Evidence (2013) User Reviews (72)

really good for 5 minutes maybe 6

[random4ever · 4/10 · 13 June 2014]

starts out semi interesting and it all goes down hill. every once in a while something happens that gets your interest and keeps you from dozing off. unfortunately you start snoozing again just to snap out of your slumber just long enough to open your eyes for a moment. like other reviews that says this movie is not on par with good movies is correct. total watchable parts of the movie is about 5-6 minutes long, the rest is a wast of time and space. think about what makes a good movie and then wonder why this has none of that stuff in it. they could of made this film a lot more fun if they showed some nudity or had humor, drama, good dialogue? just about anything would of made this movie almost memorably for more then the time spent watching it.

you been warned

Are we supposed to believe that...

[danthepoetman · 4/10 · 5 July 2022]

Are we supposed to believe that they didn't know how many victims they had?

The problem with the plot is that this should have been much clearer to the investigators than it was to us, the viewers. But they're totally lost and manipulated. Well, would you say, the evidence was tampered with. OK, but when? When did they find the time to go through the process of editing it all? And given the number of survivors, 3 are we told, the viewing of the footage should certainly not have been given so much importance.

Nothing in this film makes sense.

The beginning, with the frozen scene is catchy. But the development, until the bus crash, is long and boring. Then, it gets a bit funnier, a bit more entertaining, but we're not seeing much of what's occurring and everything gets so confused that our pleasure is spoiled. It gets more annoying than interesting.

The ending is ridiculous and disappointing, but it fits the rest of this nonsensical and unrealistic narrative. Although somewhat entertaining at times, to the extent I was alluding to and not more, the sum total is an indigestible mess.

I usually put a 5 on films that are entertaining with reservations. But in this case, these reservations are too strong. The entire thing is badly conceived and irritating in the end. I feel generous giving it a 4.

75 Minutes Of Found Footage Mess Lead Up To A Decent Final 15 Minutes

[HorrorOverEverything · 4/10 · 19 May 2014]

*Review Contains Slight Spoiler But Does Not Ruin The Movie*

I constantly say im done with found footage films yet I always end up watching more, I dislike them about 80% of the time but for some reason I keep punishing myself.

"Evidence" seemed promising when I started it. Solid start, decent acting for this type of film, and a some what interesting plot. But then we dive into the "found footage" portion of the film which is a complete mess. Its basically just a jumble of scenes focused around people trapped at a old gas station getting murdered. This wouldn't be so bad if the camera didn't shake so much during all the good parts, preventing us from even really knowing whats going on.

The last 15 minutes is definitely the movies strong point, if the rest of the film would have been more like this I could have gotten on board a bit more. "Evidence" manages to pull off a 4/10 simply because of the finale.

This was fun, nothing more should be expected

[smoke0 · 9 July 2013]

I don't get the hate for this movie based on the reviews so far, as it certainly isn't trying to be an Oscar contender.

This is a well done found-footage film with a welcome twist.

My only complaint has to do with the cop story in the beginning. The hints at a deeper backstory for the haunted-looking cop were completely pointless, as he ultimately served no purpose other than to provide a small detail that is of some significance later on.

From that point on, however, the movie takes off, and other than the red-herring police story, the film was enjoyable, fast-paced, and worth watching.

Let me wake up and write my review

[iraz · 3/10 · 1 July 2013]

This film is a mess. By the time all the details have been revealed, I could not have cared less. I generally will watch found footage films, even though I am often disappointed, however I don't remember being less interested in a found footage film than I was in this one. I was interested in seeing this film, I enjoyed "The Fourth Kind" (the director's previous effort) and I like the actors in the film.

I found myself unable to get involved in the plot and it just did not generate any suspense which is vital for a found footage film. Whatever kind of film you are making, you are trying to tell a story and if you lose viewers at the beginning it's awful difficult to get them back interested. Hopefully, the director's next effort will be more successful. All I can say is skip this one!

