I am still laughing, just because I wasted twenty minutes watching this before coming to IMDb to rate it.As a filmmaker myself, I can't even imagine sitting through watching Infection at a free film festival.I am laughing in part because it's the only film I have ever seen with an IMDb credit that has a single non-stop camera without more than a handful of cuts.If there is ever an award for worst film, this could be the winner.The film begins with five or six minutes of on screen text dialog to set things up. Again, I have never seen a feature film begin with page after page of text set-up.The first footage that appears, looks like it is filmed on a PXL 2000 Fisher Price Camera and tinted in green, the acting is poor and it has a 1970's feel about it. (Its supposedly 2006)The viewer is then treated to a unfathomable amount of landscape and night driving on a road, illuminate with only headlights, and presented in a drivers point of view. This continues for 15 minutes an ADR (Audio Dialogue Replacement) of the main character (who you do not see), engages in a conversation with a supposed dispatch person who eventually appears in a In-Picture framing.At this point in the film, you might feel like shooting yourself in the head to escape the misery, but instead, you will continue watching this barbaric deviancy in hopes of a scene change; you just get more of the same.Eventually the vehicle comes to a stop, you get to see the main character, view horrible acting with horrible storyline dialog until he returns to the vehicle in search of more awful characters to annoy you with.Suddenly you will finally realize, this film just wasted a significant period of your existence on planet earth and hit the stop button.Obviously, the writer, producer and director have never attended film school. All the rules they teach in filmmaking level A are broken in the first 5 minutes of the set-up text.That being said, despite being the worst film ever credited and featured on IMDb, there is still hope for anyone who can make a feature film, get it into a festival, have it on DVD, etc. It may not be much hope, but everyone has to start somewhere.

That's right. You heard me.Almost everything important in this movie happens off-camera. The problem with these "real-life" style horror flicks is that the presence of the camera has to be explained. The only way the makers of 'Infection' could think of to get a "real" camera into their movie was to use the dashboard camera of a police car. The problems with this choice should have been immediately apparent--the middle of a car's dashboard can't follow a principal character around. A police car can't bob and weave through buildings, can't hide in bushes, can't investigate strange sounds in an abandoned warehouse or flee to the roof and fail miserably at trying to escape via helicopter, can't do about 80% of the "required" activity in a successful zombies-are-coming-to-eat-you flick. It's just too limited. Even COPS doesn't rely ONLY on dashboard cameras. Why the makers of 'Infection' thought they could do it is beyond me. You're so desensitized to everything by the time hand-held cameras finally DO come into play toward the end, it doesn't even have an effect.The "skipping" footage doesn't help matters. For the feed to cut out just when what IS visible starts to get good doesn't make it extra scary, it just makes it frustrating.Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of "less is more." Best thing about 'Paranormal Activity?' The power of suggestion. But the power of suggestion ALONE is not enough to carry a good horror film.Even with an "A for effort," I can only justify giving this flop three stars. Recommended only for those who can't handle the real scares in something like '*REC' or 'Paranormal Activity.'

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.

Here is a fantastic concept for a film - a series of meteors crash into a small town and the resulting alien infection is caught on a deputy's single camera dash cam as the town slowly taken over. Leave it to Albert Pyun to screw that up! Don't get within 100 feet of this flick! Holy crap, what a bomb...it might be Pyun's worst yet! The crazy thing is there is the germ of a creative idea in here - an entire of an outbreak told from the POV of a dashcam. When I heard that a while back, I imagined the car smashing into stuff, people getting run over, and infected types breaking the windshield and surrounding the car in chaos. That would be cool right? Instead, we have the lead driving around in circles for the entire time in a wooded area, occasionally running into the three infected types who just stand there. The last bit is literally a 15 minute shot where nothing happens in front of the camera, just noises are heard offscreen. Stay away!!! On a somewhat relieving note, I think I am officially calling an end to my Pyun watching...only took me 20 crappy movies to realize I have better things to do.