NAZI VENGEANCE is a very low budget British horror flick, shot in Ireland with a budget slightly higher than a typical indie. After some back story about the Akashic records, the story begins properly when a quartet of hikers venture deep into the countryside, only to find themselves mercilessly hunted by a mysterious stranger with a burning desire for revenge. The film's Nazi link is only evinced in a couple of flashbacks and doesn't really tie in to the main storyline all that well. When it comes down to it, this is nothing more than your usual grubby torture porn outing, although the acting isn't quite as bad as you'd expect. The surprise in the cast is the presence of Julian Glover, fresh off GAME OF THRONES and still going strong despite his advancing years.

Wow! just wow. Two mismatched Brighton couples travel into the deepest darkest depths of the South Downs in search of their Nazi war criminal pasts and meet the locals, who have long memories. Yes, you did read that correctly. If they had a dog this could have been the Famous Five novel that Enid Blyton always wanted to write but never did. Throw in a perpetual quest to find the village pub and ale, references to the Battle of Britain, Spitfire fly pasts and "strange" locals and you have a truly weird and wonderful mix. I found myself actually laughing out loud at some points which I'm sure were unintentionally funny. I defy anybody to watch the tractor and tent scene and not chuckle. The greatest mystery to me is how Julian Glover, a veteran of the Royal Shakespeare Company and an actor, got roped into this. Julian plays his part very well, as you would expect, but only adds to the problems of the film by acting, underlining the fact that he is the only one of the cast who can. I couldn't help thinking that he was probably more annoyed at the other cast members than anything the Nazi invaders might have done but it no doubt helped him get into character. As one of the characters memorably says "There's no point in pretending this isn't happening." Regretfully, I can but agree. For the unintentional but genuine pleasure it brought me my score 4/10.

The subject of this film could have been interesting, but the production leaves a lot to be desired.

It is certainly not the worst film I have ever seen (keeping in mind I am talking about several oh-so-long decades) but it is not a film I would watch twice.

The main problem with it seems to be the editing. Several scenes linger far too long without relaying anything to the viewer - they just hang there wasting time. One gets the feeling they were left this long just to fill up the time available.

Also in the edit, scenes which seemed about to lead to something interesting just lead to nothing much at all. One is left wondering what the implied drama was all about. A bit like waiting for a big rocket on firework night only to be treated to someone lighting their fag.

Continuity is another big problem. Someone (or some people) were not paying detailed attention! If you watch it you will see. Inexcusable in the modern age when a simple mobile phone is capable of recording details of a scene which can be used to set up the next scene.

As for the acting, well it is what it is. The cast seemed to stutter along like planks in a fence. A shame, because I am sure there is talent there - it either wasn't brought out because of the lack of director's skill (and editing again) or they didn't have the freedom to interpret their characters.

Overall I wouldn't bother with this film unless you have nothing better to do or are distracted by eating a very nice takeaway.