14 Cameras (2018) - Rotten Tomatoes

14 Cameras (2018)

TOMATOMETER

——

AUDIENCE SCORE

Critic Consensus: No consensus yet.

14 Cameras Videos

14 Cameras Photos

Movie Info

When a family of four rent a beautiful house for their summer vacation, the price seems too good to be true. Unbeknownst to them, the lascivious owner (Archambault) has set up a series of spy cams throughout the house, documenting their most intimate moments and live-streaming them to the dark web.

Watch it now

Cast

Critic Reviews for 14 Cameras

All Critics (8) | Top Critics (4)

"14 Cameras" is simply a perv fantasy pretending to be something more than the icky piece of filmmaking that it is.

July 27, 2018 | Rating: D | Full Review…

Voyeurism has never been so boring.

July 26, 2018 | Full Review…

A tedious exploitation picture not even sleazy enough to find offensive.

July 25, 2018 | Full Review…

Unfortunately, Archambault's churlishly over-the-top performance makes it impossible to take 14 Cameras seriously, no matter how you interpret Gerald's actions.

July 25, 2018 | Full Review…

The sequel to the 2015 high-tech peeping Tom thriller '13 Cameras' takes the premise up a notch with genuinely creepy results.

July 27, 2018 | Full Review…

A lot of 14 Cameras' shortcomings can be at least partially attributed to screenwriter Victor Zarcoff, who both wrote and directed the previous film. This one is largely plotless, and the script fails to develop any memorable or sympathetic characters.

