Megan Is Missing (2011) User Reviews

Not pleasant

[PeachHamBeach · 6/10 · 1 August 2015]

I give it a 6 because it just seems like it's bordering on an exploitation flick. Not nearly as bad as some of Larry Clark's stuff, but instead of really good acting from frightened parents, we get bland, almost constipated facial expressions. Don't these parents give a crap? For reals?

As for the 2 main characters, at first, they are your typical little spoilt brats. It almost seemed like THIRTEEN, with the popular, slutty, troubled one and the virginal, unpopular, introspective one. I don't mind that a lot of ichatting was used. It's one of the most popular ways that teens communicate these days, and movies are a visual medium. I was irritated when the girls began to chat with "Josh", who claims that his brother, then his dog, broke his webcam. I wanted to scream at these kids, if you can't see him, turn the camera off! You don't see Josh's face thruought the entire movie, but he is an internet predator, and these girls are unfortunately just lonely, insecure and naive enough to stumble into his trap.

I have a particular hatred for shock value gore, and the horrifying fetish photos of Megan posted on some porn site were really upsetting to me, and unnecessary. We know the girl was victimized by a sexual predator/sadist. Is it necessary to strip her of every last shred of her dignity by including a simulated photo in a movie? That's why I was so angry at the publicised photos of the victims of serial killer Robert Berdella. When you show the public every last screaming moment of a victim's life, it just seems so demeaning to me. But maybe that's the point. Maybe these kinds of things are meant to make me so angry that I want to put every serial killer on the planet into a rocket and aim it at Jupiter.

It's a disturbing film. Very unpleasant. Not sure if I think it's exploitation or not, but I won't be watching it again.

2 teenage girls named Amy and Megan are best friends. All though opposites, they do everything together. They meet a guy online, who isn't exactly who he seems to be

[zafaristravel · 6/10 · 25 December 2014]

Whenever i read the reviews of this movie, everybody is saying its disturbing, or it would burn you for life. What makes this movie so scary is that its very realistic. Almost every 14 year old girl in America video chats, and even though this case is very rare, it happens.i would say yes... if you are a sensitive then i suggest you not watch this. the suspense and the creepiness are very high in this movie are very very high. but i think the 1 thing i didn't like about this movie was the acting. it was one of the worst I've honestly ever seen.... all except Rachel Quinn (who plays Megan) it was also a little confusing because the movie is missing big chunks of information but i guess thats understandable giving its all recorded on a camera or a laptop. but over all its a super sad and creepy movie

Disappointing average and over rated

[mariaroberts · 4/10 · 16 February 2012]

Having recently watched 'Megan is missing'(written and directed by Michael Gori)spurred a few thoughts in my mind, and in fact how badly a so called 'horror' film can be directed.

Although all seems bad praises go to the writter in some kind of an extent for 'attempting' to bring a film to bring awareness to some's eyes.

Megan Stewart (14) and best friend Amy Herman (13) though differ to one another spend nearly every moment, day, and minute together. Clinging together for social acceptance. Megan becomes intrigued with a 'boy' on the internet, without knowing that this boy is in fact a paedophile, 'MAN'

If you consider the first 30 minutes of this film, it makes you feel as though you are back in school watching one of those educational teen documentaries that make teens think twice.

This film being rated a 15+ is a joke to me, it's disappointing and in fact disgusting. Me myself being a 15 year old was mentally scarred having watched this movie it's great to watch and be aware of the issues that can actually go on in the world we live in about 30 minutes in. But paedophilia for a film should not be shown this way.

Genuinely, realistically this film's moral issue should be aimed and shown to the clueless, teenagers and under-age.

But no, this film could not be shown to a 12 year old, and the reason being the last 30 minutes of this film turns into a mental amount of minutes of torture, rape and the de-humiliation of humans.

Since when was it OK to promote drinking and underage sex okay to do? Since when was making a film so unrealistic to real life issues okay? and most definitely above all since when was it okay to present such an issue as this in the most wrong way ever?

Take Trust (2010) a film including the same issue but different understandably okay scenes, it presents the issue with no need of there being any rape and violence in such a way Megan is missing is presenting

So really, watch this film go for it it's most definitely not a great film its just one that you'll watch be shocked about and recover from watching this disastrous film about two days after

This film is most definitely 'missing' the point.

Not very interesting... then suddenly sadistic

[mark-o-reillyd · 11 August 2011]

Very strange film, Serious subject matter but feels more like a hallmark true-lifer on the dangers of the internet. The acting is hammy and it becomes entirely camp when mock footage of news shows get added to the mix. The only moment close to shocking at this stage is a short and slightly uncomfortable description of one girls sexual abuse suffered as a child.

....Then suddenly and with very little foreshadowing it turns into a disturbing snuff movie for 22 minutes. I usually do not spoil as much as this but this film needs it. A prolonged and brutal rape of a 13 year old in real time is probably something you should be aware of.

I give it 3 stars for it's ability to truly impart an emotional impact, even if it is disgust and for it's message to teenagers in regards internet stranger-danger.

Over-all, completely gratuitous.

the only thing disturbing is why was this even made.

[jason_leo · 1/10 · 10 May 2011]

i watch a lot of movies and have come across kid related stuff before IE hard candy, the woodsman, hound dog,. how it starts is very insulting to anyone with a brain by saying its actual footage etc... 2 seconds in you know its not and the fact it is based on actual crimes that it uses mixed with fiction is disgusting to actual victims. if you think the film is made to raise awareness about danger you are very sadly mistaken as shown by many aspects of the film. three main scenes raise serious questions about the film makers intentions and whether he should be let near anyones kids. the first is the photos designed to shock you. second is the over the top up close rape scene of what is meant to be a 14 year old kidnapped girl. last but no means least is the web cam chat about summer camp. in one scene Megan tells her friend about her first bj at summer camp when aged 10 she goes on to describe it in detail appearing to not have been bothered but it but more to have enjoyed it. this scene has no bearing on the film but does raise a serious question as to why the filmmaker glorifies child abuse. really strange and very disturbing. in short the acting sucked the filmed sucked and the filmmaker should probably be looked at by they police

Creepy and disturbing

[jarch020 · 1/10 · 30 March 2013]

This movie had originally looked like a good laugh, but it was truly quite the opposite. The apparent goal of the movie is to warn teenagers and parents about the dangers of the internet, however from what I could tell, the movie was *actually* made to act out some disgusting, disturbing fetishes.

My first problem with the movie is that it exploits these teenagers. The 13 year old girl is discussing giving head at the age of 10. Not only does she say it happened, but she goes into about 10 minutes worth of detail. It was at this point in the movie that I began to question the director's intentions with the movie, and believe me, it got worse.

The end of the movie features 22 minutes of "uncut footage" wherein we watch: - the 14 year old girl (Amy) chained to a wall in a dungeon - Amy being forced to eat out of a bowl like a dog - Amy being brutally raped (yes, the entire thing - blood and everything) - Amy being shown her best friend Megan's dead body which is sitting up in a barrel - Amy being put in the barrel with her best friend's dead body and banging to be let out - "josh" digging a hole, which is literally a 10 minute scene where he digs as Amy screams from inside the barrel - finally josh buries Amy alive with her best friend's body

Now usually I am not offended by gory, disturbing scenes. In fact, sometimes they definitely help portray a message. In this case, however, the last 22 minutes were UNBELIEVABLY unnecessary, and simply horrifying to watch. It is EXTREMELY inappropriate and downright creepy.

Just a very unrealistic, badly put together movie...

[j-b-51-777891 · 1/10 · 12 May 2011]

At the beginning of this movie we are told that it is based on a true story. I'd like to see that story as this movie seems like the most unrealistic depiction of an Internet predator case I've ever seen. I can recall watching a 10-minute awareness movie in high school that was more true to life.

Don't get me wrong, I think that it is vital to stay informed, kids do get lured over the Internet, but the way this movie presents it is laughable.

First of all, the characters are incredibly shallow clichés. The abused girl who values herself very little and thus engages in risky behavior including drinking, doing drugs and having indiscriminate sex. Her best friend is the cardboard cut-out of the good girl, and is picked on for being so.

Both girls seem completely naive to the point where they should not be allowed to be online, let alone in chat rooms. While chatting with "Josh" they are almost oblivious to his contradictions (dog wrecked web cam/little brother wrecked web cam), his stalker-like behavior and his avoidance of showing himself on video or in person.

Even more problematic in my viewing of the film is the way the kidnapping case was portrayed. If a minor like Amy came forward with evidence like she did, her identity should be kept a secret, as should the information she shared. There are reasons why certain information is not revealed in an investigation. Also, as Amy was one of the last people who saw Megan, she should have been questioned, and the information about "Josh" should have been discovered much sooner.

Even after all of this, Amy is still chatting with "Josh" even when it becomes very apparent he is the kidnapper.

Also, in a case like this, officials should be able to track "Josh's" location via his IP address.

Also, "Josh's" profile as a criminal is very blurry. He seems to be intelligent in some cases, however, he makes some major mistakes in other cases. He is not a believable criminal, and were this movie reality, the police should have been able to track him down.

This movie was just not up to par for either being an informative video or a "scary movie." It relied solely on the hype and fixation people unfortunately have on the idea of people being dramatically kidnapped by Internet predators. Skip this one.

Important movie that packs a hard punch

[jennifer-25-965231 · 7/10 · 27 September 2011]

I had no clue what this movie was about when I started watching it. Based on the name and considering I read absolutely nothing about it I assumed it must be some sort of teeny bop slasher. To be honest I almost turned this off within the first 20min. I kept looking at my Fiancée unimpressed and asking him if this is what the whole movie was about.

For the most part this movie follows two 14 year old girls and their complicated lives of living as young teens. It shows the silly things teens care about, the stupid things they do and their obnoxious behaviour. As I said, I almost turned this off thinking it would turn into some sort of Jersey Shore episode.

After a while the storyline changed into a beautiful story about two little girls and their intense bond to each other. This is where I began to fall in love with the two main characters. Megan, has some serious problems in her life and you begin to understand why she does what she does. She's outgoing, pretty, has a great sense of humour and loves to party hardcore. Amy, shy, sweet and insecure idolizes Megan and has an intense bond with her. Both of these characters begin to have so much depth you begin to feel bonded with them.

The movie goes on and focuses on how teens nowadays use cameras to chat with boys. They meet random boys online to chat with and this is where their problems begin. Megan, who seems to be looking for a boy who wont treat her like a piece of meat meets a boy online (who says his camera broke so she cant see him) named "Josh". Josh is so sweet, says all the right things and sends her photos of a cute boy saying it's him. Megan is hooked.

I won't go on to tell the whole story but I do want to add that this movie disturbed me greatly. There are only two other movies I can think of that disturbed me like this and those are Baby Blues and The Girl Next Door. Maybe those two had more violence but this movie almost made me sick just like those two did.

This is an important subject, with teens and their insecurity problems and naivety it's too easy to lure them on the internet. Yes this movie packs a punch and is shocking and sick but if that's what people have to do to let parents know what's happening in the world today then more power to the director of this film.

Zombiesteak.com - Discover a new world of horror films, designed just for you.

Gen Z TikTok - Stop

[zbbdyqbii · 1/10 · 25 November 2020]

I wasted $3.99 renting this movie because of the reactions of Gen Z on tiktok. This is by far the worst movie I have ever seen.

People just don't get it.

[akaisha0 · 6/10 · 9 December 2022]

I just watched Megan is Missing finally and I do not understand the level of hate this movie gets. Going to talk about it. Short answer: It's not for everyone but no horror is. But it does have a very underappreciated place in horror.

Exploitation films are films designed to make you feel bad and somewhat mock the genre they exist within. Even movies that are incredibly bleak (like this) tend to tell their story in an entertaining way. They still have a perspective and a purpose.

This movie doesn't.

It's fascinating in how that is portrayed. Found footage films, despite their nature, still always feel like a director's hand is involved. They're still guiding you through the story they want to tell in a specific way. Megan is Missing doesn't do that. A lot like the August Underground series, which is also grossly underappreciated, or the Slaughtered Vomit Dolls series..it's not trying to tell you a story necessarily. It's presenting a story to you in a very dry, perspectiveless, factual way. If this were real and you were someone forced to comb through actual footage, it would be like this. Not neatly spliced together like a traditional film but instead just be a series of plain events that on their own are honestly boring. But together it paints a much grimmer, bleaker, realistic picture for you because it doesn't tell you to feel any one way. A horror movie that doesn't force your hand to root for the villain or the victim. It just exists. This movie gets shot down a lot by people saying it's hollow and it's disturbing for the sake of being disturbing. You are 100% correct. It is. It's designed to be. This is a subgenre horror and the exploitation subgenre of horror particularly that is told in this way. It's also a time capsule of this era of history. I know people joke "internet bad" when talking about this movie but think about the nature of the internet in the mid 2000s to 2010. This movie takes place in 2007 and as someone who was on the internet in 2007..yea..this really mirrors what high schoolers can be exposed to online in that era of the internet. You have to understand this story in the context of that time which just adds to a sense of realism.

Now, would I recommend this movie? No. Unless you're like me and you happen to enjoy this kind of film making for the sake of it, then sure. But I won't call a genius film. You can have a disturbing and bleak slice-of-life kind of story and still have a traditionally entertaining story (A Serbian Film, Unfriended, Raise the Red Lantern, and Eden lake are all wonderful examples of this). But if you happen to enjoy August Underground or Slaughtered Vomit Dolls in terms of that story telling style, this is may be worth it for you. It's not gorey like those two it's more "baby's first introduction to this kind of film making" but it's a valid entry on that list. It could have been more impactful in a short story format but..only in the long format can you have 10 minutes of a guy digging a hole uninterrupted. That is part of the impact of the film. It's dry and mundane. Real life is far more horrific than story based horror. Megan is Missing is a prime example of that.

Like that one time...

[miel-van-dam · 1/10 · 28 February 2013]

I remember that, a while back, the government of my country (The Netherlands) was trying to put together an educational program to teach teenagers about the dangers of the Internet and how sexual predators are active on it (don't meet up with someone alone, and all that). This film's only purpose seems to be made for just that, it's an educational video. In the USA you have those ads "Meth, not even once"? This has the same message written all over it. No harm done, but don't call it a movie...

Some of the reviewers on this site and several others have said that the message is the most important thing about this flick, but I'll let you in on a secret: it's not. The acting was horribly unconvincing, the characters where flat, shallow stereotypes, and as far as the rape scene: go watch "Irreversible" and then come back and tell me that was the worst, stomach hurting, godaweful scene you ever saw in a movie. Plus, that movie *will* enrich your life, whereas this one really doesn't.

In short, if you haven't seen it: don't watch it.

The horror of this movie is in the reality of it.

[BloedEnMelk · 9/10 · 13 January 2012]

'Megan is Missing' is not a feel-good movie. Which is quite an understatement. And that is exactly how it's meant to be. It is meant to shock; but not simply for the shock value in the way horror movies like Hostel are made. The genre of torture-porn wants you to feel bad for entertainment reasons, even though many will disagree with me, the avid horror-fan knows exactly what I mean. The difference between a feel-bad movie like 'Megan' and torture-porn, is that 'Megan' wants you to feel bad so to give you a message. And to do so, it uses the grim reality that many people like to deny.

When many people look at their teenager, they like to see them as if they are still innocent kids. At one point in the movie, Amy has a conversation with her dad telling him: "I liked that when I was like ten dad, I'm not a child anymore." The father reacts: "Please do not grow up too fast Amy.." In the scene of the party that follows, we see those seemingly innocent kids getting drunk, taking drugs, having sex. Now I am not saying that every party your kid is going to will have these excesses, but I do know one thing, when I was that age (which is about 26 years ago), we were no innocent kids either. Let's face it, as soon as hormones kick in at either gender, your child changes to an adolescent and one thing that comes with adolescence is the wish to experiment and discover. We should never underestimate that. Experimenting and discovering (to a certain level) is not necessarily a bad and unhealthy thing, it is a part of growing up. But there are dangers which we, adults, smell from a huge distance, and those kids do not.

And therein lies the problem, these kids are still far too young and unexperienced to understand what the reality of this world is, what the risks and consequences of their own behavior are. Their body is developing, their brain is still not capable of smelling the real dangers of society. They think they know it all (didn't we all think that at that age?), but they are still incredibly naive. An other problem that especially girls have is that they are often far too sweet. They feel sorry if they give no as an answer to a guy who is pressuring them into something they don't really want to do. At the same time; many girls are looking for someone who 'loves' them. Who compliments them, who gives them the feeling that they are special. That combination is a very risky one.

I wish it wasn't reality; but unfortunately the very ugly truth is that there are many predators walking around on this planet who prey on children and teenagers. 'Back in the old days', the pre-computer age, those predators had to walk the streets to find your (teenage) child. But since there is the world-wide-web, they can hide into perfect anonymity and lure your child towards them, without their victim even knowing how they look like.

Back to the movie. Megan and Amy are such adolescent girls. They are beautiful and naive, the perfect prey. Megan is more naive than Amy, because she has a troubled past her need to find 'someone who loves her' is bigger. She has experienced more, but thinking that she knows it all, she doesn't understand that she is not invincible. Amy is the more sensible of the two, even though that makes her 'boring and unpopular' to the popular kids at school. When Megan finds this 'nice guy' online, everything goes wrong.

Personally, I think the actresses did a good job. To me they were totally believable in their role as teenagers. The script has its flaws but is well-enough written, with the director using real chat-conversations between teenagers to show the reality we are dealing with. The story is composed of seven real cases. Now; about the last 22 minutes. Yes, they are shocking. They will make your stomach turn. They will make you want to fast-forward, or turn the bloody TV off. Some scenes are done in real-time, so the viewer experiences the horror the victim has to go through. It is not polished, or brushed up, what we get to see is a very grim picture of something that has been reality for quite some victims. And that is where the strength is of this movie. Yes; it is sick. Yes, we are looking at torture and it is a torture to watch. No, it is not torture-porn. It is a message, and a warning, and a glimpse into a reality which you don't want your child to EVER experience. Some horror fans complained that 'it wasn't shocking enough'. But beware; the director is walking a fine line between making a strong imprint and falling into the torture-porn category.

This movie shows you the importance of educating your children against such predators. We can't stop them from experimenting and we can't stop them from developing a life of their own. But we can, and have to, provide them with the necessary tools and mental weapons so they do not fall into such a trap. Don't be naive, like your teenagers are. Do not deny the temptations they have, or the fact that they are growing up. You don't have to take away their freedom and their ways of communication, we do not have to put them in a cage to protect them. Instead, we should make sure that these kids know what the dangers are, that they learn to think for themselves, are able to say no, and are armed with knowledge so they don't fall for predators like Josh.

Go to the website of the movie: http://www.meganismissing.com/ to read statements of both the director and the father of murdered Polly Klaas.

Creepy, Unsettling but Hollow

[NickGagnon942 · 6/10 · 25 February 2021]

So the film is a mocumentary loosely based and inspired by the 2002 disappearances of Ashley Pond and Miranda Gaddis in Oregon City, Oregon. This film is about two best friends Amy and Meagan. Meagan meets a guy on line and eventually disappears as does Amy. Eventually the film gets so dark and very disturbing. Kind of a different pace because the first 50 minutes were more like a teen drama. Its a mixed bag but I got to give it credit because it did creep me out big time.

Horrible and creepy (not in a good way)

[rarepeperonis · 1/10 · 19 August 2020]

If you told me some group like M. A. D. D produced this movie i would believe you.

It looked like a shock video made to warn kids about the dangers of the internet. But it's hyper innapropriate and no teen should watch this. Who is this for?

I would have no problem if a film used shock imagery to educate but this was just weird exploitative and creepy. The ending is a child predator wet dream this was insanely weird. Why did we need the story about this bj when she was 10? Did we really need to see blood on the guys hand to understand that it was her first time?

I'm a big horror fan i saw some insanely creepy and violent movies but this was just weird man i don't know. Anyway the acting was abysmal, 3/4 of the movie was very bad. And the last 20 minutes is weird and unneccesary exploitative and probably only made to give child predators ideas.

I get what they were going for, but that doesn't make it good (heavy spoilers)

[gavynhelfyre · 2/10 · 26 October 2012]

I'm sorry. I know I'm in some sort of minority about this movie, but frankly I think it was terrible.

The first part of the movie was pretty poorly written and the acting wasn't terribly much better. Far too much of this movie was told to us instead of shown, which is a surefire way to make you not care about characters that the finale requires you to care about. If a character has to tell you that they're broken, instead of you seeing it revealed through their own actions and the revelation of those weaknesses... even the revelation of their awareness of those weaknesses, then you haven't made me feel for the characters inherent sadness.

"I'll pretty much do anything as long as you tell me you love me," should be a heart breaking revelation... but it wasn't earned one bit. It just fell flat and made me say "okay, so she's broken.... what a stereotype".

Frankly I think making this a found footage film was a mistake. While I'm sure it was done to try to bump the realism factor, the genre itself is so limiting that it forces awkward scenes and also some very strange moments like Megan and Amy doing some sort of video chat on their phones when they're literally on their way to each other (apparently a very short distance). It also forces one to question who in the film was recording all of these Skype sessions and why were they recording them?

Moving beyond that, crucial points in the film are also gaping plot holes. When the Amy character finally goes to the police about Megan's possible kidnapper (after strangely not telling them about him earlier, you know, before the odds of her being alive shrink dramatically) they plaster her name and face all over the news. I'm sorry, but that sort of thing does not happen. Additionally, if all of Megan's Skype sessions were recorded, wouldn't the police know about Josh before hand? Also, if Josh is going around posting photos of Megan on message boards, then there's obviously a way to track him. Unless we're expected to believe that Josh is not only a kidnapper, rapist and murderer, but also a computer whiz.

None of it adds up, but it's all crucial to the plot.

Finally, let's talk about those last 22 minutes.

I'm sorry, but if you're deeply disturbed by those last 22 minutes, you have missed A LOT of films in the last 40 or so years. The last 22 minutes felt way too sanitized, likely because of the characters ages, when held up against things like the original Last House on the Left or even the remake of The Hills Have Eyes (watching the attack scenes in those films, I felt I needed a shower afterward just to feel clean. Last House particularly felt so much like a snuff film when I first saw it, it took a long time for me to watch it again). She's kept prisoner, raped and then stuffed in a barrel with, yeah you saw it coming a mile away, her dead friend. Then we sit through a man digging a whole for 10 minutes while Amy, clearly not seeing where this is going, tries to talk her way out of the barrel.

This all leads to a big problem with the climax- Amy never really seems to take her situation seriously. She never does anything but scream at Josh. She seems to think that "if you let me go I won't tell anyone" will be taken seriously. To top it off, even during the brief moments in these last 22 minutes when she's not chained up, Amy makes absolutely no attempts to escape. At one point there is clearly a jagged piece of metal a few inches from her head, and she never goes for it... she just keeps crying for help.

Seriously?

I'm sorry, but this film just doesn't work. It expects you to find it's subject matter shocking and disturbing because it's made its characters 14 years old (though the actress who played Megan looked far older then 14). This fails because unless you sell me on what I'm watching, just telling me that this person is a specific age will not make me engaged during their problems later in the film. It doesn't engage a willing suspension of disbelief. Make me care up front, or when I need to care... it'll be too late.

I get what the filmmakers were going for, and I applaud the effort. I think that if they hadn't tried to cash in on the "found footage" boom that's been going on, they may have made a much more engaging and effective film. A film that makes you care, instead of expecting you to care because adult actors are playing characters of a certain age.

Terrible Movie!

