Hangar 10 (2014) User Reviews

Nothing special.

[chrismackey1972 · 4/10 · 11 November 2014]

Three people - two guys, one girl - go into a forest looking for gold. On their adventure, they film their quest. Yes, this is a found-footage film, which is filmed through camcorders. Ugh! Annoying. Anyway, as they get deeper into the forest, they happen upon an area where they find several odd floating objects in the clouds which can mean only one thing - someone severed the ropes that keep the airheaded politicians grounded. Just kidding. There are UFOs. However, they seem to be UFOs of the bad kind, because they knock what looks like an apache helicopter out of the sky.

I gave this a 4-star rating. Some of the things going against this were the grainy video. I'm not a fan of camcorders or cell phone cameras taking the place of real studio cameras. Also, I HATE when at the very beginning of the movie, they say something like "this footage was found, but nobody in the video was ever heard from again." That's code for, they're all dead, so don't get attached to any of them.

The things going in favor of the movie were the actors. They did a very good job. I think we'll see Abbie Salt again for sure. They all expressed what looked like real fear. I can't say the setting's original. As I said earlier, it takes place in the forest. I'm not against movies taking place in the forest, because the forest is like the ocean - a world unto itself. Still, it's a bit of a cliché setting for these types of movies.

There is nudity in the movie, but virtually none. Towards the end, there's a scene of a nude woman lying on a table with some...things growing out of her body. You see one of her breasts, but due to the graininess of the video, it's hard to see much. I can't say I'd recommend the movie, because I'm not the biggest fan of found-footage films, especially when they - once again - basically say they all die at the beginning of the movie. Ugh! I saw this once. I wouldn't watch it again. There were many parts of this were I was simply bored because of the continuous walking through the forest and the base with not much dialogue.

A movie that is lost in the forest

[timothygartin · 3/10 · 31 July 2020]

This movie had some things going for it. I think the actors are strong. The special effects, especially at the end, are really good. Also, I like alien found footage movies. They are a little more unique than the supernatural found footage.

The problem is the writing. The dialogue is simplistic. As a result, it is hard to figure out what is going on for most of the second and third acts. This movie has a major problem with character motivation as well. The question of why the characters are there, why they are filming, and why they don't give up just haunt the viewer throughout.

Too little, too late

[kosmasp · 3/10 · 21 June 2020]

Ufo incident they say ... well another title of the movie. Rendlesham or something. I didn't even research if this is based even losely/remotely on an actual event. Then again, since we now have been told that there have been some unidentified flying objects ... I mean who am I to discredit this, right? Still does not make this movie any good.

Nor the idea of going Found Footage. It is not just too late when it comes to the even itself (why would anyone go there now), but also the "genre" this pics to die on ... and dying it does (no pun inteneded). Not probing to find puns ... they're just there ...

Snoooozzzzeeee

[pbosleyg5 · 2/10 · 11 November 2014]

I am typically a fan of found footage movies, especially if they are well done. This one was not.

I was very excited to watch Hangar 10, as I enjoy a good UFO/alien movie. What a disappointment!

I spent most of this movie wondering what the hell was going on. The reason why they were in the woods and their reasoning for doing things was not made very clear. The accents were thick which did not help matters at all.

Overall, the movie was slow and boring, and two of the actors spent half the movie yelling "Gus!!!" which got pretty old.

Unfortunately, all Hangar 10 did for me was waste two hours of my life that I can never get back.

