Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

Good start, but then it gets ruined

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

Plugging Bow Tech a presenter and camera man go to the wilderness to film a hunting documentary about a famous buck called 'Movie Star' but encounter the local legend. Not to be confused with The Hunted (2003) what starts out as a hunting documentary turns into a paranormal investigation horror. Off the bat and clear from the outset is that actor Josh Stewart (who also wrote and directs) is outstanding as hunting documentary maker Jake. Although some may be put off by the pro-hunting angle (although morally it could be seen as a cautionary tale about why you shouldn't hunt), this aside, it's one of the better found footage films out there and best viewed in the dead of night with the volume up high. The direction by Stewart is spot on and you get a good idea of the logistics and surrounding area of the setting. The camera work is crisp in keeping with the low budget but quality shoot of the pilot episode that they are filming. The images are not blurred or have too much out of focus shaky cam work, this works different to other features of the same genre, in as much as everything Slough dark at times is clear, but nothing is given away. Thankfully there's no collage kids, Stewart's script is very believable as it is more about the documentary about the buck rather than the encounters. The hunting lodge supporting cast lend credence to the film.There's added music which is reminiscent of the ghost hunting type programmes that have sprouted up over the years, which suggests their footage has been edited for broadcast. This debatably maybe an error but it can be left at the door. As well as the night on location shoot, there's creepy photos and sounds but it's the actors which sell this spin on the usual Blair Witch template along with the sound design, footstep, wails and shrieks of a disembodied woman voice which is much of the backbone hook throughout. What it lacks in visual representation of the antagonist it makes up for with Josh's excellent convincing performance as they come to terms that something isn't right in woods, stream and surrounding area.The Hunted is one of the better examples of how a tired sub-genre still has some life in it.

This movie can be summed up with the above line which Josh Stewart says himself in the movie - something to the extent of "I can't believe how slow it is". How meta.Anyway, I had high expectations from Arkin of The Collector, especially considering how this is billed as "from the producers of the collection/collector". I quite liked both of those, despite their high level of implausibility, however, Arkin's directorial debut could not be less like either of those films. Basically The Hunted has two guys that go out into the woods to film a hunting documentary and...that's it. That's seriously 99% of the movie, the other 1% being comprised of random shrieking in the woods (sadly, the characters interact with the shrieking thing for a whopping 1-2 minutes max out). Nothing substantial ever happens, and any moments of suspense (where the ominous music starts to play...even though it's supposed to be found footage...) end all too quickly without any actual punch. There are SO MANY spots where they could have utilized this suspense brilliantly, but they drop the ball every time. I guess this is like Paranormal Activity in the woods except that even less happens, if that is actually possible - perhaps more like it wants to be Blair Witch, except 14 years too late. It's a real shame too because everything about this movie had potential. The film/camera work/"found footage" style and sound are good; the acting, while mediocre at best, was passable for this type of movie; and the setting & concept were solid.There really isn't much else to say because NOTHING happens. Avoid unless you like really slow, soporific movies that show and explain nothing, or half baked hunting documentaries.

Josh Stewart tries his hand at directing, and what better type of film than yet another found footage horror film, when you have little to no budget - but is this really Josh Stewart's film? Or did Forrest Patterson beat him to the punch with his very own found footage horror film - 'Crybaby Bridge?' In order to find the answer, I'd have to put a little more effort into the issue, but since neither film will be remembered five minutes after you see the credits, who really gives a damn? However, both plots are nearly identical, minus one hunter (that should hold up in court.) Josh Stewart is the bigger name, though, so I'm sure no one will ever notice, even if he did rip off the material.Random Ramblings of a Madman: I'm a sucker for found footage horror films, for some odd reason. 'The Hunted' isn't a total disaster, although, I'm sure some people will be unsatisfied with the unseen presence throughout the film. You can look at it two different ways - 1. Josh Stewart ran out of budget, or 2. Josh Stewart has a different view on what a ghost really should look like (If anything at all.) I'm going with the latter here. I'll chalk this one up as another watchable, badly made found footage flick.

I just finished watching this, and it was actually pretty good. Yeah, it's a found footage movie, and a lot of people do a pathetic job on these types of films, plus the market tends to be a bit over-saturated with them. Josh Stewart (The Walking Dead webisodes) wrote, directed and starred in this. Generally when somebody slaps their name all over a low-budget movie, it comes out more as a school project than anything worth watching. Not this time.It's about two guys - Jake and Stevie - who go into an unexplored area of a forest to film them hunting a big buck by the name of Movie Star. They spend three days and nights in the forest that is owned by a guy named Tony, who also owns the hunting lodge where they stay. From the first night, they hear a horrific scream that sounds like a woman, but they put it off to being a bobcat. A girl who works at the hunting lodge tells Stevie a ghost story of the area. A few things happen in the woods before that which makes Stevie take the situation very seriously, and he no longer believes it's a bobcat that is screaming in the pitch of night.Jake, wanting to get enough footage for a 22-minute show, does not want to believe any sort of ghost is haunting the area, so he resists Stevie's opinion, until it becomes apparent that it's true. I can't tell anymore without giving away spoilers.There are no special effects in this film, nor are there any pathetic looking monsters. It was made in a serious, realistic type manner, and I have to applaud the filmmakers for not getting wrapped up in trying to insert special effects into the story when they were not needed.I wasn't expecting much from this at all, but it was well worth a viewing, possibly more. With October right around the corner, I'm in need of well-done horror movies. This is certainly in that category. I know a lot of you are sick of found footage films, especially the ones done poorly and filmed only through camcorders. This is not like that. A little bit of it is filmed via camcorder, but most of it is filmed like a regular movie.I gave this a 7-star rating because the acting, writing, and directing were very good. The setting is not original, because it does take place in the forest, like most found footage films. However, the writer cared enough about the audience's view of the characters that he only had two people go into the woods, unlike many other found footage films where they send in 6 or more characters with no development. I felt these two characters were good friends, and...Oops! Almost gave away a spoiler. lol. Anyway, watch it yourself and see. I recommend it.