User reviews

Actually more than one game! So no pun intended! Yes if that sounds familiar ... you may have ... Saw in mind! You saw it coming anyway (the pun that is). You may be tired of all the movies trying to copy Saw - and I don't think this is able to reach the heights of it ... maybe not even some of its sequels power.

That said, the movie is more than fine .... especially the main bad guy. He is having so much fun with his role ... and it shows! Even if he covers his face - I assume there may be another movie in the works - or at least planned ... maybe prequel, maybe something or rather someone else than him taking over ... maybe him - depends on the end of the movie, doesn't it? That was rhetorical obviously.

Interesting horror with some horrifying effects ... not for the faint hearted for sure ... be wary if you are sensitive ... just saying.

Netflix practically begged me to watch this movie. It was relentless, like an overeager friend who won't stop texting you about their latest obsession. So, with expectations lower than a slug doing the limbo, I gave in.

Now, was the plot groundbreaking? Absolutely not. But then, BOOM, Ed Westwick appeared, smouldering like a human campfire and doing his best "I'm totally American" act. Did my rating get a little Westwick bump? I mean... who's to say? (Spoiler: It did.)

What I did like was the ensemble vibe. More characters, more dialogue. On the downside, the lighting crew must've called in sick, because in some scenes, I was squinting harder than someone reading the fine print on a New Year New Me 2025 gym membership. Game of Thrones Season 8 flashbacks, anyone?

Now, let's talk about the dark web subplot. Creepy as hell. My overactive brain instantly filed it under "probably happening IRL," like a mix of Taken and Hostel. And honestly? The film was disturbing without being a gore fest, which I appreciated. Sometimes implying horror is way more effective than splattering it everywhere. Let me do a little mental scarring on my own, thanks.

My golden rule: If a movie doesn't hook me in 15 minutes, I'm out. But this one passed the test. Why? The lack of slow, soul-draining silent scenes helped. So did the abundance of characters. Oh, and Ed Westwick. Did I mention Ed Westwick? Swoon.

"Darkgame" is a suspenseful ride that throws you into the murky world of online predators and hidden identities. While the film falters at times with a predictable plot that borrows from other films, it's the strong performances and intriguing characters that keep you engaged.

The story follows Detective Jacobs as he delves into a twisted online game where viewers pay to watch victims tortured. The investigation takes him down a rabbit hole of cryptic clues and shadowy figures, including the enigmatic Presenter (played with chilling relish by Andrew P. Stephen) who orchestrates the disturbing game.

Where Darkgame truly excels is in its atmosphere. The film masterfully captures the unsettling anonymity of the dark web, making you question who you can trust online. The interrogation scenes are particularly tense, with Detective Jacobs facing off against cunning suspects like Larch (brilliantly portrayed by Rick Yale), a character whose backstory hints at a deeper darkness.

However, the film's biggest weakness lies in its familiarity. The plot unfolds in a fairly predictable manner, relying on well-worn tropes of the genre. With a bigger budget, Darkgame could have delved deeper into the psychological motivations of its characters.

Here's where the film's true potential lies. Characters like Larch and The Presenter are far too fascinating to be relegated to the sidelines. While the film might not break new ground narratively, it lays the foundation for a captivating universe with untapped potential. If you're looking for a quick and suspenseful watch, Darkgame won't disappoint.

Firstly, this film is set in Portland Oregon but entirely shot in Bristol. It seems like all the actors are British and have to adopt American or Eastern European accents, which is clearly too challenging for them as everyone sounds ridiculous. Just make the film British and the dialogue won't sound so forced and awkward. Secondly it's a pretty poor execution of a tired idea. Full of silly montages of people "working" and no character development so you don't really care what happens to any of them. Sometimes films get made and you wonder how. Like, who said yes to this?

Give it a miss I think..

This was a confusing watch..... why they have tried to make it an American film, when the streets (with the newly introduced 20mph road markings and Bristol landmarks) and actors are clearly british, but they are putting on god awful accents, the captains uniform is something you would pick up from a fancy dress shop and even police department looks like a sadly made up job centre office.... And the plot, ummmm..... not great! Don't even get me started on the lighting, was it in the room with us? Hardly anything likeable about this movie that I was tricked into watching with it being in the top 10 on Netflix, how?