Is someone tampering the evidence?

[OJT · 7/10 · 9 February 2014]

What a start this film has. A frozen picture of a crime scene, taken by a low flying drone camera, like nothing I've seen. A bit was resembling the 2001-film Swordfish, but still this was amazing. It immediately lit my interests immensely. Some obviously CGI, but still a haunting start!

This is another take on the found footage genre. But different. Some kind of meta theme in the footage as well. This is evidence found on a couple of phones and video cameras at a crime scene. At the start of the film we get a glimpse of what have happened, but what lead up to it. No one at the crime scene is alive to give any explanation. The tape shows a group of youngsters arriving at a desolated place with a lot if abandoned trucks and houses.

Like most found footage, this is both annoying and exciting at the same time. A genre difficult to immediately like, but still interesting in many ways.

The fourth outing from American director Olatunde Osunsanmi, and the first I've seen. Though there's a lot of cameras around, there's a lot of not so likely here towards the end, before whole film takes a twist, making it more likely after all.

Smart film, with an interesting plot. A good, twisting found footage flick, most of all recommended to the fans of the genre.

Simply an awful film

[dave-goodman-130-352295 · 1/10 · 11 October 2014]

May contain a spoiler in reference to one character. I can say in all honesty this is one of the worst, most predictable films I have ever seen. I am not a fan of 'found footage' or 'first person' type movies but thought I would give this one a go and I can see now why I don't like them. The acting is terrible,the pace is slow, the storyline is dire and is no more than a poor first attempt at a group of students movie. I feel like I have just been robbed of about 90 minutes of my life I shall never get back. Do yourself a favour, instead of watching this movie go into the bathroom and one by one pull your toe nails out it will be more enjoyable and far less painful. I have never heard of any of the actors but one or two look famiiar and lets hope they move onto something more intelligent. What else I cant understand is why do they have the pathologist aged about 20, incredibly overweight and stood eating a burger and drinking a can of drink having obviously just missed a crucial item of evidence. Pathologists are highly skilled and intelligent people in the real world. I suppose I should remind myself it isn't the real world.

Massively reviled but also massively entertaining

[bob_meg · 7/10 · 16 December 2013]

Granted, I am a fan of Found Footage movies, but I found myself consistently floored by this film...and in a good way.

"The camera never lies," claims Burquez (Radha Mitchell). Burquez and a team of detectives sit down to piece together footage shot from a multitude of camera and camera phones found at an abandoned gas station in the middle of the Mojave desert, the site of a brutal mass murder. The victims are all passengers on a tour bus bound for Vegas.

What happened?

Let's just say it's better you know absolutely nothing going into this film, except for the bare bones setup. Found Footage films can be quite painful if the lead characters are boring or, worse, annoying. In this case, I actually found Rachel and Leann (Caitlin Stasey and Torrey Devitto) to be rather interesting and fun to watch in a valley gal sort of way. They don't seem particularly smart and are altogether rather ordinary, which makes the situation they find themselves in all the more unexpected and alarming.

Olatunde Osunsanmi gives us just enough enough video footage, realistically hacked together, to keep you feeling jarred and disoriented throughout, and John Swetnam's script and story are as outrageous as it is frighteningly plausible. Never did understand why so many didn't "get" this movie and equally puzzled why almost every critic who saw it panned it.

Evidence is a combination of the Blair Witch Project, a really good slasher film, and a disturbingly immediate social commentary. It follows no template and takes a lot of risks. Which many good films have been hated for.

The Climax Somewhat Saves the Movie

[GirishGowda · 3/10 · 11 September 2013]

A detective (Radha Mitchell) tries to hunt down a killer using video footage shot by the victims of a massacre at an abandoned gas station. She's aided by her team (Stephen Moyer, Aml Ameen and others). On the other side of the wall, we follow the lives of a budding amateur director, Rachel (Caitlin Stasey), her best friend and performer, Leann (Torrey DeVitto) and her boyfriend, Tyler (Nolan Funk) as they take a trip to Las Vegas and meet other people on the bus along the way. In the desert, the bus meets with an accident and they have no choice but to go to the nearest town for help.