People walk through forest for 90 minutes

[wormsoftheerth · 2/10 · 13 November 2014]

Honestly there really isn't much to say about this movie. I read other reviews which said it was slow, boring, and cliché, but as a big fan of alien movies I was hoping that despite being highly derivative it may hold some merit or entertainment value. Well I was wrong on both counts. Hangar 10 is indeed an incredibly boring, generic, and completely pointless addition to the found footage genre. The vast, vast majority of the movie is simply shots of 3 people walking through the forest filled with insignificant banter. I held out with the hope that SOMETHING of interest would happen, but ultimately gave up after an hour and fast forwarded the remainder of the movie. Things seem to pick up slightly towards the end, I mean they at least get out of the forest, but certainly nothing that comes close to justifying the large waste of time to get to that point. Hangar 10 is another victim of the sin committed by way too many found footage films (why these films do this is beyond me) where anytime something vaguely interesting starts to happen and the watcher expects the movie to pick up, the scene almost instantaneously (and jarringly with no transition whatsoever) ends and cuts to another bland scene of them standing around doing nothing while all the tension has dissipated. That's all I can really say about this one - there isn't enough content to analyze or bother bringing up. Extremely boring, pointless found footage movie that brings nothing new to the table. Avoid.

Not worth the Dollar rack at Walmart

[don-44-221669 · 1/10 · 17 November 2014]

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...

Blair Witch Alien Style

[monkeygirlsmama · 1/10 · 13 November 2014]

This movie was terrible. I love a good alien flick, and this new "found footage" styling has its merits, but only when done well. This movie was neither entertaining or exciting. There were a couple of almost moments; however, it was mostly just a lot of waiting around for something to happen. There's a plot, but it's weak. There's an underlying element of alien spookiness, but it never really gets played out well. From the home camera footage to the lack of any real story within the plot to the overly anti-climatic ending, I basically kept thinking to myself it was like watching the travesty of the Blair Witch Project all over again. Except only with the hint of alien flair.

Incredibly annoying.

[ian-864 · 1/10 · 31 May 2015]

I rented this on Amazon, where it is listed under the alternative title of "The Rendlesham UFO Incident". The synopsis, as presented on Amazon's Fire TV, is rather limited and so I took this to be a new Rendlesham documentary. The movie is listed as having the release date of "2015" to add to the confusion.

Of course, I found out within a couple of minutes that this drivel could not be further from a documentary and is the kind of found footage nonsense that gives serious UFO research a bad name. Do yourself a favour and poke yourself in the face with sharp needles for a couple of hours - this will be a more rewarding experience.

Close to being half-decent

[LiamBlackburn · 7/10 · 12 November 2014]

The movie starts to gather steam a ways in, in the forest. You are getting scared at that point. You don't quite know what to expect. Then, the suspense just tails off after that, and nothing really exciting happens. They finally find the hangar 18, it reveals dead bodies and a bulletin board with post it notes. Apparently there is an alien virus on the loose. There also seems to be a gathering of multiple alien ships around the hangar. None of this really is explained or happens in a cohesive manner. I was gong to rate this highly based on the middle point where it started to get exciting. Instead I am giving it a 7 based on a horror rating. It was well done technically but the story sucked. It could have been really good as it had good effects too.

Close encounters of the worse kind, Avoid this film at all costs.

[David_Habert · 2/10 · 11 November 2014]

What do you get when you cross The Blair Witch Project with one of the most famous UFO sightings in history. Answer this pile of rubbish, which I nickname Close encounters of the worse kind.

Having studied the paranormal and in particular UFO cases. I would have thought that this film would give respect to one of the most famous and heavily documented UFO cases in history. Namely The Rendlesham Forest Incident. (I know this movie was supposed to be a work of fiction and not to be taken seriously) Trust me, it didn't.

The CGI effects for the UFOs especially at the end of the film would give the ones on YouTube an inferiority complex, if you take a look at the trailer, you will understand what I mean and then take a look at the ones on YouTube.

The only thing which this film got right was the tape recording that Colonel Charles Halt (the base commander) was doing at the time of the encounter. But to add human and animal mutilations in this film, is taking things a bit far. I would say that the cast did the best they could for this low budget movie and at least did their research on this case, which is the main reason why I was kind enough not to give it a one star rating.

