User reviews

Wow, seeing some of these reviews really made me laugh. "Generic, it's the exact same thing as if you were playing a FPS game!" Maybe those who are saying those things saw a different trailer than me? This movie is exactly what it was promoted to be. An hour and thirty six minutes of a lot of violence, jokes, and well, shakiness. Within the first 30 minutes of the movie, many people walked out murmuring to themselves "this is stupid, my head hurts" and I really questioned why they even bought a ticket in the first place if watching a shaky camera hurts your head? Why did a group of middle aged women go see this, and leave shortly after? DID YOU STUMBLE UPON THE WRONG MOVIE?

Besides my little rant, I most definitely recommend this movie. I am not a major fan of FPS games, but having the entire movie filmed with Go Pro's, along with the great action made this a very fun and enjoyable movie. It doesn't take itself seriously, as it knows exactly what it is. As much as I hate when people say this, it is one of those movies where you really can turn your brain off and enjoy it.

I smiled throughout the entire movie, and though the trailers show some really cool shots from the movie, there is still plenty of fun in the movie to where you really do not get bored one bit. The park-our scenes are truly something else as well, with major respect to the stunt- men who did their job perfectly. The music choice was also something that I truly enjoyed, it fit the movie very well. The acting, while little of it, was passable and did not really strike me as "bad."

If you are a person who can't stand something like the Bourne movies for their shaky cam, do not see this. If you love action movies and really want to admire great fight scenes and plenty of mayhem, go see this.

And for those saying the idea is not original, yes, movies shot in first person are not original. But for an action movie of this caliber, I would say it is an experience that is definitely worth it.

When is a movie not a movie? How do you rate a movie like this anyway?

Hardcore Henry completely reinvents cinematic language. It's closer to a videogame in streamlined story and brutal, flinch-inducing violence. The sometimes low-res, often choppy POV is ballsy and cleverly conceived, gags and smart editing is commendable, the director's well-honed eye providing a true cinematic breath of fresh air.

It has superbly apt, moody music and good directional sound, it's not nearly as cheap as the marketing led me to believe even though it's clearly on a shoestring, its inventiveness and good blend of stunt performers and FX create a non-nauseous, toe-curling adrenaline rush.

There's admiration to be found in the lack of exposition in the 8-bit paper-thin plot and the gaudy, gonzo characters of a suitable Sharlto Copley. If you're in to videogames or appreciate something different, then Hardcore Henry is a revelatory, avant-garde, art-house action flick with its tongue in its cheek and its balls to the wall. It's also a sadistic, nihilistic over the top collection of video game levels. Insanely creative and in incredibly bad taste. It's a gory riot, blackly comic and tells you exactly what it is upfront and never lets up. Many parts of this film are stupid, ugly, dragging and plain insufferable and then there's equal parts hilarity and visual wit, true kineticism and sheer stuntman balls.

Very Russian. Not for everyone. And wears thin by the end, but very much a one of a kind and relentlessly intent on being it's own beast. And it helps that the ending is so absurdly laugh-out-loud OTT that it puts Crank to shame.

Crazy, action packed and also quite humorous... if you like video games you'll love this film...

This is a giant guilty pleasure of mine, that's kinda elevated past the point of guilty pleasure thanks to Sharlto Copley' geniunely great performance.

Within a couple of minutes of the opening credits, "Hardcore Henry" takes off on its wild ride, and doesn't stop until the ending credits. It is just a good old fashion action film, with gunfights, explosions, crazy stunts, good guys, bad guys, weird people, twists, turns, and most of all, non-stop action.

The film has no message. There is no propaganda that it tries to push. The films entire purpose is to make its audience forget their problems and just enjoy themselves for a couple of hours (and the filmmakers succeed in that goal).

"Hardcore Henry" is a film to watch.

'Hardcore' is the riveting story of a newly-made cyborg who must save his wife from evil tyrants and...wait a minute. Who cares?? The whole movie is a blast!!