A found footage style mixed with regular cinematography isn't new, but it isn't beaten to death either. Add to that the fact that Radha Mitchell and Stephen Moyer are very capable actors, I thought this could be a decent movie. Though it has a few recognizable actors like Radha and Stephen on the poster, Evidence is mainly about the people in the found footage which consists of video from four cameras. Rachel is shy in front of the camera which is quite laughable because she looks like a model from every angle possible. There can be no bad shots of that gorgeous girl. As a matter of fact, all the young cast look like they are models. I have seen Torrey on Vampire Diaries though.

'Evidence' tries to be interesting by making it a mystery and a thriller rather than a gore fest, but fails on all accounts. By the halfway point, I just wanted all of them to die more quickly because of the incessant screaming and regurgitation of the same lines over and over again. There are huge logical fallacies, groan inducing stupidity (especially by the police tech guy and the victims), bad acting (Torrey at least had a bit of charisma), all of which which makes it hard to feel anything for any of them. Also, the killer is annoying rather than being creepy/scary with the blow torch and welding mask. For a movie that prides itself on editing, the actual editing is ridiculously frustrating and not fun to watch. The gloriously convoluted climax which I clearly did not see coming, or rather wasn't logically plausible, somewhat saves the movie.

3/10

Tension Thriller with Horror Elements!

[Andrewamphlett · 7/10 · 6 July 2013]

Evidence is very well done film, it gets straight to point with whole watching found footage and I especially enjoyed how they changed back and forward from to "reality" with the detectives finding clues, trying figured out who the killer is. This edge of your seat tension thriller with some "Horror" elements, the horror side of the film was very disappointing with some one or two nasty deaths however it wasn't strong enough and the fact it's already happened, we'll watching it with the detectives, it takes away some of that creepy atmosphere and who might survivor the night but saying that, if was just that only. The film would have sucked but because it's got that race against time feel, it adds more plus with the shocking smart ending you will be glad stick with the film and it definitely pays off.

Being that it's from the director of "The Fourth Kind" another type of film like this one, I believe his improved hugely with imagine and using the actors to show they can actor. It's surprising right! I would recommend this film for sure 7/10

Found footage slasher flick "Evidence" falls apart due to poor pacing and an unbelievable finale

[ersinkdotcom · 5/10 · 14 September 2013]

I consider myself easy to please when it comes to genre films. I don't expect any movie to venture too far outside of the lines these days. As much as I hate saying it, there really is nothing new under the sun. I just want the filmmakers to take what's been done before, shake it up a bit, and give it their own spin. Unfortunately, Image Entertainment's "Evidence" falls short of achieving the aforementioned goal.

Five people are murdered at an abandoned desert gas station. Two detectives are given the job of sifting through the only evidence left at the crime scene: video footage from the cell phones and cameras the victims shot. It soon becomes evident that the killer is playing with the two investigators. The two must now piece together what happened before the psychopath decides to strike again.

A friend of mine gave me some good advice one time. He told me that any drink or food that has more than one synonym in its description can't be good for you. I find this can apply to movies as well much of the time. "Evidence" is one of those films. It can be described using several different terms like horror, thriller, slasher, and found footage. If you can do it successfully, it really doesn't sound so weird to have these different elements mixed together.

The two biggest issues with "Evidence" is pacing and believability. Long stretches of nothing happen while people walk around with flashlights and cell phones, which gets old quickly. It sort of sabotages the element of surprise. How can we be surprised by something unexpected happening when we're constantly waiting for it? I can't even begin to tell you how implausible the outcome of the movie is.

