Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

I love a good post apocalyptic thriller so I was looking forward to this one. It starts really well, and then quickly becomes odd, then frustrating, then just plain eye-roll worthy. The entire movie jumps back and forward between timelines but does so in a way that feels very jarring. The entire relationship between the two leads felt unrealistic... so many plot points and character decisions just became too much of a stretch for me. I can suspend my disbelief to a certain point but c'mon guys... I really wanted to like it, it was shot beautifully, the creatures were genuinely creepy, and it had potential. Points for originality, I definitely wasn't expecting what I saw (though I did call the 'twist' about 20 minutes before it happened). The message that the writer tries to leave us with is a nice one but feels out of place in this genre and left me with too many questions.

I saw the short for this film and have been hanging out for it for a while. I had expected a survivalist horror, with lots of gnashing teeth and action. Indeed there is an element of that but what I hadn't expected, was a deeply sad love story. This is in many ways a simple film. It uses basic settings combined with a cinematic ploy I'm not fond of cutting, between past and present segments. That said, in the context of this film, it works very very effectively bringing together the final scenes in a very poignant and touching manner. I think the writers, director and actors, are to be congratulated. What has been achieved here is very different and very clever. More than that, its engaging and inherently watchable. I have to confess I had worked out what was going on about two thirds of the way through but that in no way diminished the emotion of the final scene when it arrived. A very special little film, that does remarkable things, with a limited budget. 8/10 from me.

I admit that this film's horror/sci-fi genre is not one that interests me these days and the only reason I watched this movie was because Gregory Fittoussi was in it. (He won an award for this role). Living in UK this did not come to local cinema's so I had to wait till released in streaming media. Genre has more appeal to my husband so we watched together. Juliette is trying to find food for group in post-apocalyptic American, landscape is arid and desserted. Due to the presence of mutant humaniods she has to return to base before dusk. A photo of her with a man is stuck to the visor in her vechicle. The film osocilates between Juliette's present dilemma of returning to base and her pre-apocalyptic, past relationship with Jack, a rich French art gallery owner living in New York. Watching it, I became involved with Juliette's dilemma and with her relationship with Jack, who looked passed the ugliness of Juliette's life to see the beauty within her. Without spoiling it, I just want to say the ending haunted me long after the credits had rolled. My husband also enjoyed this movie terming it 'diffierent' which in his case means 'not formulaic.' This movie deserved a wider release I hope it now finds it.

There are reviewers here on IMDb that whinge on relentlessly about this or that movie not being "original" or "nothing new". Well, as far as I know, HOSTILE is completely original at least insofar as it synthesizes a post-apocalyptic/zombie story with a hand-wringing, chest-beating love story, which is certainly something I'VE never seen before. And as original as it may be, it did nothing for me. I found this very surprising because the originality whingers certainly seem to be of the opinion that originality and "freshness" is virtually the single attribute to which all movies should aspire. And yet, here I am, all unimpressed with HOSTILE, originality and all.HOSTILE generally appears to be two movies in one with the heroin character apparently the only shared element between the two parallel plot lines. Until the very last scene of the movie, with the single exception of the heroin, the two plot lines appear to be completely unconnected. It LOOKS as if we are simply watching our heroin's life as it is in the post-apocalyptic time as contrasted with her life in the "before time", prior to whatever happened which resulted in the apocalypse.The movie opens with the more or less stereotypical collection of scenes depicting post-apocalyptic life for your average survivor. A bundled up character (our heroin) going about a dry and dusty, desert-y landscape, everything looking completely dilapidated and rusty and run down, trying to collect what survival resources she can find. She's armed and very careful, always on the lookout for what are apparently post-apocalyptic monsters (which are HOSTILE's version of zombies).And then suddenly, with an abrupt scene change, we're in a metropolitan art gallery in the context of an art show where we see our same previously dusty heroin attending an art show but only for the purposes of getting out of the pouring rain outside. Within moments, the interminable flirtiness and romance with the owner of the art gallery commences, and with all the Kleenex-inducing vicissitudes of a stormy romance and blah blah blah.And so it goes for the rest of the movie, flipping back and forth between these two disparate plot lines; a few minutes of life and death struggle between our heroin and a post-apocalyptic zombie-thing (which looks for all the world like a concentration-camp-victim with a terrible skin problem) which is apparently grimly determined to eat her, and then we jarringly swap over to some romantically angsty moments in the before time, and then meanwhile back at the apocalypse...Certainly the pre-apocalyptic through line has all the great romantic elements for the unimaginative: the male romantic interest is wealthy, tall, darkly handsome, has an accent, and "saves" our heroin from her own self-destructive tendencies and... snore.It's never made clear what caused the apocalypse. Toward the end of the movie there is some vaguely referenced rather small scale terrorist chemical attack which does significant damage to the art gallery owner, but there is no clear relationship established between this event and the apocalypse. At all. But I think we're supposed to make that assumption.Only at the very last moments of the movie are the deeper connections between the pre-and-post-apocalypse made clear. Depending upon your taste I suppose SOME people may view it as very romantical, but it struck me as utter twaddle and as believable as a winged pig.