Uncaged

I liked this movie for the most part; The acting was better than most B-movies. The opening scene was really bad and should have been left on the cutting room floor. I noticed a lot of editing scenes in just for filler. I would have enjoyed the movie if the werewolf looked better. This werewolf looked worse than MTV's 'Teen Wolf'. I mean look back 40 years and you'll see scarier creatures than this thing.

Are American teenagers really hooked on sex? So bored with films depicting teenagers so hungry for sex. Around 15 minutes or so of teens talking about it which I found to be a waste of time and footage.

Annoying characters which made you cringe though the main protagonist was the best of all actors. He played his character well.

Certain scenes were just laughable and I am not talking about it being comedic. It was just plain stupidity and no thought into what the scenes were trying to represent.

Don't expect anything 1st rate as the whole film was done on a budget. As for originality, well, there were a few scenes which I thought were well done but it wasn't enough to justify the film as being good, scary or entertaining.

Uncaged is the story of a college boy, forced to lock himself in a cage to protect the world from the beast within. The story follows three friends as they plunge into one wild weekend in the country. It has the classic supernatural metamorphosis element. The protagonist figures out how to use his dark power for good: to rescue a battered wife. The cast gave memorable performances as oddballs characters. It has high production value. The special effects are good. The plot moves with funny jokes. The comic book style animation was a nice touch. It's Teen Wolf meets an R. Kelly video. If you like werewolf pictures, you will like Uncaged.

There is a lot to like about this movie; it uses its limited budget well, the dialogue is great, the acting is solid and it has a unique story. All of these things add up to a decent horror comedy that fans of low budget horror will enjoy.

That being said it is also important to know not to expect some crazy, blood-soaked monster mash as things don't really get going in that department until near the end and are pretty tame, most likely due to budget restrictions. Instead the film is a more personal story, and a good one, it's just that with the title and the poster you might get the wrong idea and be expecting something you aren't going to get (a bit like Gareth Edwards' Monsters). It also has a few problems with pacing and logic, i.e. events occurring without any build up and then forgotten about until convenient, but nothing too off-putting.

This movie demands a lot of attention and has a lot packed into the first hour for the final act to pay off properly, but overall it has enough going for it to give it a shot. It works well as both a comedy and a horror, just know going in that it is a story-heavy movie rather than a mindless gore-fest and you won't be disappointed.

OK, i was so irritated of this movie so I had to write short review. So, first it does not look like a B-category movie on first sight. It has some nice story for beginning, the camera is good and all in all the flow of the movie starts kind of a promising.

So, as the story progress..you just go into it, and then all of a sudden you got totally unconnected story point, then it happens again and again and again..until you lost track of what's going on here. On top of that add dozen of awkward moments that come out of nothing. Totally unexplained moments which just pop in and story progress into some irrelevant direction. The cherry on the top is the awful acting (with 1 honest exception from the guy with the glasses).

So simply put in: The movie looks like bunch different of clips with the same people just stitched together. I'm just giving 2/10 because of the good camera. Waste of time, or you can watch it like a comedy.