The cast of "Evidence" is impressive for an indie film. It stars Stephen Moyer ("True Blood") and Radha Mitchell ("Silent Hill," "Olympus Has Fallen") as detectives investigating the killings. Torrey DeVitto from "Pretty Little Liars" plays lead victim Leann.

As I watched "Evidence," I kept wondering if I would find Oren Peli's name among the producers of the film. It plays out like a drawn-out version of "Friday the 13th" meets "The Chernobyl Diaries." At least director Olatunde Osunsanmi was smart enough to pull out of the found footage enough to give audiences a break from the overused filming technique and show what sort of chops he really has.

If you like found footage and slasher movies, then "Evidence" might appeal to you. It tries really hard to mash the two sub-genres together. However, the film falls apart due to poor pacing and an unbelievable finale.

Good hybrid of found footage - regular movie

[farmacoltecnicos · 8/10 · 25 August 2013]

I rented this movie mostly because I like the lead actors - without very high expectations. In fact, I'm quite tired of found-footage movies. However, watching it was a very entertaining experience. First, because the director nicely blended the two kinds of shots, showing alternatively what could be seen in the recovered footage and what was going on in real life, mostly at the police department. Second (spoiler alert!) - and this is by far the main reason why I enjoyed this movie, because it wisely questions the basic premise of most, if not all, found-footage movies - that is, that the video remains can provide some valid knowledge of what really happened, however incomplete the resulting picture might be. Now, what happens if the found footage is not really what it seems in the first place? I found it really worth watching. Eight out of ten.

Watch closely, many twisted twists...

[Pinouchipop · 7/10 · 18 February 2020]

There is always something annoying with found footage movies. Still, we keep watching because we want to understand... Want to know...

Keep watching. You will. And will be surprised! "Annoyingly thrilling" could be a genre. Give it a try. You might like it in the end...

Skip this one

[jojack3332003 · 2/10 · 27 August 2014]

1) Another horrible "Footage" movie that just couldn't be more stale. 2) The vaguely recognizable cast on the cover are bit players in this film, the stars are attractive, no-named, borderline actors and actresses. 3) The casting of the musician boyfriend and the angry older lady are exceptionally bad. 4) Like most of these "footage" movies the action is very hard to make out. 5) Pointless Iraq veteran and wife side story. 6) When the very thin plot is finally fleshed out, its totally implausible. 7) Its brought to you by HULU so you have to sit through that ridiculously bad hand jive McDonalds commercial. 8) I'm a big horror fan, this movie is pointless, impossible, violence. 9)Spoiler: Blowtorch amputations are not clever just bad. Horrible bus crash caused by buried barbed wire, bus flips over and no one is hurt(minor scratches). Lots of heavy lifting and moving bodies around by two 95lb hotties. 10) Don't watch please. Disregard 7) unless you watch on Xfinity

Terrible movie

[jjcbiochem · 4 July 2013]

I watched this after thinking the trailer looked good. Huge mistake. It's one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The camera work is horrendous! The plot sucks and takes way to long to build the story. It's a shame because the concept has potential but the execution in this case was a huge fail. There are plenty of found footage films that are entertaining. They should have focused much more on the investigators and their analysis of the found footage. Instead they choose to focus on the showing us sub par camera work but do a terrible job of revealing interesting clues to keep the viewer interested. I'm shocked this film was released in its current form. Don't waste your money.

Haven't seen this bad for a while

[TerribleKatherine · 2/10 · 9 February 2019]

First of all, the found footage-style needs to be done precisely. This movie is just a confusing mix of bad footage put together. I needed to rewind the movie at times so I could follow the damn plot because the camera work was really bad. Second of all, the acting and characterization is poor. With all the screaming and whining I can't even understand the dialogue.. Aaaand they repeat "oh my god" a lot, what a buzzkill. The thing that brings this movie to a whole new level of ridiculousness is the over-dramatic way if showing everything. They probably thought they did a suspensful movie, but the music, spinning camera, it is just idiotic. It's too much for a movie that is otherwise shot poorly and doesn't obviously have a lot of budget. Overall, what is the point of this movie? Does this bring anything interesting to the horror genre? I don't think so, a bunch of people that happen to have a camera for every turn of events, that's nothing new.