Ilya Naishuller is a young director who had a very cool idea to shoot an action film from a first-person perspective using a GoPro Hero3 Black Edition camera. The proof of concept was released as "Biting Elbows: Bad Motherf***er". It was pitched publicly and helped to successfully crowd-fund the feature, 'Hardcore'.

It's better to keep this short and sweet: the film is extraordinarily violent; not for the squeamish. It has plenty of action, free-running, stunts, and plenty of room for comedic elements. Even the opening titles give you a taste of what's to come!

Sharlto Copley (District 9, and other Neill Blomkamp projects) plays the main POV's assistant throughout the film. Copley definitely gives a range of character performances and is quality. Wearing many hats, he guides you along as if you were needing assistance in a video game, which, by the way, this film makes several references to. In particular, the Chernobyl level in Call of Duty 4 with Capt. MacMillian. Even the opening scenes are reminiscent of Half-Life, and a lot of the free-running scenes are inspired by Mirror's Edge.

For those who are wondering, no. You likely won't get dizzy watching a 90-minute action film from an FP perspective. Well, maybe you shouldn't sit in the front row. Otherwise, you will have a blast.

'Hardcore' is an all-around fun time. Just be okay with the violence. It's only 90 minutes of your time that you'll likely want to experience over and over again. Or, you'll just want to plug in a play a few games.

Either way, it's bloody fun!

* Spoiler Free *

Just saw this at TIFF 2015 Midnight Madness. Judging by the constant applause and laughter throughout, the audience LOVED it. I thought it was truly INCREDIBLE and genuinely new... a landmark film. Hopefully that will be recognized without hindsight. I believe Hardcore has the chance to be Star Wars for this generation... or perhaps a Terminator or a Reservoir Dogs. I'm writing this to help ensure that happens. Context: I also thought Crank was great.

The ENTIRE movie takes place in FIRST PERSON point of view (POV). ALL 90 MINUTES. It never gets old and the POV remains a strength throughout. I never got motion sickness (and the movie moves fast - incredibly fast). After the movie, the director mentioned the Vimeo short would be unwatchably choppy on the big screen. 2 engineers spent 2 months creating a special rig with 2 magnetically stabilized GoPros to shoot the film. This new rig is the reason why the audience didn't get motion sickness.

I've never seen action like this. It's not just regular action scenes filmed in first person. It's superheroic parkour, fantastical fights, and video game gunplay all presented in first person. Seen from a regular angle, the action would likely be too cartoonish. The POV helps ground everything, making it more believable. Added Bonus: During many scenes you'll wonder how the POV camerman didn't get killed.

Hardcore is incredibly violent, but rarely nasty. People who play modern FPS's will not bat an eye, others will be shocked and appalled. Expect a lot of controversy when the older crowd expresses grave concern about this film, while the younger crowd rallies behind it. Expect marketing to exploit this generation gap.

Action aside, the movie has an unexpected sense of humour. Some driven by situations, some driven by characters, some thanks to the POV. There's not a lot, but what is there is gold - and a relief during all that action.

The main character, despite never appearing, is able to communicate a personality. I believe FPSs will steal the ideas presented here. The circle is complete.

Which brings me to Jimmy (Sharlto Copley)... Can't say much but he's easily as compelling as the action. His interactions with our hero (the POV) are not straightforward, and always intriguing. Somehow they form a bond, which winds up unexpectedly touching. Before the movie Sharlto said it was the craziest, hardest role he's ever done and it's easy to see why.

The bad? The overall plot is good but not great. The bad guy, beyond being powerful and evil, has less character than the POV. Despite some attempts, women are relegated to lesser roles. (I believe the good far FAR outweighs the bad)

Russian Hollywood has created the best first person shooter ever made. When POV becomes the new bullet time, you can thank Hardcore.

This film tells the story of a man who is resurrected from the dead by technology. He is a hybrid of man and technology, and is trained to kill efficiently.