But if your are serious about the study of UFOs, don't even waste your time watching this, like me you may feel very insulted and disgusted as to how this movie reflects The Rendlesham Forest Incident.

Blair Witch meets Close Encounters

[mmcguchan-1 · 8/10 · 26 October 2014]

Saw the premiere of this at the Colchester Film Festival. In many ways it's exactly what you'd expect from a found footage take on the Rendlesham UFO mythology. For me the twist was the artistic vision that the director Dan Simpson brought to the table, which was there from the start I guess but becomes increasingly prominent during the film as it heads towards its unsettling denouement. The set-up is good, conventional as it lays out the 'rules' of the found footage, who's got which camera etc, but the characters are well acted and you get drawn in to their dramatic set up. I don't want to spoil what follows, I will say that Blair Witch is a clear template as things become increasingly stressful for the protagonists - until the final act - about which I will say no more. The camera is shaky to start but settles down, the editing is GREAT and really keeps the pace up, and the director takes every opportunity he can to tell the story visually, resulting in some genuinely haunting, mesmeric imagery. A fine example of independent British film-making at its best.

Three people bickering, and no plot. That's all you get here.

[fedor8 · 12 December 2019]

The stereotypes about found-in-sewage films having a meager plot and too many wobbly scenes are confirmed here, the film's big flaw. I can even get past the wobbliness, but the story makes absolutely no sense at all.

Is that area controlled by the army or the aliens? It can't be aliens working with the army (as is perhaps suggested by the last scenes) because one helicopter is downed. When Abbie Salt (looking very purrty) and the skinny guy enter the secret base how come there is nobody there except a few infected bodies? Where's the personnel, be it alien or human? Everything would indicate that the base is run by humans, but since when are secret gov't bases run without humans?

Regardless how you twist or bend the very thin facts, nothing adds up even half-way logically. It's all just one big nonsensical hide-and-seek-o-rama - a typical enough ploy in alien-abduction flicks - but this time taken to the extreme. To the extent where the viewer is literally as confused as the protagonists aimlessly wondering around.

It's a pity the plot is so dumb and random, because the mood isn't bad, especially at the base. It doesn't speak well for the writer(?) if he couldn't even manage to devise a thin, basic plot to accompany the action - which mostly consists of three people aimlessly wondering through the forest arguing. There is a limit to how much mystery upon mystery upon mystery you can layer atop itself until the entire thing crumbles like a deck of cards, like the joke that it is. A plot can be forgiven for certain types of flaws and for a certain quantity of nonsense, but not for being totally incoherent. All we know is that an infection is being tested on humans and animals. Who is doing it, for what reason, what's the government's role, what's the aliens' role, what's the purpose, why is the base abandoned yet has fresh guinea-pigs - none of those things are remotely answered.

Besides, how come none of the three people were shocked or at least worried about seeing so many animals dead on a field, before deciding to trespass on a piece of property nearby? Is it possible that the writer(?) believes that this is how average people react to such a discovery?

Ignore the hate. People are idiots.

[hoytyhoyty · 7/10 · 13 August 2016]

Ignore the hate. People are just idiots and expect the wrong things.

The low scores must have come from low brows all wanting massive FX budgets and big casts and big sets. This is a low budget story.

HANGAR 10 is a 'found footage' movie, yet another one. But it doesn't suck for several reasons:

The cast are good.

The tension builds and builds.

There are some jump scares and genuinely unsettling moments.

The camera footage isn't just random "OOh! Something is happening so we must point out the ground!" rubbish. It actually manages to stay on-point.

The later scenes get weirder and weirder.

The ending is just explosive.

Criticisms?

* Some of the CG is a bit weak in the body of the film, but it gets better as the film goes, and the stuff at the climax is astounding.

* The film goes a bit slow towards the end, and they start repeating themselves a bit, but it doesn't last long and suddenly the end-game story is upon you. It's not a boring film. Unless you are a moron with the attention span of a sparrow.

