No spoilers yet, will let you know.

I wanted to review this film not because it wasted 80 minutes of my weekend -- which it did -- but because it had so much potential that was ultimately frittered away. And not through poor film-making either. The direction was fine, the movie itself is professionally shot, and the effects/gunshots/gore are all well-done. What killed this film was its screenplay, which violated dramatic story guidelines that have been in place for a hundred years for one reason -- they work.

The first half hour of this film is very promising. Two brothers are driving through the desert. Before long, based on human behavior, it becomes apparent that the setting is post-apocalyptic. Very Road Warrior/Mad Max-ish. Lots of scavenging and cold-blooded killing going on.

(Begin spoilers) One of the brothers is damaged or mentally injured somehow, and is fully dependent on his sibling. The other tougher brother is one mean hombre, capable of pistol shots that I would call impossible in real life. He's a very interesting and mysterious character, and between their relationship and deadly challenges we get plenty of dramatic action. They wind up in a deserted town where the survivors hide like mice in dilapidated trailer homes. This town is run by a cannibal army with a vicious Joker-like boss named Doyle. I don't know about you, but I usually eat this stuff up.

(Begin serious spoilers) Then they're captured by Doyle's goons, and the tough brother is killed straight away. Admittedly, this can work in certain dramatic situations. But in "Drifter's" case the tough brother was the best, most interesting character in the film. Taking him away absolutely ruined any momentum it had, leaving only textbook cannibal gore and a dozen characters you care nothing about. I therefore spent the last 45 minutes of the movie bored to tears and wishing it would end. So, if nothing else, "Drifter" serves as an object lesson in dramatic tension: If you have only one good character, don't kill him off till the end.

Have you ever seen a kids school project where they try so hard to do something awesome but the end result is just something sad and a mere shadow of what could have been something good?

Well this is like that.

The videography is beautiful. The movie itself could have been something good. But they just tried to damn hard to be like other directors (see Tarantino) and instead the entire culmination of all of their hard work went to pieces.

At least the scenery was nice.

What little story the film has, it involves two brothers, criminals of course, who are on the road, stealing and killing when necessary.

They venture into unknown territory and get more than they bargained for when they hit the middle of the second act.......and there's no Danny Trejo vampire cameo in this?...

Within 10 seconds of this film starting, you can just feel the writer wants to be the next Tarantino/Ritchie/Smith/add any director who made a change cinematically once, by the attitude of the victim. It's been done a thousand times before, and since 1996, it's not been hip or cool to be showing attitude to someone who has a gun in your face.

Talking about 1996, within two minutes of the film starting, I guarantee 100% you will think of From Dusk Til Dawn. If you don't, then you haven't seen the film. It's just so blatantly obvious, it verges on the offensive.

So like the Brothers Gecko, we have the smartish one, and the slightly off kilter one, the latter being beaten within an inch of his life several times.

Moving on to the second act, and the film decides to ditch Rodriguez, and go for The Hills Have Eyes remake meets The Crazies, and it's baffling. So our two anti-heroes drive into a strange town and instantly get terrorised and seduced by a very strange community, and then the writers try to shock the viewer by Doing......... Something.......... You'd............ Never............ Expect........

Then we get to the final act, and from remakes, the writers decide to go back to the seventies and royally rip off The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, with a little bit of some random actor trying to be a villain from some other comic book film.

And this is where the problem lies. Whilst you are watching the film, you cannot help but think about other, better films, and it distracts you from the narrative of this film.

I will give it one thing though, there are some beautiful shots of the desert, and it has a psychedelic feel to it, but other than that, it's nothing more than a rip off of other films.

Which you would rather be watching.

The movie was so slow, I took to fast forwarding it to get to a scene where something interesting actually happened, and before I knew it, I'd fast-forwarded through the entire thing. It's not scary, it's not gory, you can barely understand much of the dialog, the music adds nothing but more annoyance, and it makes little to no sense. I get that it takes a lot of work to make a movie, even a bad one, but I wonder if anyone involved even watched this after it was done. If they had, they would hopefully have realized they needed to start over.

The music and sound ruin this film. Both are horrible and cringe-worthy. I have nothing else to say because I couldn't focus on anything positive with amateur-hour going on overlaying every scene / camera shift. I'm not sure anyone previewed the final product before deciding it was good to go.

We all know this post apocalyptic medium has been well explored, and some suspension of disbelief is always required. What I will say about this film is that it manages something fresh and groundbreaking in this genre, in that it manages to eschew character development, acting AND plot to deliver something so truly pointless that you almost imagine you've suffered some kind of cataclysmic brain bleed and missed something.

