A jarring emergency call sets the tone for what’s to come in Hangman. The opening perpetuates an unsettling amount of morbidity. It proffers the fear that many so often fixate upon. that being, morbidity portrayed by the media (or one’s life experience) and its effects; making people inherently adversarial towards their fellow being as a result.

Directed by Adam Mason.

The immediate brutality involved in this film pulls no punches. The level of depravity is executed tastefully; illuminating the found-footage genre with an advanced technological lens.

Produced by Simon Boyes, Mary Church, Adam Mason & Jeremy Sisto.

The attention it pays to the killer’s everyday life is something briefly touched upon – not alike overly indulgent movies such as Creep 1 & 2. The way the film illustrates the villain acquiring his own reconnaissance regarding potential victims is portrayed much more succinctly than similar features.

Written by Simon Boyes & Adam Mason.

The way the film transitions between filming devices could lead one into believing that it doesn’t occupy the found-footage genre – which is rather ingenious. At the ten minute mark; one could even begin to ponder whether they’re viewing actual governmental surveillance. This speaks for the level of sophistication the villain technologically imposes upon his targets; and just malevolently someone could utilize such instruments.

His tactics exhibit a duality of intimidation and misdirection; repeatedly breaking into the homes of those he’s psychologically manipulating while simultaneously mocking investigative forces. This is a level of intelligence not commonly associated with the common killer.

Surveillance obtained by the protagonist resembles that of one’s home security system, speaking to the penetrable nature of the modern household’s privacy. It also begs the question of whom you’d rather have in control; if you were under the threat of assassination.

It’s clear that Hangman will one day be regarded as an all-time-great; as far as found-footage/horror goes. It ignites a level of introspective cynicism to a remarkably sinister extreme.

It makes the sound of a two year old crying in the night something parents should regard as threatening. This is contextually driven home to the audience through the circumstances surrounding the initial burglary.

Masterful, harrowing cinematography lacking gore don’t come around often. Infringements upon people’s possessions; privacy and lodgings are conducted by a sadistic, prideful individual. With technology being more effective a weapon than it his his blade (or plastic bag,) the vulnerability of one’s privacy being encroached upon is unsettling.

It eventually becomes apparent that romance/lust are the voyeur’s modus operandi. His motives aren’t particularly clear throughout a good portion of the movie. Whilst this feature is one depicting villainy beyond that of mere burglary; it’s incredibly sensitive to the emotional state of those who’ve fallen victim to burglary.

Making it clear that being historically impeached upon can actually make someone taken less seriously in future situations. It demonstrates how victims can be subjugated to much worse (without external intervention) following first reporting a crime.

It shows how local law enforcement and family members are more likely to regard any future tribulations as anxiety driven delusions; should they report further infringements. Pretty macabre stuff. The circumstances presented here are brutal; but who knows how often this sort of societal failure influences the miscarriage of justice these days.

Streaming on Amazon Prime.

Brightening your day as always!