I realized before watching this movie that it was an amateur film, the budget was low, and the acting was not going to be top notch. However, this wasn't the case with this movie. Rather this movie was was prime, grade A garbage! First of all, the most basic laptops have video editing equipment. This movie wasn't edited in any way. I realize the director was attempting to do something different by making a (supposedly) constant, no break or cut in the film. Newsflash: it didn't work. Camera tricks could've been used to make it APPEAR that there were no breaks in the film like what Alfred Hitchcock did in his movie, 'Rope'. Would've made a quicker paced, evenly flowed film. Next, why is there a music score in a film that is supposedly 'reality'? It was completely out of place. Such films like The Blair Witch, Crow's Next, VHS doesn't have one. If this wasn't shot in the manner that it was in, then a musical score would've been acceptable. But in this case, it jacked up the movie even more.Lastly, the atrocious acting the dragged on like fingernails on a blackboard. It seemed as if the actors weren't responding appropriately to the post production audio. It was such distraction, it was so laughable.In conclusion: this is a 'D' movie that isn't worth watching to laugh or make fun at; it's really just a waste of time.

...but that by no means makes it good or even mediocre. This doesn't rise to "complete crap" status. And that's the fascinating part: it's such a non-movie that you keep watching and waiting for something to happen so the movie can get started. But it never does. It actively avoids everything...period. I can't stress enough that isn't an exaggeration, this lack-of-a-movie avoids it's own characters and plot, even just abandoning them completely by the side of the road and goes for a long, slow drive through the countryside. Yes, that literally happens, it's actually a pretty succinct summary of the entire 70 or minute runtime. The most interesting thing about the whole thing comes from the fact that it was made at all: who thought this was a good enough idea to make a movie? Who heard the pitch and invested real, actual money to make it happen? How can an absolute absence of story and characters and events be anything but boring? Was this just another attempt to scam the foreign video market with a fake movie made for $20 and a tank of gas? If nothing else, "Invasion" raises a lot of questions. "Can't there be an IMDb rating BELOW 1?", for example.

So the whole point of this movie was that we're watching it being filmed from a police car camera. It might be one unbroken shot, or maybe several very long ones, which would have required some careful staging. But even if you thought the technique was clever, there really isn't much to the story to make it worth sitting through. Like other reviewers, I found it IMPOSSIBLE to get through this without fast forwarding. There were many long stretches that felt very repetitive. It didn't bother me so much that this took place at night in the woods, but if the filmmakers really wanted to make an impression, they should have given us more to care about. Put something interesting in there to look at, give us some memorable moments. The story was about an alien invasion. This was played out by having people walking around like zombies and spreading the infection/virus by putting their mouths to the next victim's ear. I barely remember how this movie ended because I had so little interest by the time it came. I think this movie needed a few more good ideas to have been worth making.

Director Albert Pyun does not inspire confidence. His name evokes groans and memories of cheap and often pretentious genre films. But when I heard that his latest project was a single uninterrupted shot I was as intrigued as anyone to see the results. The fact that Infection (retitled Invasion when it DVD) was getting praise from critics only served to heighten my interest. The film's novelty is that it is a science fiction film told from the fixed view of a high definition camera mounted on a police car. With a cast of mostly unknowns and an aura of mystery, Infection inspired a similar level of intrigue as the much higher profile Cloverfield (2008). If only the results were as exciting. Whether the consequence of budgetary limitations or a misguided artistic aspiration, Infection is a huge disappointment. Shoddy-looking news footage and title cards set the scene as the film begins with a Police officer driving down the dirt roads of a national park. He meets a local resident acting very strangely. Once again something alien has come to small town USA, but while the soundtrack provides plot information the visual element is an endless steam of footage of bland dirt roads. Pyun is both a prolific hack and a talentless artist and has been consistently disappointing viewers for nearly 30 years. One can theorise that this event-free narrative experiment and its largely meaningless visuals are intended to isolate viewers. To hypnotise or unsettle an audience used to seeing everything. If that was the artistic intent that's fair enough but it simply doesn't work. While I respect that using a single traveling camera to encounter various characters is a complex undertaking I can't help but feel that he could have done more. Set within an urban location and with a larger cast this could have been, like Cloverfield, an extraordinary film. As it is it's just a bore. The fact that over-the-top sound design, a smattering of dubious visual effects and an admittedly interesting score seek to shatter the faux-realism of the found footage merely adds to the overwhelming sense of disappointment.