I'm sure the actors employed are not so completely risible (it's genuinely not possible)

I really hope the writers get the help they so richly deserve.

The inclusion of the requisite gore and what (if you're 8 years old) amounts to twists/upsets probably earned the director some points, but I'm still searching for some abstract message or meaning. I'll not give any plot points away (can't call it spoilers, as there really isn't anything to spoil; apart from perhaps the careers of some really good looking actors.

I have contacted Sky in the hope that there was 20 minutes of cohesion lost in broadcast, I'm not expecting a particularly helpful response from the Murdoch clan.

Anyhow, usual caveats of 'this is just my opinion, some mong who likes Mrs Brown's Boys will probably jizz their pants over it' etc, but if you're a horror/film fan/human give this one a miss. it's not even good enough to be trite wankery.

Listen, I get the bad reviews I really do but this delivered gore, action, and some very strange, original characters. The camera angles and score also kept my interest and built up intrigue but I must complain about the second half of the film, it really falls flat and nothing much happens. Would I run out and buy the DVD, no but like I said the movie was "fun" and the actors really were dedicated to their roles, especially the murderous townies.

Apocalyptic type setting, 2 brothers looking out for themselves. Felt like a video game/comic movie - think "sin city" but 1/1000th the quality and plot.

Movie was trying to capture shock attention from viewer with gruesome violence and sadistic characters but it wasn't scary nor suspenseful. Idk maybe the movie was supposed to be a horror-comedy? Boooooo!!!!!!!!

I had to turn this off half way through.

That sentence alone should be where I end the review but I feel I should expand. I turned the movie off and watched the rest at another time, after my senses were sufficiently rested.

There sort of a plot - brothers are on a revenge mission to kill their father's murder in a post-apocalyptic world. They end up in the wrong town and things go wrong. They meet the wrong people, - the end.

So then, let's dissect this then: The plot is weak - it's been done before many a time. The only twist on it comes right at the end when you'll have lost interest and probably worked it out. The acting is annoying; I didn't care for anybody in this and would have welcomed a H-bomb destroying them all to make the film shorter. It's slow to get going and even when it's running fast it feels painfully laborious - in fact, the longer you watch this film, the slower it gets and the harder it is to watch. It feels like they swapped writers half way through to inject pace and instead of going forwards they new writers found the reverse switch and decided to go with it. The music and sound sometimes deafens the narrative, you'd think this is a good thing based on the points I've made. In fact it's the opposite, somebody has tried to be clever and deliver intensity and psychology via the music score - I'm afraid it didn't work and just ends up being annoying. Things happen in the story for no reason, with no motivation or explanation. There is no character development; it just is as it is. Stupid choices are made constantly - both in front and behind the camera. There are constant nods of homage to other films, which are similar but a billion times better, there's one point where they practically just lifted scenes from "From Dusk till Dawn", you'll no doubt see "The Hills have eyes", "The Crazies", any "House of 1000 corpses", "Devils Rejects", "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". Do yourself a favour, watch one of those instead.

2 out of 10 is being generous. This was very close to being a 1 out of 10.

Miles (Aria Emory) is mentally slow. His brother Dominic (Drew Harwood) looks after him. I loved the opening scene with Miles looking through a large bullet hole in his palm...however duck tape and beer heals most wounds. They take off in their car and drive for two days without stopping for gas, through the desert and seems they are still in the desert. While in the middle of nowhere three guys sneak up on them from...? Who knows.

They end up in a trailer trashed town and find themselves trapped in a Rob Zombie wannabe film. The film failed to regain any cleverness it pretended to have, even with the quirky characters. IMDb has a small plot spoiler I will share when they describe the group as "psychotic cannibalistic lunatics." We don't discover they are cannibals to late in the film. I would claim "psychotic" is redundant when you use "lunatic." Guide: F-word. Sex. Male rear nudity.

Not sure of/why the couple, on the negative side, reviews. I don't get into the hoopla of filmmaking. I wanted to watch a horror movie, and I got a horror movie. People who care about goofs, color shots, and all that crap are ruining filmmaking for people who want to just plain see a horror movie. It is 2017, and they borrowed aspects of previous horror movies nicely, while adding their own flare. To sum it up, I thoroughly enjoyed watching this film, and would recommend it. So F*** the whiny people, and sit back and enjoy a decent horror film.

