Hunters (2016)
6/10
With only a few predictable quirks, "Hunters" is an average sci-fi at best
12 April 2016
In order to mix mystery and action, the show chooses a more militaristic approach to the usual premise. It doesn't provide much in terms of characters, although there might be slight potential here. For action itself, the camera is unsteady and the dark tone of cinematography doesn't help much. There's not much here that bring hook and creativity beyond the casual draw.

Flynn (Nathan Phillips) is an agent with difficult situation, wife missing and awkward step-daughter. The strange relationship with his wife's daughter can be appealing in mildly dysfunctional kind of way, but the acting doesn't create any spark. Flynn himself is the typical agent, while this secret organization lacks any appealing identity.

The pilot misses its chance for impressive introduction, something similar to MiB first initiation that really sets the tone. While it may be done to keep the mysticism, a series with organization at the core needs to establish itself well, yet Flynn is merely unceremoniously thrown in. The antagonist creature has a good design to it, the make-up does present something humanoid.

Graphic is occasionally too dark, which can be distracting. It tries to bring more authentic military look and the shaky visual might diminish the effort. The narrative doesn't pique much interest either, it might utilize the thriller aspect, yet even this is rather questionable as none of the characters can effectively draw audience to emotionally invest in the series.

"Hunters" manages to cover the basic sci-fi, but there's little drive to push the series further.
13 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed