Caught (2017) Poster

(I) (2017)

User Reviews

Review this title
31 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
gengar84314 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Let's get right to it. The story is very simple - photojournalist couple receives visit from oddly-behaving man and woman, who turn out to be creatures the photojournalists have accidentally "caught" on film. The photojournalists are "caught" at home, "caught" unawares because they have no clue what's on the film until they take a closer look. It's all very claustrophobic, helped immensely by the acting skills of the four main characters, and the suspenseful score. Unfortuately, it's very slow, and seems repetitive, trying to pad what is essentially a short. The audience is therefore also "caught" in this ponderous web.

I say web because I believe the creatures are spiders. It's never revealed outright but there ARE clues. (1) A brief scene where a spider (brown recluse?) crawls up an arm. Why is that in the film? Yes, it's creepy but the film doesn't otherwise use symbolism to create atmosphere. (2) Though the audience never sees the photo in Andrew's hand, there IS a photo hanging in the darkroom which looks to me like a giant spider creature. (3) While some may think it's a cat-and-mouse game the creatures are playing, I see it as spider-and-fly. (4) Once their human features are punctured, the creatures revealed seem more invertebrate than vertebrate. (5) The creatures ooze saliva on these human victims quite often, as if trying to paralyze them rather than merely menace them.

It's not a bad film by any means but it DOES seem as if writer and producer Alex Francise intentionally wanted viewer frustration, as if they too should be "caught" in a trap from which there is no resolution. True to form, the film ends on a dim note, neither apocalyptic nor hopeful.

One last note: Baby Emily might be part creature offspring. The creatures' interest in whether Andrew and Julie were "copulating" at the moors indicates they have not only come for the photos but also for the infant. Interesting anyway.
15 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't get "Caught" Wasting your Time
jtncsmistad31 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
When I saw the trailer for the new British space creature feature "Caught" I thought, "Man, this looks stupid." Alas, I wound up watching it anyway. Lesson learned. Sometimes you gotta go with your first impression.

It's not that the premise, nor the acting, are bad here. They really are not. But the pace is utterly atrocious. And there is absolutely NO payoff in the end.

Hey. Filmmakers. What in the hell was so horrifying about that which was caught?? Would have been nice to know here.

It just mighta saved your flick.
23 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Pointless movie, and this coming from a guy who loves tons of pointless movies.
vladimirpolaski1 April 2018
There are very few movies I've watched in my life where the director intentionally wasted audience's time.

It's like reading a mystery novel where someone dies and a detective starts investigating, and in the end, the detective just gives up and leaves without solving the mystery.

I use this analogy because this entire movie was literally centered around the mystery of the two visitor characters. What good is a mystery movie if they intentionally don't resolve the mystery?

To be clear I love abstract movies, and movies where the entire plot is a metaphor, such as "mother". This movie was not one of them.

It's just a plain "mystery movie" that doesn't solve the mystery, doesn't even give you a hint almost as if the director wanted to troll the audience.
21 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Tea With The Blairs!
doorsscorpywag30 March 2018
Set in 1972 Andrew & Julie are a couple of would be investigative journalists who are starting to work on an expose of a new army base on the nearby moor. 'Must be nukes' they tell their editor.

Then a couple of strange Jehovah's Witnesses with a problem with postmen hove into view. They claim they are from the Moor and have some questions so the pair invite them in for tea thinking they are officials of some kind.

The strange couple introduce themselves as Mr & Mrs Blair. Everybody sits down. The Blair's rather oddly and tea is served. Mrs Blair complains it is hot. Andrew points out Mrs Blair's shoelace is undone. Mr Blair says she will get around to it shortly.

Then the questions begin and are strange at first and get stranger as they progress. When Andrew gets annoyed Mrs Blair suddenly screams maniacally and attacks him. Mr Blair explains 'she has killed and you would not be the first today'. The interview goes downhill from there.

Mr Blair seems to want something they have but they don't know what it is.

April Pearson & Cian Barry, who I am not familiar with, play the Blair's really well and give a new insight into creepy. Especially April who steals the show. It's as if we are in Strangers territory but its even weirder than that.

It's a pretty well done mostly indoor mystery drama with some good acting from the 4 leads.

What's it about? Check it out as it is worth an hour and a half of your time. It's not a horror as such but is well acted and a decent story. I gave it 5 but added a 1+ as it was an attempt to do something new with a tired genre. I guess with a bigger budget it could have been something a bit special.

On the downside there is one glaring omission that will have you spitting feathers. But decent effort all the same.
21 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
drramos423 June 2020
I've read many reviews of this movie. A lot of people hated it and didn't get it. Others are defending it, saying that viewers weren't using their imagination to get it. If wanted to use my imagination, then I would have read a book. Sorry, I don't enjoy movies that don't have a resolution.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A Premise is Not a Story
seriouscritic-4256916 August 2018
Two creepy strangers show up for tea: that is a premise, and depending on what you do with it, not a particularly bad one. However it is not a story. Occasionally having something creepier inexplicably happen is adding incident; it is still not a story. This film, sadly, has a premise and enough incident to make for a mysterious half hour but then it would be nice if it went somewhere from there. And it doesn't. A lot is hinted at but nothing elaborated on or explained. The actors are all rather good but they are only given fifteen minutes worth of screenplay and forced to stretch and repeat until the film ends. Almost literally. When characters finally learn a little of what has been so confusingly hinted at, it doesn't change anything for the situation, and the audience is never even let in on it, because to resolve a story and reveal mysteries you would need a story and at least some ideas to begin with. And all they had was a premise. The whole exercise becomes ultimately pointless. It might have been a successful and well-made short film, but as a feature it is a frustrating trial.
13 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
We've got to get better neighbors.
S_Soma2 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
CAUGHT does not lend itself to my customary review style so this review will be a little ad hoc.

The set up for the movie is relatively straightforward: there is a family living in a house on or near the Kintry Moors in England in 1972. There's a father and mother, Andrew and Julie, respectively, a 6 or 7-year-old boy and an infant girl. Andrew and Julie are investigative reporters and they are currently poking around a mysterious military base being set up on the moor not far from their home.

A very well dressed but EXTREMELY peculiar couple, who call themselves Mr. and Mrs. Blair, suddenly show up on their doorstep. As viewers, the behavior of the Blairs is so peculiar we quickly come to the conclusion that the "Blairs" are aliens disguised as humans. This suspicion is confirmed nearly immediately and becomes incontrovertible as the movie progresses.

At the time of this writing, there's a lot of hate coming from the reviewers on IMDb, and I'd have to say that most of it is deserved. It's as if the director went out of his way to irritate his audience. Audiences respond negatively when a movie sets up mysteries that are left unresolved by the end of the movie. To make matters worse, it's unclear whether the unresolved mysteries are the result of a low-budget, artistic "vision", or just really inept directing.

Still, at the risk of flying in the face of what is currently universal derision, there were some redeemable elements of CAUGHT, at least in my own opinion, although I did have to indulge in a lot of potentially (and sometimes certainly) unwarranted speculation about what's actually going on in the picture. So much of the narrative is vague and ill-defined one has to indulge in speculation to make any sense of CAUGHT. So here are my potentially unwarranted speculations.

In the very first scene, where we first see the Blairs walking towards their encounter with Andrew and Julie, they move with perfect synchronicity. Walking, starting, stopping, head movements and etc. all in perfect unison. Clearly they they are "connected" in some way not in visible evidence (telepathy?). This suggests to me why the Blairs ability to communicate is so poor and their speech habits so peculiar. If you're an alien accustomed to telepathic communication, how difficult and unnatural must verbal communication seem?

Additionally, as we humans would tend to anthropomorphize aliens, what sort of anthropomorphizing might aliens fall into with respect to humans? How would that affect their perspectives and assumptions when trying to communicate?

The behavior of the Blairs suggests that Mr. Blair is of some sort of higher or managerial "rank" than the female, while Mrs. Blair has a decided tendency toward violence and hostility, like an attack dog. Mr. Blair seems rational, curious and sincerely desirous of communication, although focused on his objective. Mrs. Blair is hostile, murderous, and decidedly un-curious.

The focus of the Blairs is apparently tied to the fact that Andrew took some photographs of the mysterious military installation and in that process accidentally "caught" something having to do with these aliens. None of this is satisfactorily explained in CAUGHT. SOMETHING is clear in a photograph (as we are led to believe), and is the source of the conflict with the Blairs, but we never get to see what's in the photograph nor is it ever described. As viewers, all we can do is throw tons of speculation at the entire situation. Are the aliens there because of the military activity or is it the other way around? If the military is there because of the alien activity, why would the Blairs be particularly interested in what Julie and Andrew know about it? Why wouldn't the director let us see what was in the picture? Bad direction or the inability to create the necessary artwork to depict the event?