Normally I'm not a huge fan of these films, but they've been creeping up and up on me as I find better and better ones. This is a good one.

Haters gonna be morons, y'know?

-

--

---

Just Terrible

[smike8403 · 1/10 · 16 November 2014]

This has to be the worst found footage film of all time. It's boring. It's slow. It's all over the place. Terrible camera work. Cheap Effects. Bad Acting.

This is an insult to the Rendlesham Forest Incident.

UFO stuff should be scary and have an atmosphere to them, this Hangar 10 garbage has none, not one sign of it.

I have to say again the camera work is terrible, its so shaky, they should not of let the clueless actors hold the camera. What you see on screen is the result of people that have no idea of how to handle a camera.

Don't bother with this so called film, it sucks and more so.

Mike.

Do not watch this film.

[brenmains · 1/10 · 28 February 2015]

This may just be, hands down, the worst film I have ever seen. There is nothing redeeming about anything in this project, and I don't say this often, but I honestly feel robbed of an hour and a half of my life.

The plot could be summed up in 3 sentences on its Wikipedia page, if anybody could be bothered making one, the dialogue is bland and the camera work is a shoddy mess. A small voice inside of me cheered when there was a change of shot because hey, at least something, even in the most minor of ways, happened.

I honestly feel bad for the people involved in this film. I wouldn't be surprised if the actors involved asked for their names to be taken out of the credits due to hoping nobody ever finds out they were in it, similar to how you wouldn't want anybody finding your baby photos. The acting was okay-ish but I say that because there's honestly no way to screw up characters they decided to write into the script. I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't acting, just reciting lines and being themselves. There was that part where one guy has to act weird by laughing and throwing a stick but even then it's not clear if that was intentional or not. I'd like to say that there are worse things to do for money, but honestly none of them come to mind right now. I know that sounds bold, but if you'd seen the film, you know you'd agree with me.

I don't like people who criticize films in the cinema, especially at the debut, however if somebody stood up as the credits began and shouted "What the f--k was that sh-t?" and walked out, I would have envied that person for the rest of my life.

I really do try to take whatever lesson I can from a movie, regardless of whether I liked it or not, so I can take some sort of knowledge from it. But after the non-existent plot, the boring whale sounds and "jump scares" (and by jump scares, I mean you could tell what they were meant to be, but they just failed at it) and to top it off, anti-climax after anti-climax, this film may just be the worst film in existence. I actually felt angry when it finished. I felt like I had the chance to do so many other things with my life in the time I saw that movie, and I saw it around 11pm during a f-----g blackout.

Please, if you're considering watching this movie, watch something else.

Anything else. It doesn't matter what. There is nothing more I would like to get across in this review is that under no circumstances, should anybody watch this film.

I am giving this film 1 star because I cannot give it a 0.

Awful...

[paul_haakonsen · 2/10 · 27 December 2015]

Prepare yourself for about an hour and a half of awful camera-work that is all over the place and just downright annoying. And prepare yourself for an hour and a half of virtually nothing happening aside from three people pretending to be lost in the Woods and then finding an old abandoned hangar.

There are no words that will do justice to the extent of which I loathe this genre of movies; the mockumentary and found footage genre. If you have seen one of them then you have essentially seen all.

I will say that the lights in the sky, as shown in "Hangar 10", was quite good and interesting, and that was actually the best part of the entire movie.

With just three people on the cast list, there was a tremendous performance pressure resting on their shoulders. I will say that the actors and actress did manage to do good enough jobs with the limitations of their limited script.

Once the movie actually manages to shamble to an ending, you just sit there left behind with a foul taste in your mouth, robbed of 83 minutes of living and you just go mmm-hmmmm.

"Hangar 10" is not worth wasting your time or money on. I did it so you don't have to. If you enjoy Sci-Fi or UFO/extraterrestrial lore, stay well clear of this movie.