Relatively creative in a saturated market

[jonnytheshirt · 6/10 · 22 August 2013]

This one gets 6 points for effort. Evidence takes elements of genres and mixes them together, if you are a CSI fan you may well enjoy this. Warning the actors portrayed on the DVD cover and the screenshots referring to this movies are experienced and recognisable however they are not the stars and are in fact not in the movie that much, I was expecting their characters to be the subject of the movie and develop throughout it, they don't. This movie is in actual fact mostly a found footage movie which I think finally I am tiring of. In fact I find found footage actually tiring to watch; all that shaky cam action. The premise was relatively fresh and I found the movie enjoyable enough for an hour and a half depsite silly things like serial killers with ninja stealth apparently no matter what they're wearing or carrying. I ended up watching it because somebody somewhere described the movie as 'disturbing'. Someone taking this movie seriously would be disturbing however as a suped up CSI episode its alright.

Do not look (SPOILER)

[jan-tromp · 1/10 · 11 August 2013]

This is one of the worst movies I've seen. There is no story, or I did not get it. Its clear from the early start that the two women are lesbian friends, so thats no surprise at the end.

The women in the movie are constantly screaming in a childish way. It is never a scary movie, what it is is boring and you hope it may get better but it doesn't. The use of handycam footage is nice for one minute and then it gets disturbing, never surprising (or it must be that everything is on tape)

Its not horror, not scary, not a Thriller, not funny. It is best forgotten.

Average, but with a hint of gold

[akirajump · 6/10 · 25 April 2020]

QUICK FIRE REVIEW...GO!:

Evidence is a found footage horror/thriller that doesn't excel in any area, but has a terrific cast that play their roles fantastically. The movie definitely drags in places, but when it gets going it really does pull you along.

If you like found footage movies and/or who-did-it flicks, this is one to check out.

SPOILER WARNING:

I want to quickly list my main gripe: The ending.

I don't buy it AT ALL. These two girls display absolutely NO reason to do what they did. The actress is about to start her career, bringing her friend the director along for the ride. But then out of nowhere, it turns out it's these two girls are the masterminds of the events because they wanted to 'make a movie together'. What?? Why not actually make a damn movie?! It just didn't make ANY sense at all. They displayed absolutely NO inclination towards violence, yet I'm supposed to believe they masterminded a way to get all these people killed? Pfft, yeah right.

Other than that, it was worth a watch.

Beware, it will make you dizzy ... even nauseous.

[mecheart · 1/10 · 3 August 2014]

It's a found footage slasher movie with an ending twist toward the most unlikely possibility, which, these days is actually expected. Thus the plot outsmarts itself. It's also a another "girl power" power trip film. Haven't we just about worn out that plot device?

This film will cause viewers to literally become ill. In many scenes the camera spins around the police video analysis room so quickly most viewers will either have to look away or get sick. But that's not all! Strange camera effects kick the film off with several minutes of paused video not unlike a video game where the player can stop world time and all movement. I nearly stopped watching 'Evidence' about five minutes in; it's a shame I failed to do that.

Character wise we've got an annoying British accented female with a camera (what found footage film doesn't have an annoying individual on a camera?), an annoying up-and-coming actress who from her first appearance is very obviously in love with herself, her whiny, annoying boyfriend, an annoying Russian dancer with thankfully just a few heavily accented lines, a grungy looking army wife who does little more than scowl (annoyingly), and a grumpy bus driver who ought to be able to kick some serial killer butt, but never does, of course. Oh yeah, there's an oriental teen who seemed like he could be comic relief but he dies right away.