The second unresolved issue in CAUGHT is the fact that the 6 or 7-year-old boy is attempting to escape with the baby at the end of the movie and the movie just ends without us knowing for certain what happens to the boy and the baby. In my opinion, it's clear that they are caught and killed. Literally NOTHING that Andrew or Julie tried (in their exceedingly irritating half assed, incompetent and uncommitted way) ever worked at all. Not even a little bit. Why would the boy's lame escape attempt suddenly work? And the boy demonstrated an inability to follow parental commands AT ALL (run and escape with your sister). The Blairs showed no hesitancy to kill Andrew and Julie and did so. The boy, rather than doing his best and running with the infant, just sort of wandered away. We also catch half a glance of something considerably larger than the boy and in close proximity to him right before the end of the movie. So it is clear to me that the boy and the baby were killed just as the parents were.

Lastly, anecdotally, I should like to point out something non-British viewers might possibly miss. In England, depending upon the locale, one hears a lot of fox screams. If you're unaccustomed to it, and you're walking around in rural England in the dark and you hear it, it can make you soil your pants. It is a seriously creepy sound. (You can find examples of them on YouTube...) If you watch any British crime dramas like FATHER BROWN MYSTERIES, you often hear them in the background. As an American, you wonder what the hell that sound is you keep hearing and why nobody on screen is reacting to it at all. For Brits, it's no more noticeable or reason for comment than chirping birds.

Well, as it happens, fox screams are pretty much the same sounds that the aliens make, or at least the violent ones like Mrs. Blair. This is intended as a scarey punch line at the end of the movie as we realize that the recent "fox noises" that the family has been hearing recently has actually been aliens calling to each other as they've been observing the family leading up to the horrific final encounter. For a Brit, I'm guessing that would be a pretty creepy tie-in to a common British sound.
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Grossly Underrated
acarltoncooke11 December 2018
This movie does more through what it does not show or tell than many movies do through spoonfeeding and gratuitous FX. I especially enjoyed how the film teased you with the promise of a "reveal" then withheld it and let the viewer try to understand what was "caught." This film is for those who like to use their imaginations. A "lo-if" film reminiscent of The Invitation or The Sound of Your Voice.
11 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Who thinks of movies like this. SMH
Hotepsekhemwy20 February 2019
This movie gave me a headache. Trying to understand the nonsense baby language is driving me crazy. The purpose of the woman character is uncertain. The husband character is weak. The wife seems to have some sense of urgency to understand the new visitors.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
For those who don't want everything spelled out
This movie is getting a lot of flack for what seems to be viewer laziness. You will not find any voiceover guiding you through the story, or a character showing up at the door in the final minutes to sort everything out. This movie requires the viewer to put the pieces together, and the pieces are definitely there. It is not hard to follow if you're listening, and having one of the "visitors" explain themselves in detail would have been a major letdown, since they make it clear repeatedly that the scope of their knowledge is limited. This is a disturbing film that trusts that the viewer is capable of sorting things out on their own. Much like Under The Skin or Hereditary, there is some ambiguity and I wish more films would require viewer intelligence as part of the experience.
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Pointless drivel! Story totally unresolved, in the end.
alloutnow1 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This is such a pointless film. The story has no message; doesn't give any answers about anything and the only thing it adds to the viewers experience is a loathsome, dark feeling of sadness and a lingering depressive state of mind. It isn't even that scary, just gory make-up and unnecessary dialogue about nothing... the story isn't even resolved in the end.

When the end titles start to roll the viewer has no answers about anything relating the the story that is being attempted to be told by the writers, director and actors. I was just left with a bad taste in my mouth about this mess of a film.