There is a lot of buzz around "Hardcore Henry" being the first film to be filmed in a first person perspective. To me, the film looks more like a video game, because Henry is moves so fast and is so good at killing. People around him just die so easily. Scenes move very quickly from one to another, and the location of the story moves very quickly as well. One second he is on the roof and then the next second he is in a car. I can hardly keep up with the pace and the story! Towards the end, I felt dizzy from all the constant motion, and I was lost by the plot. At least, it was cool to have watched Henry doing daredevil jumps from one floor to another as if he was walking on grass.

This movie is just one those movies where majority of people are either going to love it or hate it. I saw it with my brother and he completely despised it and thought it was the worst movie ever. While I wouldn't go that far, I diddn't think it was great either.

Pros:

-The movie features some of the best action scenes I've ever seen. As well some highly intense brutalized/stylistic kills.

-The stunts pulled off by the main actors is just unreal. Some of the stuff they did was just so amazing and even though it was a movie I couldn't believe it.

-Pacing and the length of the movie was good. Never did it feel sluggish and the movie wasn't to long either.

Cons:

-While the first person approach was interesting after awhile I found myself getting headache from the constantly bouncing around camerawork.

-The plot to me wasn't very good. I tried to get into it and really couldn't. I felt it was all over the place. Also a a good chunk of it doesn't get explained till thelast 30 or so minutes of the movie. Sadly by then you're to confused to care.

-I diddn't enjoy any of the characters at all. Henry has no lines, Copleys role was highly annoying, and bennett isn't feature that much at all. Which is weird because the plot mainly revolves around her. I also diddn't find the main villain interesting enough, instead found him highly cheesy.

Overall its an okay movie. Would I recommend it? I personally wouldn't watch it ever again or tell close family about it. But if you're someone looking for something different its worth a try.

So, I REALLY liked the shorts this movie is based on, so I was ecstatic to see it was being made into a full length movie. Unfortunately it falls short in a lot of ways.

The format is awesome, just like the short action scenes from you tube, but there just wasn't enough original content for me. I think action movies are mostly about those "woah, that was cool" moments, and this movie just doesn't have enough of them. It was kind of like watching a really long montage of people being punched and stabbed close up. Like if you watch the matrix, every part of the lobby scene is unique and cool. This was more like "oh there's a guy, PUNCH", "oh there's two more guys, PUNCH, KICK" repeated over and over. Henry also felt too omnipotent to me. After a while you'd see a room full of guys and know he's just going to go through a blur of killing all of them. If that just happened at a climactic moment, it would be cool, but it happens so often it looses all meaning.

The plot was eh. This wouldn't be a deal breaker, but it certainly didn't bring the movie UP.

One other minor thing. I think they could have done a lot more with non-combat stuff. Like intimate or flirty scenes could be really cool in POV, but there wasn't much of that.

..also, the title sequence was BRUTAL. Like I'm pretty desensitized to violence, and I had to look away at one point.

I went into this with no preconceived expectations. I saw the trailer, it looked interesting, I went.

I wasn't disappointed. Whether this is a commercial hit or a flop, it will be a cult film forever. It's an instant classic for no other reason than it's just so damn fun.

Your best bet to enjoy this movie is to see it as an experience and not as art. Don't ask questions about characters background or whine when they don't explain random biker chicks with samurai swords... it just doesn't matter. I eat ice cream because I like ice cream... I don't pick through it during dessert.

Half human and half machine, Henry wakes only to witness the kidnapping of his wife Estelle, by a group of mercenaries. From this moment onward Henry searches and fights for Estelle with every ounce of energy he possesses. He kills and risks being killed himself, by every weapon imaginable. The viewer, through the use of a special camera attached to someone's head, is about as face to face with the violence as anyone can get. Each move that is made by Henry is followed by the viewer. Every throat that is cut seems as if it is done by our own hands. We figure out what is happening only in so much as Henry does, for both viewer and character are in the same shoes. The film is kinetic, bloody and non-stop action. While worn down by the shaky camera work and bad acting, I also appreciated all the zany twists, gore, rawness and laughs to the story. Ann of Green Gables and Little House on the Prairie the film is not, and this is usually a good thing. Seen at the Toronto International Film Festival 2015.