Yes, I did attempt to make the above paragraph as annoying as possible to read in order to convey the spirit of the effect 'Evidence' will have on you.

What happens? Cops analyze found footage in hopes of solving a string of brutal murders in the Nevada desert. Most of the film involves the viewer watching this found footage from various victims' video recording devices which amounts to--when pieced together--a low budget slasher movie.

This is yet another movie where a group of stranded (fill in the blank) take shelter in a run down structure middle of nowhere and rather than even consider fighting back, cower together after the first murder. The way these "characters" were written to behave suggests some kind of horrifying supernatural thing on the loose. Instead of something cool like that, we end the film with ... frankly ... the stupidest possible solution to the watered down mystery posed by its so called plot.

Please, do yourself a favor and avoid this one. Otherwise, the only entertainment to be had (the camera spin will still make you sick), is to make fun of 'Evidence' by staging your own episode of Mystery Science Theater.

Not perfect but pretty good!

[jmbwithcats · 7/10 · 10 June 2014]

Just watched a found footage film and was surprised by the depth of story, it's not perfect, the middle makes you wonder if it's going to just be silly, but stick with it, it's real good for horror fans I think, decent anyway... called EVIDENCE... stars a few guys from the show "LOST" It only has a 5.2 on IMDb, but I'd say it's worth a 6.5 or 7.

Check it out, if you're curious what other found footage films I enjoy for some baseline:

Grave Encounters, Hexen, Blair Witch 1 and 2, come to mind.

Thanks for reading!

Unwatchable

[happyinthehaze · 1/10 · 3 January 2017]

This is one of the most annoying films in the history of movie-making. The female cast in the 'found footage' is the most over-excitable I have ever seen - everybody seems to want to talk, shout or scream all at the same time (not unusual in Loudmouth America but not good in a film) and the hand-held camera footage is so all over the place and jerky it renders the whole piece unwatchable. Some of you might enjoy this kind of rubbish (if you liked the equally unwatchable and massively overrated Blair Witch Project - you will probably like this). Watching crap like this will probably encourage the development of epilepsy, so good luck with that. This is a truly awful piece of film-making.

Great movie. (Contains Spoilers)

[DarlaNyx · 8/10 · 22 July 2013]

I really enjoyed this. The movie had me interested from the very beginning. I liked that I didn't have to wait half an hour for the thrills to begin. It was extremely well directed.

I enjoyed that I was watching the murders in passed tense which kept changing back to present tense. The killer was as original as a killer can be in the movies of today. I did not see the twist coming at all. I personally thought it was Tyler or Ben. But it was the girls. That alone gave this movie an extra star because girls make for the best psychotic killers.

I also thought the score was very well suited to the movie. Overall a great thriller.

I personally enjoyed it

[spgaze · 7/10 · 6 August 2018]

There was earlier post stating that this was the worst film ever??? I can only assume that reviewer has only seen a handful of films.

I thought this was a clever, enthralling film, it has it's flaws yes hence the 7stars not an 8 but as the film unfolds as you're watching you feel part of the process. I would say give it a go.

Unwatchable

[bobbybits · 1/10 · 29 August 2013]

I fail to grasp how anybody could sit down and watch more then 5 minutes of this awful film.

Radha is the only recognisable actor on display, some others have come from a very bad day at Trueblood. The acting is terrible, the dialogue is terrible, the effects are terrible, the camera-work is terrible, the story is so unoriginal it has been done before in 2012 under the same name, an equally as awful film using the same lost/found concept.

The film in effect of, fake inspectors saying play the next tape, in a fake lab serving no real CSI function, looking at fake evidence, durp durp thats who dun it you think so.

I got up to the bus flipping over from a barb wire puncture the bus was on it's roof engine facing the ground, back end up in the air, doggy style. If you like watching Blair Witch camera's with a bunch of unheard of dopes making their you-tube video's. Then you will probably enjoy this film. Anybody else avoid at all costs