Affamés

I'll admit, I have a thing for low budget horror films. But I don't review all of them, just the ones that impressed me. This one definitely falls in that category.

Here's a few reasons:

1) It's less about gore (although there is some) and more about human behavior. It's an incredibly psychological film that really makes you wonder "what would I do in this situation?" and, possibly, leave you surprised at your answer. Not what I was expecting, but definitely kept me watching.

2) The acting was pretty good. So many of the low-budget movies get stuck with a good story but wooden acting--not this one.

3) The story. They actually give you a solid background for what's going on and it never felt too rushed or too slow.

This isn't the goriest or grossest I've seen, but you still might want to leave your stomach at the door. If you're into dark, scary movies about human depravity, this one's for you. I found it entirely fascinating.

"Hunger" is a Crime - Horror movie in which we watch a group of people trying to survive in a madman's prison. They have to figure out a way to survive or escape but until then are imprisoned in this dungeon.

I found this movie interesting since it presents how people can change in tough conditions and they will do anything to survive no matter the cost. As a social experiment was very interesting and the evolution of characters was very good and how they changed through time. The direction which was made by Steven Hentges was good and he established very well his characters and their differences, something that made clear the way they act. The interpretations of Lori Heuring who played as Jordan, Joe Egender who played as Luke and Julian Rojas who played as Alex were very good. Finally, I have to say that "Hunger" is an interesting movie but it's not for everyone since it contains many horror and bloody scenes.

I'm about halfway through the Fangoria Titles and this is the new low of lows.The other films have at least one redeeming quality, but I couldn't find anything to appreciate in this one. Low budget doesn't have to mean bad, but the acting, set, and acting are subpar. Very little happens in this movie, don't let the reviews that praise it for being 'psychological' fool you. The first ten minutes are told primarily in the dark. This sequence could have been effective, but merely sets the stage for further mediocrity. Some of the editing is so poor you have to piece together what is transpiring by guesswork. These are not characters that devolve to survive in desperation, just poorly drawn characters that you won't care about. Not much logic to be had here.

Do not waste your time, no redeeming value.

Every human being needs to eat, drink and breathe in order to live. We are able to survive longer without food than air and water, but how far would we go to make sure we have food? There are starving people all over the world that simply starve to death, but that is a way of life for them. In other words: they aren't used to having anything to eat. What if they came from a nation where they have never had to go a day without a meal?

"Hunger" is from the bag of your unorthodox psychotics. If your traditional psychotic is one that kills people with no regard but still is a hands-on killer, the unorthodox psychotic is the one that sets up elaborate schemes or traps in order to kill his prey.

In this film a very mentally deranged man places five random strangers in a secluded yet locked location with no sustenance to survive except water and each other. His plan: see if they would cannibalize themselves in order to survive.

This is a movie that delves into how depraved human beings can become when facing death. It was an interesting movie that gave us some gore and a little bit of depression. I think we'd all like to believe in our basic humanity but what would we do?

The brave and very honest performances of the cast is what allows Hunger to rise above its low budget. It's harrowing rather than frightening, and largely predictable. It might have worked better if less of the drama had been predicated upon one member of the captives being unstable, of tiny morals and given to rage. We see the setup in so many horror flicks, a group of strangers awake to their captivity, and are preyed upon by a sadist to bring out the worst in their characters. Saw and Cube movies are just two of numerous comparisons, but the most notable. Saw and Cube at least gave entries a fighting chance. The setup in Hunger largely discounts that hope, which makes the unusual ending all the more satisfying. There's nothing essentially wrong with Hunger's production, or its pace or its vision. It's a good indie. You just have to decide if spending 90 minutes underground in a man-made hell is your cup of tea.