I think this might just be one of those high-concept movies that works better as an idea than as an actual film. I've been following Ilya Naishullers work as the frontman of Biting Elbows for quite some time now and I was really impressed with those first person shooter style music videos he made with GoPro cameras for two songs of the band. I had my reservations when I first heard that he will attempt to turn it into a movie and in retrospect I think I was right. These POV movies never really work out as feature length movies and this one is no exception. It just gets frustrating after a certain time that the whole thing resembles more a video game than a movie. It lacks the interactivity of the former and the intimacy of the later. We do indeed have the POV of Henry but we can not identify with him because there is no character development or conflict to this character at all. It is just cold and alienating. It also does not help that the movie uses violence as in a rather nihilistic and senseless way. All that is left are nice camera tricks and some genuinely amazing stunt work. But those two things can not sustain a complete movie. This is a typical case of style over substance. Nice to look at but ultimately empty.

Awesome innovative movie jam-packed with creative, intense and bad-ass action. a purely-fun action movie. lots of great scenes. for the most part this experiment was very successful to me. the villain was pretty goofy but for this type of movie that you can't take too seriously, it kind of makes sense (3 viewings)

'Hardcore Henry (2016)' is an interesting experiment, an action film told entirely from the first-person perspective. At times, it provides a unique kind of entertainment you won't find pretty much anywhere else. It's admirable what the team behind the picture were able to achieve with their limited budget and camera restrictions. Some of the already elaborate stunt work is made even more impressive when you realise that the performer(s) for the eponymous 'Henry' couldn't wear a safety wire due to the 360 degree view required for the camera to seamlessly navigate through the sequences. The video-game feel - which is bolstered by several clichés, such as a silent protagonist and 'tutorial' moments -can lead to some frustration as it just seems like you're watching someone else play when you'd rather take the controls yourself. The outlandish plot and mile-a-minute pacing, along with the constrained camera-view, do get tiresome quickly, too. As such, this as an interesting movie worth a watch once for its surface value, but not much more. Plus, it is likely to cause some motion-sickness if that's something you suffer from, and maybe even if you don't. 6/10.

This movie is INSANELY awesome!!!

If I could rate it a 20, I would, just from the shear story telling, character investment and novel first-person POV, not to mention all the video game tropes, puns, and long shots!!

At least 90% of the movie are long shots, that's how well it was directed!

It contains a LOT of elements from Counter Strike, Modern Warfare, Half- Life 2, Portal and Mirrors Edge, so if you like those games, you should absolutely love this movie!

It has a LOT of gore in it, so I wouldn't recommend it to the squeamish, but if you're a high-octane true-blooded alpha male like myself, you should absolutely love it!

Hardcore Henry is an action film, and it shares most of the flaws that action films do, except for a gimmick: first person perspective. However, the creators of Hardcore Henry committed to that simple concept with a level of clarity that elevates the work and makes it truly unique.

What I find truly impressive is how much more real everything feels from a first person perspective. Every chase scene feels real, every gunfight, every visceral punch just looks and feels so right. Using a gopro for the entire film doesn't lend itself well to a beautiful image, but committing to such a concept anchors it in reality, and that's the important thing. As well, the main character is a mute, which immediately cals to mind the silent FPS protagonist, and allows the viewer to imprint upon them. It's fantastic.

I'm not going to talk about what doesn't work, because it's the same problems most action flicks have: it's unrealistic, it's goofy, it has too much music, and it's story isn't terribly well written or interesting. But it looks damn good, and it feels damn good, and that's all I care about. I wish there were more movies like this.