Even AI like ChatGPT thinks this is stupid. 'DarkGame' glorifies violence and sickness, feeding harmful ideas to people's minds. In 2024, we should be better than praising a movie that's this irresponsible and tone-deaf. If you're leaving a good review, rethink your standards. Had to waste 2 minutes of my life to create an account here. This movie was horrible. Investors on that one shouldn't get a profit. Disappointed from Netflix uploading that one.👎🏽 Now I have to add more character words so I could post my comment, hopefully it's worth it! Zippity zop, flibber flabber, bamboozle, and a dash of plop!

For the love of all that is holy... LEARN TO LIGHT A FREAKING SCENE! Every. Single. Scene. Is backlit with daylight coming through the windows and ZERO fill lighting. In a police station, apparently they cannot afford to pay the power bill. Not a single light is on. At night, there is the equivalent of 4 watt night light bulbs "lighting" the scene, again from behind, so that the main figures are silhouetted. There is one scene in the killer's basement where there is literally a dual fixture flood light - FLOOD light, mind you - that apparently puts out as much area light as MAYBE a single 40 watt bulb. And that is being generous. I don't know who started this ignorant, film-school-dropout trend of poor lighting, but they should be forced to participate in one of these "Russian Roulette" games.

OK... enough about the lack of lighting. The movie itself... meh. It's been done before, and in much better fashion. There is no reason for the killer or his games. There is no rhyme nor reason to the "contestants" choosing. There is no reason for the convict that is called in to help, and then once he does, he's completely forgotten. As a matter of fact, once the feds come in and take over (like they always do), towards the end, the just aren't there. No reason. No mention.

Oh, but just for checklist's sake, there is one of each... just because. No matter who you are, you WILL see yourself in this movie. As a matter of fact, I have never seen so many foreign language speakers in America in my life. I will give it that the usual suspects are not all knowing and all powerful. The casting is the only thing "current." But It is still noteworthy just for the sake of transparency.

Nah... don't even bother with this one.

I found this film to be a gripping thriller that defied the expectations set by its trailer. While not excessively gory, it effectively maintained tension throughout, offering a storyline that kept me engaged without any dull moments. Ed Westwick's portrayal of a troubled cop on a mission to rescue kidnapped individuals from a dark web game show was noteworthy, bringing depth to the character. Opposing him was a villain reminiscent of the Joker, played by newcomer Andrew Stephen, who delivered a standout performance that evolved from menacing to oddly compelling.

The heart of the film revolves around the captives, a group of likable characters, particularly the main female victim Katya, who serves as the audience's window into the dark games. While the film may not be groundbreaking in its themes, it presents them in a well-structured manner that sustains interest from start to finish. The tension builds effectively, with gruesome moments cleverly implied rather than explicitly shown. The director skillfully elicits strong performances from the cast, and the refined script contributes to the overall coherence of the film.

While the film excels in many aspects, it does show signs of budget limitations in certain areas. While the setting suits the narrative, larger set pieces could have enhanced the viewing experience. Overall, it offers a tightly woven storyline that keeps viewers captivated throughout.

For a British film especially, the writing is subpar and lacking any subtlety. It's like it was written by a 12 year old. There is a scene about a third of the way through where the large group of captives are all holding guns and 'forced' to play russian roullette while their 'captors' are standing around the room without guns, goading and mocking them. This tells you everything you need to know about this film. Why they decided to take a bunch of British actors and make them fake American accents & pretend they were in Portland USA rather than Bristol (the actual filming location) is beyond me. The end just inexplicably disintegrated into nothing.

This intense, gruesome thriller has a fairly predictable script - especially the cliched dialogue between PD and FBI - with a few clever twists. But overall the acting is generally very good, especially by the victims, and some of the fight scenes are well choreographed and appear very realistic.

Because it's low budget, my expectations of the director were low, but it's kind of amusing to see how they used the limited locations.

There's at least one fun jump-scare and certainly enough to make this worth watching for fans of this type of psychological thriller.

And it's also unusual to see a movie set in Portland.

Read reviews about 10 mins in ..agreed with most it looks amateurish but the actual game show was well done and the actor who played the host was watchable ..all the American accents were passable apart from the police officer with the grey beard it was all over the place ..it holds its own against saw and hostel and they had bigger budgets so hats off to all involved ..in what could easily have been a complete mess the direction was quite tight and and the acting was ok .....................I've seen far far worse films that have had rave reviews..I'll name one bloody Black phone lol ..like I said not ground reading but very watchable.

Disappointed! The idea of the film was good - executed in a miserable way.