The acting is OK, I suppose, but this film had better never been made. Bad script and utterly ridiculous story.
12 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I am dumber for having watched this.
petewells-269709 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Weird people invade your home and barf on you and your floors. They're looking for something "Caught". They mean a picture of something you never see. Then they kill the homeowners as their 5 yr old runs off with the baby. End of movie. A heaping pile of suck.
14 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Slow AF
davidhartley923 December 2018
Not recommended for those without an abundance of patients. Although it's a good slow burn thriller, so little is explained by the ending that it may leave America viewers (like me) very frustrated.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Really don't bother
andyaj3114 September 2018
Not many things would be worse than the alien dude and his Melania Trump like wife coming to your house. I really felt like cutting my arm off and hitting myself repeatedly with the soggy end until I was unconscious

I just wish that I could get the last 90 minutes back so I could see a good film.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Festering pile of rancid crap
al_luk26 March 2019
This is the absolute worst movie ever to have been filmed in the history. I wish I could meet every single person who was a part of this elephant dung fest and kick them sqaw in the balls. After that I would put them into some sort of box like object and catapult them into space preferably aimed at a blackhole and even more preferably with every copy of caught with them. I promise to the great spirit and maker of all life I will destroy my copy of this DVD and encourage you to do the same. We must repent for we have seen the depths of hell and it is caught.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Creep Factor 10+
joeldodd22 April 2018
If you want a movie that explains everything explicitly, this is not for you. The plot takes you through the course of a single day that, for the English couple, gets progressively worse. There are many metaphors at work here, but Cian Barry and April Pearson take creepiness to new heights - whether it is his turn as Bryan Ferry's psycho idiot brother or Pearson's disintegrating zombie - and their naivety about the human world is at odds with what we expect. This is seen in Crow and Sumner's 1972 vintage couple, who frame the events and their visitors in the context of what real people, in the real world would expect. They do not confuse a fictional world of zombies and alien invasions with reality so, if you are used to seeing movie characters default to "aliens, of course!" or "Zombies, what was I thinking?" then this is not for you. You are expected to do some thinking and speculation of your own.
9 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Reasonable concept poorly executed.
mjsreg6 April 2018
There seem to be a lot of younger 'producers' and 'directors' who seem to fail because of a fundamental lack of awareness of the final goal - to produce a good film that engages the audience and tells an interesting story.

This film seems like the people who made it forgot to take their vision out of their heads (if it were there in the first place) and put it on film for the audience to see.

I got the impression that this was a poor attempt to replicate a '70s look' - like classic thrillers and horrors of the era. It doesn't work. It may have worked if more thought had gone into it and the story was set in the present day with a 70s style. That would have been interesting.

Then there is the story. The end is obvious from the beginning, it is just a matter of how the story is going to get there. Not much mystery and certainly no horror.

The cast put effort into their performances, which were generally good, but have been woefully let down by poor production and direction.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I should've read the reviews first... save yourself
Rickard-606-59271624 July 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Look, I get the whole idea of a film that doesn't spell out every detail for the audience. I have thoroughly enjoyed such films in the past. I did not enjoy this. The sad thing is, I saw a preview for this movie some time back, and have been trying to recall the title for months, because I really thought it looked like a great movie. By some conincidence, I was thinking about it again this evening when suddenly my desire was made manifest, and an ad for the film-- on a no-charge streaming channel!--suddenly appeared on my television. The fact that it was nearly 1am didn't stop me from watching immediately, even though it wasn't likely that the film would vanish overnight. If I had waited, and the film had vanished, I would be well-rested and not annoyed by having wasted my night's rest on a half-baked, unresolved and ultimately frustrating movie experience.

It's a beautifully filmed movie with a lot of fascinating moments, but ultimately I felt as if I'd overheard an interesting snippet of conversation before moving out of earshot -- never to know how it began or ended, and ultimately, not caring much.

Yes, the acting is quite good. Yes, the movie has some thoroughly creepy moments. But it was in no way satisfying for me. I also didn't at all understand the motivation of those who sent "Mr and Mrs Blair" to the house. If the .. er ... aliens? Mutants? Other-Dimensional-Beings? knew they'd been photographed, and for whatever reason this was a huge problem for them (maybe they shouldn't hang out around inhabited sites with a military presence?) why didn't they just scrabble and lurch over to the copulating couple, vomit and spit on them a few times (eventually giving up on the venomous saliva idea), bashing in their heads with a convenient rock and then scuttling away with the camera?