Not worth 18 certificate on the grounds of violence, I've seen more violent movies in my life for almost 58 years(I'm born in 1958 and I'm watching movies from when I was 3 years old). And I have seen thousands of films, almost all from 1961 onward and thousands of movies made before I was born. In terms of action, Hardcore Henry has the highest level of adrenaline, pure adrenaline, the highest quality. Now I believe that people, not all of them, only some people, can levitate. I'm kidding, of course. But everything is so well done in this film, that it almost seems truthful. The stunts are downright breathless. But not only. All actors, music, editing, everything. It makes you want to see it again and again, to understand it and feel better. An exceptional film, excellent. Ilya Naishuller, I want to work with you! And, to answer to a guy here on IMDb, concerning the problem he has with the stupid "dance routine" in the middle, I don't know Ilya Naishuller but, I'm almost sure that he wanted to pay homage to Stanley Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange (1971), a film in exactly the same kind, a masterpiece of the genre, a film about violence and how violence can be cured. Remember the dance scene of Alex DeLarge (Malcolm McDowell) to the tune Singin 'in the Rain? Maybe Ilya Naishuller will tell us... 10 out of 10.

"Hardcore Henry" is an ambitious experiment in action filmmaking, but its relentless chaos and limited narrative leave much to be desired.

The film's unique selling point is its first-person perspective, giving viewers the sensation of being inside the action. While this concept is intriguing, it quickly becomes disorienting and exhausting. The shaky, frenetic camera work makes it difficult to follow the action, and those prone to motion sickness might find the experience unpleasant.

The plot is paper-thin and often feels like a mere excuse to string together action sequences. Henry, the protagonist, is a cyborg with no memory, on a mission to rescue his wife from a villain with telekinetic powers. The story lacks depth and character development, making it challenging to invest emotionally in the outcome.

The film's supporting characters, including Jimmy played by Sharlto Copley, add some comic relief and variety to the proceedings, but they are underutilized and often feel more like caricatures than fully developed characters.

One aspect where "Hardcore Henry" excels is its stunt work and practical effects. The action sequences are undeniably impressive, and the filmmakers didn't hold back on the violence and gore. However, this relentless violence becomes monotonous and numbing after a while, and it's questionable whether it adds much value to the overall experience.

The film's soundtrack, featuring a mix of classic rock songs, adds some energy to the action sequences but can feel somewhat out of place at times.

In the end, "Hardcore Henry" is a cinematic rollercoaster ride that prioritizes action over substance. While it offers a unique visual perspective and impressive stunts, it ultimately falls short due to its lack of a compelling story, character development, and its overreliance on dizzying camerawork. If you're seeking a mindless, action-packed experience, "Hardcore Henry" might provide some thrills, but it's unlikely to leave a lasting impression.

I believe this to be the very First Person movie produced for mass audiences. The trailer is enough to captivate anyone that watches it at first glance, so I was excited to make sure I watched it on the big screen because it didn't seem like the type of movie that would be worth watching at home.

I didn't go watch because of the plot, I went, like many others, just for the experience of a 90 minutes of a first person action film.

Where it failed: All sequences looked the same except with different "thugs" and different guns. It felt like the movie looped at least 4 times.

I am not sure the correct word to use in this situation is "bored" but I was tired of the same thing over and over by the first 30 minutes I wanted to walk out, but I didn't want to miss "SOMETHING", which never really came.

The experience was not that great, it was not like the 180 degree cinemas they had back in the days where they would put you on the seat of a roller coaster and you could really feel like you were part of it. I wasn't able to feel included, it did not really seem that immersive as I thought it was going to be.

Although I didn't come for the plot, I have to say this movie was just weird. I won't get into the details but it was all over the place, a mess really.

I am not sure more like these will be produced, It will all depend on how the mass audience reacts to the title, but although I do not see a future for "first person movies" I do think this is a gateway into 360 Virtual Reality movies, which in theory at least, sounds very interesting.