Set design - meh Costume design - Bad Acting - more than enough room for improvement Script/ dialogue - a lot of cliché tech and law terminology Music/score - okay

Overall felt like a high school project, so I can imagine it would be convincing for 12yr olds.

It was like watching one of those fake prank videos on Facebook - just irritatingly pretentious.

The events are said to take place on the dark web - I'm confident that zero research was conducted regarding the etiquette and culture surrounding the dark web and 'red rooms'.

Same goes for law enforcement - their meetings are cheesy, the swat team are cringe and felt like I was watching a YouTube skit or a SNL sketch. I'm impressed at how little effort can be made into a movie that potentially had a great film writer.

Everything felt really vague! ... Not to be confused with ambiguity (in which case would be somewhat suspenseful) It is a watered down version of something that could've been tasty.

Everything felt a little too clean and 'on the nose' with no depth or character development.

It's like when Crime programs like CSI used to do that thing where they click one button to "enhance image" ... Like bruh 😆 that's the feeling I got when watching this - like we're just supposed to accept it haha.

Gave 2 stars because it MIGHT be funny if you're high.

This isn't a bad film, the script is dreadful, the locations dreadful, cast dreadful, effects dreadful, but every now and then you can see the bones of something better.

The story and the twist ending seem very heavily influenced by Saw, but the movie itself is like the Saw you'd get if you ordered it on Temu or Wish.

Apart from some good lines here and there the dialogue is terrible and there is a whole sub-plot about an imprisoned tech genius serial killer that just doesn't go anywhere or serve any real purpose.

The single biggest thing holding this film back for me though is the villain, nothing about him works, he's not scary, not intelligent, there is no threat or menace when he's on screen, he's not Jigsaw, he's more 'Kiddies Safety Scissors'.

I'm embarrassed to discover this is actually a British film despite its setting. Let's start with the premise; like a cross between S. F. W, Saw and Running man whilst not coming close to any of those in any aspect. The cinematography is like a student art project, the screenplay is stilted and unconvincing. But probably the worst aspect of this, is that it contains themes of celebrated violence and sadism with absolutely no point to any of it.

I got the impression that perhaps I was supposed to find myself rooting for the "presenter" as some sort of sadistic but enigmatic villain like Art the Clown in Terrifier. But he was so utterly one dimensional and he gives away none of his motivations. He's just a crazy game show host. Other movies of a similar genre attempt to to at least build some motivation behind the violence or lore around the villain. This did none of that. He's a narcissist, that's all we get. The fact this finished on an obvious attempt to coax a sequel (or more) made this vacuous trash all the worse. Avoid... and please, no sequels.

This movie seemed like a watered down version mash up of SAW and Hostel. Lead played by one dimensional unbelievable Ed Westwick, but I guess the dialog left him no choice. The Presenter was a mix of Joker & Saw without any embellishments. Never really answered how the Presenter was one step ahead of the cops/FBI as well as other plot dropped questions. Should have been so much through and not left any dead ends. I was not too thrilled and left very disappointed.

I think I watched a different movie than those who thought it was an "intense, gruesome thriller" or "A Gripping Thriller" or even "intelligent".

Like another reviewer said, a movie for me is either I'm in or I'm out, in the first 15 minutes. This one, I was in! Kept me entertained. I particularly rated Rick Yale playing the convict, acting wise. Shame he wasn't in it more. Yeah, the plot may not have been the most original, but not many films are now. Hard to come up with an idea that hasn't been done in some capacity, by now. This one touched on some bizarre big brother come Saw concept. What I expect from a netflix flick now is a good standard of acting, a decent dialogue and a storyline that can keep me entertained. Not expecting every film to be an earth shattering unique, block buster. This one I felt had good pace from the start, to draw me in, was entertaining and definitely delivered an overall good effort, though slightly predicatable twists. Character wise, gave a fair bit of personality and background to help with the storyline to the main characters. Looking forward to potentially a sequel!

The movie is very bad and the story is repeated, but by directing worse than the previous films that were watched, shooting is limited to two places throughout the movie. I do not recommend wasting your time watching this bad content. The movie is commercial. I don't know how it was included in the cinema. It does not live up, so the actors were not, and there are many mistakes that the mind cannot accept even for entertainment. I hope that the cinema companies will be the greatest responsibility so that these commercial films are not included once in the theaters.

Thanks for reading my opinion.