Why send heavily disguised agents to spit on, torment, scream at, show flashes of near-understanding that humanity could be a beautiful thing, hint at a hive mind, puzzle over voice recorders and music players (but they understand cameras? and can put together perfectly lovely (albeit short-lived) human skinsuits?) wait patiently for photos to be developed in order to see the one that proved their existence or whatever it proved (we never get to see it, another fun chance for YOU to use YOUR imagination)... and yet they seem incapable of understanding or even having an awareness of human military, human journalists (or hobby photography), journalism, babies, families, and never do understand that drooling thick gray saliva onto someone is not ever going to do what you're clearly hoping it's going to do, so you may as well give up and grab a rock.

May I say that my one moment of startled, unrestrained laughter was when we saw the small boy fleeing for his life with his baby sister in his arms? There is a young man who does not understand the concept of "run" in any way.

Not sure why I wrote this review. I guess so I could vent a bit of spleen, since I'll now work to forget I saw this after trying to remember it for these many months. Oh, and perhaps to push some version of me into making better choices for his or her evening.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
If you go out on the moor, you're gonna have a bad time
Sankari_Suomi10 August 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This excellent movie has received a torrent of thoroughly undeserved abuse on IMDB, so I think it deserves a shout out.

British journalists Andrew and Julie live in a comfortable Sussex cottage with their children Emily and Toby. Following the flop of their latest book, they are desperate to find a new story for their editor.

Intrigued by recent military activity on the local moor, they start to assemble what might just be a major exposé of nefarious shenanigans. Their suspicions are further aroused when two strange visitors knock at the door, seeking answers to questions they may or may not be able to answer.

Set in 1972 for reasons that are not immediately clear until later in the plot, Caught is the kind of Jamie Patterson film that makes you thankful for indie directors. With a running time just shy of 85 minutes, and a highly ambitious cast of 7, Caught packs a surprising amount of narrative into its sharp, increasingly violent screen time.

The standout performer is Cian Barry, who absolutely nails every scene with what I can only describe as an Oscar-worthy performance.

I rate Caught at 26.64 on the Haglee Scale, which works out as a feisty 8/10 on IMDB.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
What a letdown
casey-4271221 March 2020
I love sci fi and monster movies. I don't know what I just watched. Plodding, slow, pointless, far too long.

No slow burn, no thriller, stilted, obtuse, and disappointing.

Don't waste your time, I did it for you!
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Lazy writing spoils good effort by cast.
kingslandbungalow3 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This is one of those movies where there is an over-arching question that runs throughout the entire film. The viewer might reasonably believe that there will be an answer/reveal/payoff at some point, because otherwise what's the point of watching? Well, there is no payoff! The writers could have brought some satisfaction to the audience by having a token explanation, even a lazy half-baked one would be better than nothing at all. I can't imagine how the pitch for this movie was green-lighted: "Hey, we have an idea where this spooky couple go into someone's house." "And?" "Uh, that's it...." Save yourself the hour and a half, this is a badly, badly written movie that ultimately has no point whatsoever.
6 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
What was the point.
gnvvclark11 September 2020
Warning: Spoilers
If there was ever a time to find a goal, it was this movie. What was the point wasting time with this long drawn out wannabe plot. Please produce better movies taking the viewers interest more seriously. You'll never garner praise by using infants either.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Hate these no-end endings
moongold71 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I don't think the film was useless, and I disagree it didn't provide what many horror films fail to deliver. The acting from the demonic female was particularly convincing. As to being depressing, well, isn't that what most horror movies cause anyway? I think it was well done, but as I say, I hate movies that leave the ending unresolved and not finalised. What happened to the boy and his baby sister?
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I Kinda Liked It...
wandernn1-81-6832747 February 2021
This was an interesting story to me. For an English horror movie, not bad at all. And the ending, was not what I expected at all.

0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Deliberately tedious
rainbowfascistparty12 December 2020
Felt like the director had a quota to fulfill for runtime so he just kept telling the actors to move more slowly and ad lib more tedious lines which only serve to make the film longer but added no relevance to plot or script. This movie will make you beg for the monsters to put these horribly tiresome & stupid humans out of your misery. Oh and bonus: there's a crying baby screeching through most scenes; all audiences LOVE the endless hideous screech of babies, don't we? Makes all the women feel broody & maternal, doesn't it? And the the older child is told repeatedly, urgently, to run away; each time he stands still, staring stupidly. The ending is the only good part of this film. Welcome to Earth, Alien Overlords; what took you so long?
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed