Greyhound Attack (2019) User Reviews

Probably the worst movie ever !!!

[andrewuna · 1/10 · 1 April 2019]

People like these shouldn't be allowed to make movies, they should just use their cameras to shoot wedding videos. They probably used most of their budget for that poster which is certainly meant to deceive people into watching this soulless low budget movie, then the rest of their budget went to hiring costumes and paying for stock footage of flying planes. I don't think they spent more than 50 dollars in the little special effects used in this movie, 1940s movies has better special effects. When the pilots are flying the planes or even standing beside it, it's quite obvious that they ain't flying planes and the planes aren't in the background when they are standing beside it.

The acting is quite poor most times with awful german accents. Some movies are not supposed to be made if you don't have enough budget, you will end up ruining the whole project. That's exactly what happend with Greyhound Attack. It's better you watch wind blowing trees or watch a clear blue sky because it certainly has more colour and is also more interesting than watching this movie. Please stay away from this!!!

Stage play on film?

[koningszoon · 1/10 · 2 April 2019]

One of the most awkward movies(?) I saw in the last 25 years must be Greyhound Attack.

This "movie" is is actually more a stage play which the director tried to get on film on an absolutely shoestring budget! And I am not exaggerating: the movie budget must have been absolutely TINY.

The budget must have been so ridiculously low that they could not even afford any real or convincing actors, props, costumes or anything else a serious movie requires.

95% of the acting and actions scenes are actually shot against a green screen and are SO obviously fake and off set that it gets totally ridiculous to be honest!

The actual script and dialogs are also beyond anything I've ever seen or heard before.

Skip all the problems related to the budget and you end up with an unbelievably bad attempt in every creative, commercial or technical way possible to create a movie or stage play.

Perhaps somebody else can tell me what this movie actually is: an April' fools joke?

Absolutely Horrible

[bobsarsfield · 1/10 · 1 April 2019]

I was hoping to read a review before I watched Greyhound Attack. No reviews. If I am the first to review, I recommend that you avoid wasting a second of your life watching any part of this movie. It is horrible from every aspect. I cannot believe that 1.5M was spent/wasted.

Never seen anything like it...... Hope i never do again.

[djdec1 · 1/10 · 13 April 2019]

My advice? Keep this as the worst movie you've never seen. I took one for the team here and i watched it so you don't have to.

Such a shame that '-' stars cannot be given!

[adambolton-47291 · 1/10 · 3 April 2019]

Absolute dross! I don't normally rate, or comment on movies, but this is soooooooooooooooooooo bad, it's only fair to warn people before they watch it!

Story: If one existed, I failed to notice it!

Acting: Failed to see any!

Cinematography: Non-existent!

CGI: Meh!

Ghastly waste of time

[oldvinyl · 1/10 · 4 April 2019]

The supposed plot of this movie has little or nothing to do with what appears on screen, and the title has nothing to do with the movie either. The whole thing appears to be a rather pathetic attempt by a bunch of students to make a movie; with zero success. It is so pathetic it's not even funny. If you would like to watch a "WW2 fighter pilot" be played by some juvie wearing a smoke respirator and no actual real background or effects or anything, really, then go ahead and waste your life.

Very Very Bad

[bjackson-739-450552 · 1/10 · 2 April 2019]

At the time of writing this the story/plot is still wrong. I submitted a correction several days ago and still no updated(corrected) plot. It has absolutely nothing to do with ships or U-boats. It's about American pilots helping the Brits. Extremely low budget ($1,500,000) movie and it shows. It seems that they could not even afford to rent time on a cheap flight simulator for filming the cockpit scenes. Starts out with an idea for a story and goes down hill from there. Poorly delivered dialogue combined with amateur grade school level acting and no action sequences to speak of, made for a real snoozefest. Even the aerial flyby scenes barely made this corpse of a movie twitch in its' grave. If the budget was not a government grant or even if it was, then it was money not even well wasted.

It is not a movie, it is a joke

[albertfels · 1/10 · 6 April 2019]

10 seconds into this excuse for a movie already demonstrated the worthlessness of it all. The CGI planes were so unrealistic that they were ridiculous. The pong game I played thirty years ago was more interesting than this garbage. The actors are not worthy of that name. It looked like someone asked uncle Bob and some guys from the pub to join this enterprise. The only positive comment I can give is that pushing the stop button makes you feel better.

If this movie released on April 1st, it would make sense, if you know what I mean

[hughhemington · 1/10 · 1 April 2019]

I only watched about half. It's all I could stand. If you want to argue I missed the totally Casablanca-quality parts, fine.

Imagine you had access to a few vintage planes in a static display, now write a movie around that. And this is it. There is literally nothing I saw in this movie that wasn't awful.

The act... the people moving and speaking in front of, what I'm assuming was a cell phone seemed to have never done it before, and shouldn't ever again. The sets were flat and bad to distraction, but I found them more engaging than the talking people who were standing in front of them, or green screens.

The "action" was so badly faked, in a computer, I looked forward to the next scene back on the ground. I won't go on with this too long. Suffice to say, if you want to re-calibrate BAD in your movie lexicon (likely forever), and you won't be trapped in a room through this entire dismal mess, and it won't cost you anything but the minutes of your life you'll never get back, spend as few minutes as possible watching... some of it.

Rocket planes

[nogodnomasters · 1/10 · 9 April 2019]

The film takes place in Nov 1944, minus the flashback. Two brothers fly attack planes and are hounded by superior German planes made at the V-2 rocket factory.

Christopher Forbes wrote, directed, and produced the film which failed in all three areas. The backdrop was very fake looking as was the sky in their airplane settings. The acting and dialogue were pathetic. Looks more like a failed film school project. Worth a double punch on the hacker's card if you can make it through it.

'Greyhound Attack' is not 'Greyhound'

[malbarrbak · 10 January 2020]

The synopsis for this film given above is actually the synopsis for 'Greyhound' (2020), a film set in the Battle of the Atlantic based on a story by C.S. Forester. 'Greyhound Attack' is a (presumably lower budget) film with less than impressive CGI about the German Me262 jet fighter.

Unintentionally Hillarious

[tkrotchko · 10/10 · 12 April 2019]

It could be the "Planet 9" of the 21st century.

1) The backdrops for planes are large posters the actors "emote" in front of. Or maybe its CGI. Nah. I'm going with the poster of airplanes.

2) Although it does its best to convince you that the actors are outside in front of the posters of the airplanes, you can still hear an bathroom echo when the actors speak

3) The budget looked to be about $25K, but that probably includes catering from the local in-and-out burger.

4) The interior shots in the airplanes are literally two guys sitting in chairs with a poster of a plane window in back of them.

5) Speaking of the actors, they really are just random guys who have never acted in front of a camera or audience before.

In short, this production may be a real-life version of "The Producers". Try to see it before it disappears.

Not good enough to be the worst movie ever.

[Gorgo33 · 7/10 · 25 June 2020]

This is not a top shelf movie, but the director and the cast really gave it their best shot. Low budget, audio problems, no custom props - but one must make due with what they have. They tried and I give an A for effort. No one mailed it in, they just didn't have enough money to make a good movie. Hats off for the effort.

Home video with non-actors standing against walls stone-faced mouthing words

[HeathCliff-2 · 1/10 · 16 April 2019]

I watched a bit of this because I was curious at the comments by people unanimously calling it the worst movie ever made.

It's actually much more - or less - than that. It's not really a movie as in "motion picture." It's like someone's home movie in which they had Aunt Gladys and Uncle Sid and the neighbors and signees from a sign-up sheet in the local Piggly-Wiggly play parts in a "movie" shot on video with no lighting equipment, no sound equipment, no backdrops, no make-up, no hair.

The actors are clearly non-actors who mouth the lines with little to no emoting.

The panorama establishing location shots are panned internet screensavers.

In the pilot deck, there is no ambient noise, no shaking against blue screen of a sky with clouds.

Shot almost always in close-up to obscure lack of sets, Clearly no cinematographer.

I am reminded of early television childrens' programming in the early 50s with basic lighting and minimal sets, but even then acting far exceeded amateur.

I don't want to make fun of Christopher Forbes. He has done what many dream of: "making a movie." But it displays a complete lack of artistry in making a movie, without even the basic rudiments of moviemaking skills or sensibilities. By contrast, Planet 9 from Outer Space or The Room shine with passion, dramatic vision and flair and creative juices.

You have to try to watch a few minutes to be utterly flabberghasted by the total absence of movie-making skill.

I would give it -10 if possible

[anastakiyudin · 1/10 · 2 April 2019]

They got $1.5 million and came out with this??? Absolute worst

What the !

[dickmcd52 · 1/10 · 3 November 2019]

Everyone involved in this must have been on a bender of mind altering substances from start to finish. This is an insult to the genre. To the financiers, producer, director and the actors I say go hide and never again darken the walls of the movie industry. Disgraceful.

Laughably awful!

[Starbuck222 · 1/10 · 13 April 2019]

I love a war film, particularly a WW2 flying themed one. Curious when I spotted this, I set off into viewing it. Within 10 seconds of it starting I was pretty much gobsmacked at how dreadful it was. Filmed in a series of echoy rooms in front of a greenscreen with the ocassional blowup of an airfix model behind...I just fell about laughing. I'm so surprised seeing that this had a budget of 1.5 Mill as it looks like no money was spent at all and a lot of it looked to be filmed in a shed! Do not waste any of your time on this. Possibly the worst film I have ever stumbled upon!

Garbage Is Too Kind A Word To Describe This TRASH

[artbreyfogle · 1/10 · 9 April 2020]

OK, looks like used vacuum hoses for the oxygen masks...WORST key effects ever...Shot in GA...Waste of computer space shooting this horrid mess...Now, ask me what do I really think about this flick...Got a used barf bag on hand?

Worst movie ever

[brownmichaelj · 1/10 · 9 May 2019]

Wasted $10 on this at Walmart. Worst damn movie ever made!!!!!

Worst movie every made

[bmann-12412 · 1/10 · 12 May 2019]

I now understand why this was in the discount bin. Bad writing, bad acting, horrible special effects, and so much more. This movie should be burned so that no one ever sees it again or used as an example of how not to make a movie.

HOW DID THIS GET MADE

[s_shine · 1/10 · 31 January 2020]

I can only guess where they got the funding for this.....whateveritis. They must have got 1,500,000 to invest $1 each. Looks like they only used half of it.

Waste of time!!! Would rather watch paint dry.

[johncs-smith · 3 April 2020]

What a bunch of inaccurate CRAP! At about 28 minutes into this nightmare, the Canadian flag, among others, is shown draped on a wall. Believe it or not, it is red and white and depicts a maple leaf. This "historical" film takes place in the early stages of WW2. The Canadian Maple Leaf flag did not see the light of day until 1965! I stopped watching at that point. The acting was not even 3rd class. Anyone connected with this farce should be forbidden to breed for fear of their descendants becoming as ridiculous! Aside from all this, the U.S. as a country did not enter WW2 until it was nearly half over.

This is Hilarious

[paularoger-94717 · 7/10 · 28 April 2020]

I watched it and laughed at the audacity of such a funny, backyard movie being released! Next to Midway, this is a total pigmy of a film, bad and poor in every respect but one. These people are having a go despite their lack of resources! Telling it because it is a story worth telling about the air war with Germany throwing bits of rocket technology at the Allied onslaught. Anyway it helps me appreciate the craftsmanship of really good movies, Enemy at the Gates or Greyhound, soon to come out. I recently rewatched The Guns of Navarone, one of the most memorable movies from my childhood, probably saw it when I was 10. Watching it again I was shocked really at how amateurish a 1960s action movie seems, in some ways quite similar to this movie. Good on you guys. Hope you get some real money to throw at your next project. Good old Lord of the Rings producer director Peter Jackson started his career making cheap almost unwatchable garbage horror movies, like Bad Taste. Just sayin'......

Don't just DON'T...

[gypsydanger-41348 · 1/10 · 21 June 2019]

I a sucker for naff movies, the old 50's B movies, sharknado, three headed shark ect. However there is ABSOLUTELY NO POINT IN WATCHING THIS.... It is totally in accurate, factually incorrect, poorly filmed even the aircraft sounds are wrong, I can usually find something of merit, a bit humour too naff for words. I only wish that I could give it a minus 10 star's.

Bab, Bad, Bad

[johnnymilne · 1/10 · 26 April 2020]

It is not often that I watch a movie rated less than 5.0 however I wanted to acquaint myself with what a 1.2 movie was like. This one, Bad real Bad. Who would finance such a dismal attempt at making a movie? The Director wrote, produced, directed the photography, edited and provided some of the music..then had some of his family and friends work on other aspects of the film as per the 7 minutes of end crawl. Should have been kept as a family home movie!