A more intelligent film than it first appears actually. I watched thinking it would be a mildly thriller in vein of other dark web orientated content. But I was surprisingly entertained on a few fronts.

The film opens with a bloody death as the masked host of a game show kills an innocent girl, and I immediately thought I'd be watching a nasty hostel-alike show.

Not at all - sticking with it, what unfurls is a tight, attention grabbing thriller, with a lot of tension, and squirming moments that manage to avoid showing any real gore, a testament to the film-makers to able to pull that off.

The antagonist of the film, the Presenter, kidnaps people and puts them in his game show on the dark web, where presumably his evil friends place bets on who gets evicted and how they get killed.

What then unfurls is something a little more layered. Ben, played by Gossip Girls Ed Westwick, is battling his own demons whilst hunting this supposed deranged lunatic taking people hostage, and a young mum called Kaya who provides our window into the game, and the Presenter himself, who, in my eyes, is the real star of the show here.

I found myself starting to root for him about two thirsts into the film, which is a great mark pf a film presenting an antagonist that we might love to hate. He is deliciously played by Andrew P Stephen, who has done little on screen before, but he is clearly enjoying the role immensely, he is a joy to watch and I would like to see a sequel where he take more of a central stage.

This film delivers of thrills and drama. It lacks some sophistication in its execution, I'd have liked the police station and exteriors to have felt bigger, but the action it does have is well done.

Good evening, everyone! I'm Mr. C Reviewer, and tonight we'll be diving into the film DarkGame. I had the opportunity to watch it on Netflix. This movie originally premiered on February 20, 2024, and has a runtime of 1 hour and 40 minutes. It is rated for viewers aged 18 and older. Notably, parts of the film were filmed in England. It grossed approximately for DarkGame was $217,493 worldwide. As someone on the autism spectrum, I appreciated the inclusion of subtitles, which greatly enhanced my ability to follow along with the dialogue throughout the film. The movie was directed by Howard J. Ford and written by Tom George, Gary Grant and Niall Johnson.

Summary: A tenacious investigator races against the clock to dismantle a nefarious online game show operating on the dark web. This chilling competition forces captives into a fight for survival.

Review: -The movie begins on a strong note, effectively establishing its premise right from the start. We are introduced to The Presenter and one of the survivors, allowing us to grasp the stakes involved in the narrative. The film explores the consequences faced by individuals who lose a game, providing insight into their experiences. We meet another key character as they successfully complete a task at work, which offers a glimpse into their professional life. This introduction also sheds light on their home life, enriching our understanding of their character. In the film, characters are frequently portrayed as being pushed to their breaking points, illustrating how desperation can drive individuals to make horrific decisions. The movie also critiques modern society's obsession with violence and suffering, particularly through digital platforms. By presenting an illegal game show that draws an audience willing to pay for entertainment rooted in torture and death, the film reflects on pressing real-world issues such as online voyeurism and the ethical ramifications of consuming violent content. The film's pacing was meticulously crafted to sustain tension throughout, ensuring that viewers remain captivated from beginning to end. The interplay of suspense and psychological elements weaves a compelling narrative that keeps audiences on the edge of their seats. The high-stakes nature of the game introduces profound drama, making each moment feel vital and resonant.

I tend to be quite a jumpy person when watching movies on my own, and this one did make me jump once, although I was somewhat anticipating it. There were moments when I felt compelled to shout at the screen, urging the characters to take action, only for it to be too late by the time they finally did. I was quite impressed with the casting choices. The performances were generally strong and often felt authentic, to the extent that it became almost difficult to watch at times. It was evident that Andrew, who portrayed The Presenter, thoroughly enjoyed his role in the film, even though much of his face was obscured by a mask. I found the film's soundtrack and sound effects to be particularly effective, as they complemented the scenes.

-I appreciated the costumes in the movie, particularly how they incorporated elements that made the clothing appear worn and dirty. This attention to detail enhanced the film's realism. Many movies often overlook such nuances, focusing instead on ensuring that actors look polished and tidy on screen, while avoiding a more gritty or grim aesthetic. I found it refreshing that this film chose not to shy away from that authenticity. The film wasn't excessively graphic, as it includes cutaways from the more brutal scenes. I found the depiction of gore to be quite realistic based on my observations. However, I believe that the overall believability of the film could have been improved with a greater variation in colour tones throughout. I appreciated how the film explored various characters by shifting perspectives throughout the narrative. It delved into the dynamics of the groups holding individuals hostage and forcing them to participate in live games, as well as the captives themselves and the group who's aim is to rescue them. Dim lighting was used strategically to emphasize key elements within the frame.