DO YOU HAVE ANY CAR INSURANCE?

[nogodnomasters · 2/10 · 29 November 2018]

Three young adults with a camera and metal detectors go to Rendlesham Forest to look for old Roman coins and aliens. The film plays a garbled audio from the 1980 UFO incident. Our threesome get their car stolen and are trespassing, stuck in the woods with weird things happening that look like a spot light moving around. At one point one of the guys (see DVD cover) holds up the metal detector during a lightning storm. It includes a lot of night time filming, herky-jerky motion, ground cam, people screaming in the dark, and playing "what is that" game.

The movie would have been decent if the camera shooting wasn't done so bad. We know the film isn't real, so please stop tossing the camera all around.

I found the film to be a waste of time because of lousy camera shooting.

Guide: F-bomb. No sex or nudity.

Pathetic.. simple as that.

[adammarks11 · 1/10 · 23 November 2014]

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.

More Painful to Watch Than Observing a Doctor Botch A Vasectomy

[poiuytblivet · 1/10 · 15 September 2015]

Another failed attempt to film in the style of the Blair Witch Project. The difference in this movie is that it takes place in England. Three young people decide to tackle a conspiracy known as 'Hanger 10', I'm guessing like the United States' Area 51. The movie was painfully slow, much like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

The camera angles were worse than your average movie filmed in this manner. There seemed to be about two or three cameras, yet in some scenes it seems that there is a random third camera, (basically a camera not belonging to the main characters') almost as if the director was cheating for a better camera shot. If its going to try to be a videotape type film, it should stick with that.

In the end there seemed to be no resolution, finishing anticlimactic, not really explaining some of the inconsistencies they encountered. After certain scenes you are left wondering what a particular situation was about, wondering how the characters survived.

Overall I think it could have been a lot better. I would not be watching it a second time. In fact, I'm in the process of building a time machine so I can stop myself from seeing this.

Dire.

[docjohnnie · 11 August 2020]

Best left undiscovered. In terms of restaurants, that one you would never, ever admit going to.

Effective within its limits

[jrarichards · 7/10 · 5 November 2016]

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.

One of the worst movies ever made

[rich52 · 1/10 · 2 November 2015]

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.

Doesn't deserve the hate...

[sodead-159-737169 · 9/10 · 14 November 2014]

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.

Interesting and underrated

[stephanbuurma-09515 · 7/10 · 16 March 2024]

I feel this movie is rather underrated.

It seems the couple do some treasure seeking using detectors as we find out that the lad has received some soft of certificate and that the next thing on their mind is to search around in Rendlesham forest to do some searching for lost treasure.

They invite a friend to document it all on his camera.

On their way the make some stops like some sort of roadtrip and find there is some unusual military activity in the area.

Quickly enough they are confronted by unexplained phenomena in the forest and the influence of otherworldly stuff is noticeable, for example on their gps locator.

And it gets worse from there on.

The dialogue is a little cheesy at times but the overall graphics aren't that bad at all.

Turn off your brain and you might find this flick enjoyable, at least I did.

What..! I was duped.

[jonnytheshirt · 3/10 · 26 November 2014]

I had read somewhere Hangar 10 had something to do with Severance (the excellent Brit comedy/horror) therefore I was expecting the same director, or writer perhaps, I think I was wrong. First off the acting isn't too bad and the story line is not entirely off point. Too much time most certainly is spent in the woods however and a meandering atmosphere soon sets in. It's obvious the found footage style is here to stay however a real drawback in this movie was the extent of it and the implementation - I really had enough of it. To the point it detracted from the movie unfortunately, and this movie does gain momentum towards the end so that was quite a shame. You'd have to be a real hardcore Sci-Fi fan and not mind headache inducing camera work to enjoy, which is a shame as I think the ingredients were there for an enjoyable movie but did not make it for me. As a comparison Probability of girlfriend enjoying District 9- 100% Hangar 10- 0%.