[chago_bajista · 1/10 · 21 July 2013]

This movie is so pathetic that it actually encouraged me to write my first review on IMDb. Why? Because i think it would be a crime and an irresponsibility not to warn the world from the insulting garbage i just watched. The problem with this movie is everything! I can't imagine hoe they could ever think this was good. the acting is abysmal, the writing is lazy and even funny (in a bad way) and the directing is worst than terrible. The overall idea of the movie is just wrong, the way the characters behave is not even close to how real people would act. The whole point of the movie is antagonizing the internet when the director and the creators of the movie don't even understand the concept of online browsing. THE DIRECTOR... Oh my god this guy made some mistakes not even i would have made in a high school movie project! The quality of the shots doesn't match the devices this movie is supposed to be shot with (like cellphones, "computer files", and web-cam footage) WHO the HELL says COMPUTER FILES! There is even a scene where you can actually hear the guy yelling "ACTION!" and he didn't edit that out. How careless is that? Have you no shame? I was so impressed by this that I googled the guy, and he is the... wait i have to take a moment to say this... he is the PRESIDENT of the ASC (American Society of Cinematographers) That's it people. I'm out... I've got nothing. Do yourself a favor, and don't watch this movie. It's dumb, it's childish, it's terribly written, terribly acted, horribly edited and insultingly bad directed. It deserves less than a 0 in rating. From now on I will only write positive reviews for good movies because I don't want this to be my last one... It sure was my first one though.

Disturbing? Yes. Entertaining? No.

[paraplunaa · 2/10 · 17 November 2020]

Uhh, this movie has become a whole thing on TikTok so I had to watch it since im a big horror fan. The storyline itself gets exciting in the second half. The first half is super boring. Plus the acting didn't make it any better. In the second half Amber Perkins does get better with acting but it still wasn't good enough to keep me entertained. I get that it's supposed to spread awareness and not be entertaining but i don't really see the point of the first half anyway. I missed music and above all character development. Amy didn't have a lot of friends so she could've told everything to her parents. Amy's parents were only on screen in the beginning plus when she was missing. I felt like if her best friend went missing my mom would be really scared for me and not let me go outside to parks by myself, meanwhile Amy was chilling with her bear in the middle of nowhere. I mean, yes the two photos are disturbing. But they could've built the suspense up so much better, now it was just like 'yea idk and idc here are the photos take a free coupon while you're at it, oh also, dead body'. It was so platonic. So my opinion is: Bad acting, no cinematography, it does spread awareness I guess but I still hated the progression of the storyline. The three major 'trigger moments' were disturbing but could've been so much better executed.

Highly Disturbing

[dragon_maiden · 8 May 2011]

I am having a hard time rating this movie for I have somewhat mixed feelings about it.

I'd like to start off by saying that I wish I had never watched this. Not in the usual sense of "why did I waste my $3 on this horrible movie," but because of the highly disturbing nature of the film.

As for the acting, I felt in the beginning that it was a movie made to show in high school about what not to do in the sense that the acting was... lacking. Overacting, longer pauses then would normally be in usual day to day conversation, etc. The best acting was done by Amber Perkins, the young woman who played Amy, Megan's best friend. However, the story itself and the premise behind it was not bad in and of itself. However... imagine mixing an unrated version of Criminal Minds with Saw... using teenagers. Graphic depictions of horrible acts flooded the last 45-60 minutes of the movie.

I do not believe that the actions of these young girls as depicted in the movie are all that far fetched. I personally know a young girl who acted the same way as these in the movie when she was the age of the characters.

***SPOILERS***

The movie contained kidnapping, rape, murder, and... I'm not even sure how to describe it. Kidnapping in and of itself is frighting. However, the depiction of what happened to the girls afterwords, specifically Amy. However, at one point in the movie, there were two "photos" shown of what had happened to Megan. They depicted her in a "contraption," for lack of a better word, that she was stuck in, naked, where her mouth and eyes were forced open. Then a scene with Amy shows the "13" year old girl being raped by the man she was kidnapped by. While genitalia was never shown, the girl being bent over the same contraption her friend was stuck in, with her face being shoved down onto the board along with her screams, his movements and grunting and his bloodied hand afterwords, were. This was shortly followed by the reveal of Megan's lifeless, emaciated and just-beginning-to-decompose body.

As I said, this is a movie I wish I had not seen. For the reasons mentioned in the paragraph just above.

However, if you feel you can easily stomach these violent and disturbing images... the movie in and of itself is not all together horrible.

Its only a movie.

[horizon2008 · 6/10 · 13 May 2011]