I have to say, go watch it for the experience of something completely different, but don't expect anything out of the ordinary

I was definitely already a fan of the Biting Elbows music video that gave rise, but was unprepared for the roller coaster of awesome that doesn't let up for 90 minutes. I don't know if it was the 98 foot Frank's FDX screen or just a more attached rig, but some of the action was shaky and a little hard to follow, especially when Henry would get moved or tossed around. Without a sense of motion, you can lose your bearings. Being an avid FPS gamer will really help here. I'd recommend not filling your vision to the periphery with the screen (like the front 1/3rd point, where I sat) and choose a middle screen height position, which will make it more like a computer monitor experience. That said, I still found it easier to follow then the hand to hand combat in the early Bourne films, and more enjoyable. The audio is a blast with a good system, so don't wait until it gets to the crappy 30 seat theaters with the turned down speakers the megaplexes seem to tuck away in unused corners.

Sharlto Copley is extremely fun to watch in this film and did a great job not being the same character in District 9, and Elysium, proving far far from it (not a fan of Chappie, but he did well in that too).

There are so many oo, ahh, wow, and shock moments in this film. I really want to see a sequel and would definitely be happy to help fund it if they go that route again.

I think I will be seeing this again.

tldr: if you grew up with or are a fan of FPS games, this movie is amazingly fun.

I was very reluctant to watch this as I cannot stand quick-cut, hand -held camera shot movies.

I am not a big fan of pov movies nor m a fan of games n all.

My son made me play GTA n i kinda enjoyed that. So it was he who persuaded me to watch this flick. It was not bad. The story is lame, acting is nada.

The best thing bout this flick is the top notch brutal/violent action sequences. At times it made me turn my head not coz of gore but coz of its shaky cam.

Ilya Naishuller shud b given more action projects to direct. This movie has a very good parkour sequence. Action fans n gamers will not be disappointed at all. I wish that this movie was made in a normal mode with the same kinda stunts, parkour, action n gore. The gun fight sequences are top notch. Gamers and action junkies will love this mind-boggling action fiesta.

The title sequence of Hardcore Henry,and Henry is punched in the face, shot with pistol, has a baseball bat applied to head,shot again with a pistol, then shot by shotgun. Finally he is slashed in the stomach by a broken bottle, knifed by a serrated blade that goes completely through his neck and shot in the head. All filmed in slow motion, ultra-graphic realism with blood and bits of tissue, bone, and organs flying everywhere very slowly.

The graphic destruction of human tissue for the film's never-ending murders could only be imagined by sadists and others who are not tousled by the experience of watching human suffering.

This movie has no central idea, very little plot, no direction, only ceaseless pornographic violence. When any tiny parts of the plot peek out between the endless killing, they are swiftly brushed aside by new brace of homicides.

Apparently there is humor in Hardcore Henry, according to one reviewer. He sneered cynically at those who found the violence too intense, or found the movie to be too similar to video games. "What did you expect?" he asked, implying that those who found this movie went a bit too far lacked sophistication. He then went on to lecture and say that he found much humor and laughed often throughout this movie.

We have been conditioned to increasingly accept more and more graphic violence on TV and the Big Screen.

But when does the violence become too intense? And what happens when and if, it does? Hardcore Henry may inspire some debate on these matters.

"Hardcore Henry" is exactly what the trailers promised:a First Person Shooter on the big screen. If you're that sort of gamer, I'm sure this is candy - but it never gets beyond that gimmick to tell a good story. The camera-work is good for driving scenes. But for fistfights, running and parkour? Hell, no!

I'm not rating this movie because it's not like I didn't know what was in store going in. Mildly curious, sure, but it has FPS written all over it from the start. Even so, I doubt I'll ever see this again. Here's a much better way to describe it. You know those Let's Play videos on YouTube? This is *exactly* like that. You're watching a video game that someone else is playing. Where's the appeal in that?