I have to say i wasn't really ever bored watching this movie but i must admit this mockumentary genre has really run the gamut at this point. Based very loosely on an apparent you tube video depicting the actions of an ELF-like animal rights vigilante organization, the story line attempts to convince the viewer that certain ridiculous scenarios actually coincide with reality. This is the kind of movie that if you go into it looking for reasons to pick apart a low-budget production you'll find them. Having said that i think this movie would have faired a lot better to have developed the characters a little better and spiced up the hunt with a few more surprises. I kinda felt like as soon as i got into it, the ending credits appeared. I felt the beginning and ending were decent, it was the rushed middle content that kinda let me down. Overall not terrible but could've been better.

This is one of the most boring films I have ever seen. Although marketed as based on a true story it is obvious that it's totally fictional. Apparently this film was supposed to invigorate debate about fox hunting. It has failed to do this as the debate is about the storyline. Has this happened? Would it happen? The answer to both is no. The anti's are accused of dumping dead foxes on the porches of the hunt fraternity. The truth is that the hunt have done this to anti-hunt campaigners. A search on YouTube will bring up numerous videos of the hunt physically and verbally assaulting anti-hunt campaigners. Women are their favourite target. Animal rights is not about torturing humans to save animals. Had the film been unbiased then the anti's would not have been masked the whole time. Information about them would have depicted them as compassionate people and their beliefs about why the hunting act should not be repealed should have been explained.The film is pro hunt propaganda. You'd be better off watching A Minority Pastime

One of the most boring films ever made!! Certainly not a thriller. The acting is incredibly poor and the 'churchy' moralising spoils any enjoyment left in the film. The film feels like watching a particularly uninteresting episode of crime watch with all the long, boring mocumentary interviews - I think a story about a old ladies purse being taken by teenagers would be more gripping than this! After watching it I researched where the film came from. It has clearly been 'self-funded' my some trust fund kiddies with more money than skill and seems to have flopped everywhere. They tried a 'viral marketing' campaign to promote the film but Youtube pulled it. They set up fake accounts to promote the film and even spammed movie forums - but no one is interested.I don't think this film would even hold the attention of the most avid hunter. All I can say to the team that made this is don't give up the day job (or the money from mummy and daddy)!

At first you feel cheated by the film's 'documentary' approach. you know the character's survive because they're right in front of you being interviewed, but as the film picked up speed you realise that this isn't a slasher film and that character survival isn't important.The film is a moral dilemma, are the hunters in the right as innocent victims? or are the animal rights protesters in the right for defending animals through drastic measures? Really, both are right, and both are wrong. But it's up to the audience to pick a side.this refusal to pull the audience one way or another is a very strong narrative technique, the film will divide audiences, and some people will dislike it as a result, but those are the same people that will want to just see a straight horror film where the killer is known from the start and the victims are easily identifiable.Strong performances, stunning visuals and a clever script help produce a fine film which is thoroughly enjoyable and will keep you thinking about it long after the credits have rolled.