Well, I guess after reading the rest of the reviews here I can categorise how this has been received as either being a great horror movie, a rubbish horror movie, or those that find it a "sick" movie. Funnily enough, its the last category of review that I find the most interesting. Do folks generally read up on a film, and what its about before they watch it? I would tend to think they do. So those of you who thought this was "sick" - can I ask just wtf did you expect to see? An inane Adam Sandler comedy? A Hollywood blockbuster with Bruce Willis? Maybe a animated Disney film? Do you catch my drift? Why did you bother going to see this, or renting it, if you knew it wasn't for you? Many people avoid "horror" movies simply because they just don't like them, but in here we seem to have a few idiots who are claiming that this is the "most disgusting film ever made" (lol) - you really haven't seen many films have you my friends? To call this sick is a huge overstatement, and while its purely a work of fiction, I find it quite unsettling that someone here asked that the director be shot - hmm....who's "sick" now eh? A work of fiction inciting a work of real-life murder? Nice! Actually the guy who directed this has been around for a long time, and a lot of his work is comedy, and while I found a few bits of the movie unnerving myself, it still played quite well and it certainly didn't stay with me beyond the time it took me to watch it. Maybe it was full of plot holes and maybe the acting was a bit hammed up now and then, but for a flick shot in a short space of time, and on a small budget, I think it wasn't bad at all (that digging scene is way too long though - the first cinematic hole ever dug from start to finish without a cutaway? lol). Anyway, I suppose it would make parents of teenage girls think twice about who their kids might be talking to in their bedrooms in this age of rampant social networking. But beyond that, I've seen much sicker than this, and I didn't ask for those directors to be killed even once.

A lot of Hype for A lot of Gore

[mrsdrasek · 2/10 · 25 May 2012]

This movie was kind of pointless except for shock value, it didn't send a message at all other than claiming "based on true events" and hype over the last 22 minutes being "actual footage". Parents need to realize that although the film boasts that it is sending a message about online sexual predators this film is very brutally graphic. I got tired of hearing moms say they were making their daughters watch this. No normal parent would let their children watch this garbage to "send a message". Be a parent and do your job. It wasn't hard to find out where some of the ideas came from for the film. It was loosely based, but drew from the murders of two young Oregon girls. Their murderer was not even a man they met online but a neighbor who's daughter they befriended. They were also abducted on their was to school. Only one was buried in the blue barrel in the back yard, the other in box in his shed. He was caught and convicted and is serving out two life sentences. Sure stuff like this happens every day but it can be put forward as a message sender like movies such as "Trust" to get the point across, not a below B flick horror. Sadly its would be message is lost on the target audience that could have watched a more thought out form of it, rather than it just being more horror fodder for gore fans who seem to the bulk watching it.

A Reply to DesertTrash and my opinion

[brclark21 · 7/10 · 9 May 2011]

@DesertTrash I understand what your saying, and agree that its sick...but watching a movie about actual events ( repulsive or not ) is much more 'informative' than fictional Trash like, Hard Candy.

I liked this movie because whether you or I, or anyone for that matter believe people this sick do or don't exist....they do! and I'm not disagreeing with you in anyway..I got this movie thinking it was just another twisted horror movie. Obviously I was wrong. But I watched it because its true (and sick) but because I think the producer is sending a message to be careful rather than 'pure entertainment' Sick? yes, definitely! But, why degrade someone for spreading truth. We are celebrating bin ladens death, no? you want sick? watch the original "Spit on Your Grave" Just don not watch this or any other movie because one viewer found it obscene.

No i didn't enjoy this because of its content, but because of its meaning far beyond that...

Out of 90 minutes, only one second managed to be good.

[mrhs612-1 · 1/10 · 8 May 2011]

And even that second wasn't that great. It was basically just a surprise shock. I'm not going to write any spoilers, because I want to make sure you read this. The first hour is just annoying teenagers babbling about how they're cool for having sex and drinking and making fun of the only virgin.

I don't know what emotion the first hour was intended to provoke, but annoyance was the only one I felt. And at least the 45 minutes do nothing to build the characters or the plot. You grow only to hate Megan more and more. In fact, you grow to hate every character except Megan's best friend, Amy, who is a self-hating pitiful girl that every one makes fun of because she isn't a giant whore.

The last 20 minutes are only there for shock value, and most of it is terribly acted, boring, and just make you feel uncomfortable.

There is a one-second reveal that made me jump, and only because I happened to walk back into the room at the exact moment.

If you're looking for a genuinely scary movie, this isn't your movie. If you're looking for a movie showing the danger that children are in due to online predators... this still isn't your movie. The characters are too one-dimensional to be believed and if you're a parent, trust me your teen doesn't act like this.

If you're looking for a cheap shock based only on surprise, you can do better. I've had serious shocks from movies that don't annoy you for 80 minutes before getting to a shock moment.

Basically, watch something else.

A Reminder of a Local Tragedy In My Home Town!!

[fralligator · 10/10 · 27 May 2011]

Actually my heart sank when I read the description of the movie because there were some striking similarities to a tragic case that happened here in Portland Oregon. Another reviewer mentioned that the movie is supposed to be based on a true story but when they tried to research it they could not find anything that matched. If you read more carefully you will see it is based on a study of multiple cases which I am guessing means they used elements from different cases to create this story.

Several years ago 2 teenage girls who were friends disappeared in Oregon City Oregon. Their names were Ashley Pond (almost 14 years old when she went missing) and Miranda Gaddis (14 years old when she vanished). They both lived in the same apartment complex on a dead end road. At the top of the road there was a house where a man named Ward Weaver lived with his daughter who was roughly the same age as Ashley and Miranda. The two girls became friends with Weaver's daughter. In August of 2001 Ashley accused Ward Weaver of attempting to rape her but the police did not investigate. In January of 2002 Ashley disappeared on her way to school. As in the movie - everyone searched for her including her friend Miranda - she was never found. Two months later Miranda vanished.