-I enjoyed meeting some of the characters and gaining insights into their backgrounds. However, I would have appreciated a deeper exploration of their psychological motivations, which could have added more complexity to the narrative. The character of the Presenter struck me as particularly unsettling; I certainly wouldn't want to encounter him in real life. I was pleased to see powerful female protagonists at the forefront of the story, effectively driving the narrative and challenging traditional gender roles often depicted in action films.

-While watching the film, I was reminded of the third book in the Timothy Blake series by Jack Heath. In real life, victims often have to fight for their freedom, a theme that is subtly explored in the movie, which I appreciated. I admired the film's commitment to a more realistic portrayal of its themes instead of conforming to conventional cinematic endings. This approach felt refreshing compared to typical formulaic storytelling. Additionally, I enjoyed how the ending suggested the possibility of a sequel; if that happens, I would be eager to watch it and provide a review.

I rate each film I watch out of 10 and for this one, I give it a 7.2 Remember this was what I thought about the Movie personally and I suggest that you give it a go for yourself.

This horrible portray of torture is not welcomed in this world. I cannot condone such horrible filming of what could be a real experience for many people and future people & so therefore i am cancelling my subscription to Netflix & will not be renewing my membership ever again as for a popular streaming company to allow this is disgusting & can only be attributed to many individuals that have such a deep instinct to harm & to kill & i will be submitting this report to the authorities. It is disgusting that a film such as this is allowed on a mainstream that has so many viewers including minors.

I don't even know what's to start. I read the synopsis and knew going into it that it wasn't going to be a masterpiece, but I'm a big fan of bad movies so jumped in anyway. Plus I've been carrying a crush on Ed Westwick since I was a kid watching Gossip Girl.

Oh man, what the actual heck was I thinking.

I'm not one to nit-pick on direction and lighting etc; I'm certainly not an expert. But even my untrained eye thought the choices were just weird. What was with the random montages backed with 80s network television music? What's with the utterly terrible dialogue? Bad acting, bad dialogue, weird plot filler that did nothing to help the story, bad lighting, bad everything. B movies have value, but this one didn't.

How do you mess this up when you're just ripping off the Saw franchise with a touch of Squid Game? 10 movies and 1 TV season of source material, people. How hard is it to screw this up.

Do yourself a favor and only watch this if you're prepared to pee yourself laughing while rolling your eyes and questioning your life choices.

Ah, Dark Game. A title brimming with intrigue and the promise of suspense. Sadly, the only suspense was in wondering how long I could endure this painful exercise in cinematic misdirection. Spoiler alert: not long.

First off, let's address the elephant in the room - or rather, the glaring 20 MPH road signs scattered across the "Portland" streets. Nothing screams American city like a distinctly British road layout, complete with double yellow lines and an unmistakable drizzle. Portland, Oregon? More like Portland-on-Thames.

Now, onto the accents. I can only assume the cast trained with a dialect coach who learned American English by watching YouTube videos on 1.5x speed. Every line feels like an audition for a bad sitcom, with "y'alls" and "ain'ts" delivered with the enthusiasm of someone who just Googled "How to sound American." It's less Portland and more Poundland.

The characters? Forgettable doesn't quite cover it. We've got your stock cardboard cut-outs: the brooding protagonist, the suspicious neighbour, and a Russian hacker who, despite being the most fleshed-out character, feels about as relevant in 2025 as MySpace. It's hard to connect with him, especially given the political climate of the last three years. You're not rooting for him so much as waiting for him to log off.

The plot, if you can call it that, feels cobbled together from rejected Black Mirror scripts. Dark secrets, ominous emails, and a twist you can see coming from 20 MPH (or should I say 32 KPH?) away. By the time the "big reveal" comes around, you're more relieved it's nearly over than shocked by the supposed cleverness.

Even the cinematography fails to redeem this mess. The dreary, washed-out aesthetic might be intentional, but it makes everything feel like an extended insurance ad - though one where nobody gets covered, only uncovered as a fraud.

Dark Game tries so hard to be edgy and thrilling but ends up as a poorly assembled jigsaw puzzle with pieces from entirely different sets. The only real tension is deciding whether to hit pause or just give up altogether.

Verdict: Save yourself the agony and play your own dark game - like seeing how long you can stare at paint drying. At least that has a sense of progression.