would you have hated it because it was a normal horror film set in a forest, just like the many hundreds of horror films already set in or around forests!? Too "derivative" still? Do you just have a problem with forests? Or horror films? Perhaps just steer clear of watching films based around either of those two "problem areas" then, in future.This is an excellent film that builds on the suspense from the first frame to the last. It switches effortlessly between the fear of the situation these people find themselves in to conveying the sense of wonder and awe (even joy) at the spectacle before them and all the unsolved mysteries that are out there in the world. It does this while staying true to the concept its based on...which does mean you'll be in for a bumpy ride (though the camera- work does settle down further into the film). If you miss it, you'll be missing out. Or alternatively, just go and sit in your room and listen to a type of music you hate, really loudly, then complain about it on the internet for hours.