As in the movie there was media coverage that speculated the girls ran away. There was talk that one girl had a bit of a reputation and came from a home that would be considered "broken". Both families insisted their children were victims of foul play. They appealed to the public and put up ads on billboards all over the city. In both cases the girls left for the school bus stop at the top of the road but never made it there. They just seemed to vanish. They were never seen alive again.

For months there was speculation that Weaver had something to do with the girls vanishing but he denied it. I remember him giving a local news anchor a tour of his property showing his yard and proclaiming his innocence. I also remember being sickened when the truth came out. At the time of the interview they were standing on a recently poured cement pad and underneath that pad was the body of one of the girls in a blue barrel.

I remember being glued to the TV for hours in August of that year as the story broke. Every local channel ran uninterrupted coverage that weekend. I remember watching them use ground penetrating radar and cadaver dogs. I remember the video from the news helicopters as the police sifted through the dirt looking for the bones of the missing girls. Eventually they were both found dead on the property. One of the bodies was found in a shed. The other girl had been put in blue barrels before she was buried behind the house and then covered with concrete where Weaver planned to put a new hot tub. I remember crying for the families of those children whose lives were cut short by a monster. Watching this movie with all the similarities brought all of this to mind in vivid detail.

What I took from this movie was that this could happen to anyone's child in the blink of an eye. I grew up in that neighborhood. I had a friend that lived in the same apartments that those two girls had lived in. When I was a teenager I went to the same schools that Ashley and Miranda went to. I walked on the same roads, shopped at the same stores, etc. If this horror had happened 10 years earlier, it could have been me or one of my friends. From time to time I still have to drive past the place where those girls died and laid hidden in the ground while their families searched for them. Eventually they tore the house down but the land will never go away.

Who cares if the acting is bad, the writing is corny, the budget was cheap or if it was shot in a week - It is the message that is important. If this movie brings awareness to young girls or saves a single life it is worth every star I can give it.

Effective but tasteless.

[ocosis · 6/10 · 9 August 2021]

I thought the two leads did OK on the acting front. But the film is pretty tasteless. And pretty mean spirited.

Beware the evil interwebs!

[stitchesaresore · 1/10 · 24 March 2015]

I've put off watching this one for quite a while because a.) I'm not huge on the found footage trend and b.) Megan is Missing looked pretty badly made. But as an active member of several horror communities, I kept seeing this movie pop up with comments about "a very realistic portrayal of teenagers" and "the last 22 minutes are so disturbing". After seeing enough people say that they'll never get over the ending, I finally decided it was time to see for myself.

As the movie starts, we're already greeted with some terrible acting. Some text shows up on screen informing us that everything viewed here is taken from news clips and the girls' cameras, video chats, and cell phones. So they try to play this out like a sort of documentary. Let's keep in mind this is supposed to be in 2007, yet everyone is walking around video chatting 24/7 on their super awesome cell phones.

We're introduced to Amy, a shy outcast virgin from a good family, and Megan, a popular sexually active girl with a rough home life. Nobody likes Amy, but Megan is able to get her into a party by trading favors with the jerk host. After attending the party where everyone is drinking and using drugs (complete with Amy walking in on Megan pleasuring the host, being hit by an overly touchy party goer, and getting sick in a terribly embarrassing way), Megan and Amy video chat. Megan goes into detail about her first blow job -- which was totally rape, BTW -- and gets busted by her mum, which leads to talks about running away.

Later Megan starts chatting with some dude who calls himself "Josh" that her friend told her about. She's seen a picture of him, but his webcam is broken. They agree to meet up, but she doesn't see him. She finds out he was too shy, but decide to meet up again.

The next morning, Amy starts video calling Megan's other friends (because who actually sends texts or makes phone calls), much to their annoyance. Everyone gets mad at Amy for Megan's disappearance after the girl reports Megan's talks with Josh to the police. He contacts her from a new ID and threatens her. This does not stop Amy from going alone to make a video diary under a bridge and she is kidnapped.

For some reason, Josh decides to record things with Amy's camera and then he just tosses it out where it can be found. We're shown the uncut 22 minutes he recorded of Amy in captivity. He forces her to eat without her hands and later rapes her. She keeps her bra and knickers on during all of this and the rape remains focused only her face, though we see his bloody fingers to remind us that she was a virgin. The last moments of the film go on far too long of showing him digging a grave while Amy begs for her life the entire time. (During this scene you can see the shadows of other people around.) He then buries her alive.

The entire thing serves as a "don't talk to strangers online!" warning. This is why a lot of people found it disturbing because "IT COULD HAPPEN". But even with that reasoning, you're better off watching an episode of SVU than sit through this disaster.