Bodycam

Gordon April 12, 2026 at 3:58 am by Gordon 1

It started off kinda strong. The opening premise was good and had promise, but, as you go, they expect the viewer to have knowledge of the "Underman" and give no set-up or backstory to it. The acting is strong. Other than that, I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone.

Chin02 April 5, 2026 at 5:32 pm by Chin02 6

Pretty enjoyable ride for the most part. Started really strong with a mystery of what was going on that, to me at least, dropped the ball at the end. I'm always one for not showing the monster cause it's scarier that way. I'd say it is worth the watch if you like found footage movies.

Sierbahnn May 5, 2026 at 10:53 am by Sierbahnn 6

Found footage films are always a bit tricky. You have to establish why the cameras stay on. And a body cam born by a police officer is as good of a reason as any. The characters in this movie aren't bad at all and you feel engaged with their plight. The directing is good and the scenery is spooky. Overall it isn't bad at all. The Nebulous antagonist makes the tension a bit more interesting, and the ending is a trope, but nevertheless a good one. I recommend this if you like found footage.

kutthroatsosa October 4, 2026 at 4:41 pm by kutthroatsosa 9

Wow, where do I even begin? Bodycam was perhaps the most refreshing take on the found footage horror genre I’ve seen in at least a few years. The concept of using police bodycams as the source of footage instead of the typical handheld camera was genuinely original & allowed the genre to be used in a whole new way. It already seems to have inspired other found footage horror movies to copy it, with ‘Infirmary’ being a clear example. Another fantastic thing about the film is that it respects your time. It’s super short at approximately 75 minutes & gets straight into the horror from the very start. Typically, horror movies, or any movie for that matter, but especially found footage horror can be slow & full of unnecessary fat that could easily be trimmed. There’s none of that here. From the moment the film begins, the catalyst for the rest of the movie is already set in motion. The film follows two police officers in a rough neighbourhood who respond to a DV call. When they arrive, there are numerous homeless “tweakers” zonked out around the house/street. As they enter the property upon hearing screams, the house is clearly decrepit, creepy & immediately unsettling. One of the officers is forced to accidentally shoot one of the disturbing people at the crime scene, so the officers decide to cover it up. The rest of the events of the film spawn from there, as a supernatural cult begins pursuing vengeance upon them. For a low-budget horror film, I was really pleased with how well this turned out. For one, I was surprised by how many locations they managed to shoot in & how effective the set design was despite the budget constraints. The calibre of acting was also noticeably strong. Sean Rogerson from Grave Encounters, who plays Officer Bryce, was great, but so was literally the entire cast, including the secondary characters: Officer Jackson, his mother, the two tweakers from the DV call, Bryce’s wife, Esposito & everyone else involved. Everybody brought their A-game. I will admit the VFX of the monster/entity at the end was a little shoddy, but I loved the creature design & I also respect the hell out of the director & editors for not abusing the camera glitch & shake cliché that is so often used in found footage horror to hide subpar CGI. Found footage horror is my favourite horror genre & even I get tired of how often shaky cam & over-glitching are used to hide anything even remotely difficult to pull off. So kudos to Brandon Christensen for being bold enough not to abuse that trick just to get away with the CGI. The rest of the VFX in this film were extremely well done. Most of them are simple & cheap (the sort of VFX that are invisible to most people), but there were also some tricky shots that certainly weren’t cheap or easy & they were pulled off well. My only real VFX gripe is that the demon creature had a slightly cartoonish, video game texture to it, though it’s barely noticeable unless you’re a cinephile or actively looking for that kind of thing, I’m also going easy on it because the monsters actual design was awesome which makes up for the amateur texture work. There’s also a really cool & nuanced story detail that didn’t fully sink in for me at first, but I read about it in a Reddit AMA with the director Brandon Christensen before writing this review & I wanted to share it, he said: “At complete face value, the “you take something from us” line is literally about the baby. Since Bryce has a baby on the way, they got retribution by taking it as a replacement. The couple in the opening hadn't sacrificed the baby, but actually the opposite, they had second thoughts of giving up their child & wanted the police to take it. The Father is literally saying "take it take it take it" on repeat when Officer Bryce finds him. Unfortunately, everything around them felt threatening and since he didn't articulate his hopes well, it looked far more dangerous than it actually was. But I imagine The Underman had struck a deal with this couple for their child, and they tried to trick it with a dog - but this idea of selling children for drugs is pulled from real headlines. So that was their goal, make the trade, have second thoughts, and try to get the baby rescued...which failed horribly.” I found that to be a fascinating nugget of information because it hadn’t occurred to me & it doesn’t seem to have occurred to anybody I’ve seen review this film online either. I’ve watched numerous YouTubers cover this movie in extraordinary detail, & everybody seems to think the line “you took one of his, he takes one of yours” is referring to the adult tweaker who was part of the cult & was killed by the officer. In reality, it was the baby that acted as the catalyst for the revenge from the entity & the cult members. It’s also interesting because the director intended the situation to appear misleadingly dangerous to the main characters (the cops) but it also came off that way to the viewer so I had no idea the DV call was actually a front in an effort to get the officers to save the baby. It also makes far more sense now why the homeless tweaker cult members were outside the house. I had assumed it was just foreshadowing & because the neighbourhood was full of them, but now I realise it was far more intentional. I’m curious if it was meant to be vague to the viewer or if it was a mistake not to make it more obvious, but regardless, I found it to be an absolutely fascinating hidden detail. The score (as limited as it is) was really nice too, the song that plays a couple times in the movie such as when the officers rush over to Officer Bryce’s house, which is called ‘This Love (That I'm Giving You)’ by The Joy Tones which was mistakenly credited in the films credits as The Soulmates Connection, was really nice & was a really nice touch & added a lot to the atmosphere. Overall, I REALLY enjoyed this movie. I applaud its originality, both in story and in its use of police bodycams as the camera device. It feels fresh, intense, creative & genuinely different within a genre that can often become repetitive. I treasure this movie a lot & look forward to seeing the director’s other work. This is an easy 9/10 (Amazing / Loved it / Nearly perfect).