July 27, 2018 | Rating: 5/10 | Full Review…

Audience Reviews for 14 Cameras

Looks like after 31 straight nights of horror movies in October, I couldn't stay away from my love for too long. As much as I do love horror movies, and I really do, I do think that part of me was looking forward to not having to find a horror movie to watch every day. The reason I say this is that, of course, I have very limited resources at my disposal. I don't have every horror movie available to me on a silver platter, I only have what Netflix and Prime offer and, quite frankly, I've seen a ton of what Netflix has to offer by this point. I do feel that Prime has more horror to offer than Netflix, as the genre page for for horror on Prime is something like 265 pages of movies. The problem with Prime, which I've pointed out before, is that they take pretty much anything they can get, regardless of quality, whereas Netflix does a better job of curating what movies they put on their streaming service. That's not saying that Netflix has nothing but good horror movies available, it's just that they are better at not allowing the cheapest of the cheap, shot on a weekend for $100, horror movies on there like Prime does. That's neither here nor there. Regardless, the point is, that there's a certain amount of pressure, as stupid as it seems, to pick something that's good. Now, obviously, I didn't pick all good movies last month, it was actually, surprisingly, somewhat split down the middle. Fifteen movies were rated 3 stars or above and sixteen were rated 2.5 stars or below. That's actually pretty good and, if you do the math, which I did of course, that's an average of 2.7 stars for the entire month. What a nerdy thing to do. Anyway, I'm glad that the 'pressure' is off now and now I can just watch horror movies when it's the right time to do it and not because of some self-imposed rule. With that aside, of course it turns out that the first horror movie after the horror fest is one that is, quite frankly, not particularly good. I have seen the original 13 Cameras, for those of you that didn't know that this was a sequel and I never thought that it was a good movie. Its lead characters, outside of the Gerald (the landlord and lead villain), were incredibly uninteresting and their marital strife was really boring to me. Having said that, however, I did find that the movie I did find that the movie, particularly when compared to this one, was incredibly focused. It was about Gerald spying on this newlywed couple, who moved into this rental home, and whatever it is that he had planned for them. The movie did feature the couple going through their own struggles as Claire, who was pregnant, wasn't as attentive to her husband and he, like the asshole he was, went and cheated on her. This wasn't interesting to me, like I said, but at least it didn't deviate much from it. Like I said, there was a narrative focus. There was nothing in the way of bullshit. The problem with this movie, however, is that it tries to be more of the same while also adding way too much ancillary bullshit that doesn't feel exactly essential to what you are watching and, really, feel like they're just padding the length. Firstly, at the end of the first movie, Claire was kidnapped by Gerald and, in this movie, it is revealed she's been held hostage in this underground bunker. The implication being that she's been in there for years now. Actually, the implication is that she's been in there for over a decade which, to me, doesn't really make sense given the timeline of the original movie, but let's go with that. The reason I mention this is that Gerald kidnaps another woman and he shoves her in the bunker along with Claire, this other woman calls Claire 'granny'. So, clearly, she's supposed to be much older than she actually looks like in the movie. There's also the implication that the kid that Gerald has raised for, like, 12 years or so is Claire's son. So there's that part to deal with as well, dealing with the kid and the very slow realization that the person who raised him is an utter creep. Gerald has also started live-streaming from the cameras he has set up in this vacation house that is being rented by this family of five on the dark/deep web. This leads to the climax of the movie when one of the subscribers to Gerald's channel asks how much for one of the girls staying in the house and he replies that she's not for sale, which in turns leads to the chat, in less than 3 minutes it seems, finding out the location of the house and leading to one of the chatters to kidnap this girl to sell to this other guy for 100K. I mean, seriously, the people in this chat room found out this location incredibly quickly, so why the fuck did they not do it earlier in the movie? It makes no sense to me. Regardless, there's also the fact that, of course, the family of five also have their own 'problems' to deal with, which are nothing when compared to those of the original. And, if you've been paying attention, then you know how uninteresting the marital strife was to me. And this is even less interesting than that. It's not really even about the entire family, it's about the teens, Danielle, Molly and Kyle. These three are bored at this vacation house and, really, that's all there is to them. Well, there's also this subplot about Kyle stealing Danielle's panties (which Gerald actually stole to sell to a guy in the chatroom), but that's about it. There's literally nothing to this people and no reason that you should care about any of them. I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that the movie is trying to juggle 77 balls in the air and, of course, they end up dropping over 95% of them. And even that number might be generous. Like I said before, I wasn't in love with the original movie, but I give them credits for maintaining their narrative focus. This movie, however, in trying to expand its own 'world', if you can even call it that, forgets what was one of the few things about the movie that, I'm certain, most people actually liked. The fact that you're jumping between stories, from Claire's son(?), to Gerald live-streaming, to Claire in the bunker, to the family in the vacation house means that your attention is being pulled in all different directions and there's no real sense of flow or progression because, much like Killing Ground, when it's about to get good, they cut their own momentum off to go tell someone else's story and so on and so forth. It's not fun to watch and, to me, feels like they're overcompensating with the 'narrative' to avoid being too similar to the first one. But, again, you didn't really need to expand too much. I don't think anybody really cared enough about the original to want more in the way of 'lore', so to speak. As the cliche goes, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. With that said, however, Neville Archambault remains as effectively creepy and disgusting as ever. As far as his presence is concerned, in this movie, as I'm sure Neville is a lovely man in real life, I don't think I've ever seen anyone so repulsive without needing extensive make-up work. From the way he walks, to the way he stares, to the way he breathes, to his heavy mouth-breathing, this guy is just perfect for this role. And, as I mentioned in my review for the original movie, it's not that he's a great actor, it's just that he completely embodies and becomes this character. It's just a fucking shame that this movie is so goddamn boring. Because I don't think I, or anyone else for that matter, would have much of a problem with all of these different stories being juggled if they were interesting, but they were not interesting. I just kept watching waiting for something good to happen and that moment never came. It's not that this is a bad movie, it's perfectly watchable, but it just offers very little. Neville Archambault is a perfect creep, but that's the only good thing from the original that is transferred over to this one. Everything else, however, is a severe step down from the original and, quite frankly, even if you loved the original, I don't think this will appeal to you in the slightest. It's just not a good movie. I've certainly seen worse, but there's no real reason to watch this. There's no reason to, particularly when there's better horror movies available to you. Being watched without my consent is preferable to watching this movie ever again.

Jesse Ortega
Jesse Ortega

Super Reviewer

14 Cameras Quotes

There are no approved quotes yet for this movie.

News & Features