I had to go online to figure out this was supposed to be a "post-apocalyptic" story. The information on Netflix and online says that these 2 brothers are supposed to be avenging their father's death, but there is no dialogue about it, no flashbacks to actually let the viewer know that. It was just them shooting some guy, and then them driving! It was boring. Almost NOTHING happens the first hour, then when they encounter the actual cannibals, it was a huge letdown. The director should be ashamed.

Started off ok but then just got stupid and made me feel sleepy as hell, found it hard to follow due to the fact of the story going from one place to another,shame the ending couldn't have been happier

This was straight up strange. IMDb is the biggest spoiler for this movie with its description. This movie gave me the feeling it was a first year film student's very first big project. There were all kinds of weird angles and lingering close ups. The acting, for the most part, wasn't very good with an exception or two. Some of the characters were over the top and not in a good way at all. The story is weird. Two brothers perform a revenge killing and one is shot in the hand. For whatever reason, they're traveling through the desert in their car. Three guys try to carjack them. Where the heck they came from in that flat, barren desert I don't know, but one guy beats the heck out of the younger (slow?) brother. They're killed by the other brother. More driving, then they see a woman in the road. She's covered in blood, hysterical and saying how "they killed them all." and "They're gonna kill you too." Nevertheless, they continue forward because they need a doctor. The town seems deserted, but there are freaks about. Lots of poor choices made by the characters. The older brother is warned not to wander around town, but he does anyway. When a strange woman shows up, he simply follows her and then has sex with her. You just don't go wandering off in a ghost town with some woman who popped up out of nowhere. Things just get worse from there. It's not even revealed until the end that they're cannibals. Thanks IMDb for spoiling the only possible surprise in the movie. Oh, yeah. The music and sound effects are loud and jarring. Sometimes you can barely hear the dialogue over them. I know I watched the whole thing, but it was kind of like seeing something horrible, but not being able to look away...no matter how much you want to.

I don't know what it is with me and random films but this one was awesome. Sure, it's going to be hated by a lot of movie watchers. It lacks length and depth to the story, but for some reason it is pleasurable to watch. The crisp shots at the beginning, the visceral concise shooting from Harwood in the opening scene. He's exactly how I would be in that situation. Pop, pop, pop then give the last guy a bullet in the back. It was nuts. I was hoping he'd stay throughout the whole movie. The only thing I wished was added, is more civilians/wanderers who make the misfortune of stumbling into town, maybe let the surviving brother have to get initiated into the family(Before writing him into killing everyone) LOL Then we could get the family perspectives of their little operation. This movie had me pumped through it's entirety. Even A-List Blockbusters rarely keep me aroused the entire movie. So for that experience alone, I give it a 10/10 Bravo Chris Hoffman and to your Amazing Cast(Supreme Actors BTW)

I have never written a review on here before, I'm usually happy to give an out of ten rating and leave it at that, but on this occasion I feel it is my civic duty to do so! IMDb trivia for this movie tells us it was shot in 13 days, and I can't say as I was surprised to read that!

This movie starts with so so so much promise... the cinematography is outstanding, the SFX are excellent, I found they really put me on edge and made me feel actually quite uncomfortable - exactly as you would expect a horror movie to do; but that's where it stops being a horror, and starts being just plain awful.

The first half of the movie promises so much that the second half simply fails to deliver on. I always watch a movie to the end if I make it past half way, but on this occasion I came extremely close to breaking that rule.

Drifter begins being very intriguing; two brothers who have a "working car" driving around a post apocalyptic wasteland seeking out revenge... soon takes an utterly ridiculous tangent whereby they get taken prisoner by cannibals and subjected to some unoriginal and frankly boring torture/death. Confused? Me too, it's really like they changed writers half way through the script and just ruined it.

In summary: Not a horror, and not worth your time! I'm devastated I lost over an hour to it, let alone the time it took to write this, but I simply wanted to save as many people from it as I could!

This is the biggest pile of garbage I have ever had the misfortune of watching. Absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Anyone who enjoys this sorry excuse of film making has a serious mental problem. Do yourself a favor and avoid this like the plague. Have I made my point? It was utterly horrendous.

A post-apocalyptic movie about two brothers travelling through the country on the car, which makes them very noticeable since working cars are very rare and everyone wants it.

Weak story, but captivating visuals and memorable direction. Every character is dumb and an asshole, aside from the doctor, who is just dumb but at least not a complete garbage like all others. Her motivation to live in such a city with such neighbors is really, really questionable. Overall, it's pretty much almost an arthouse movie, the events don't make much sense but the way they're presented makes them interesting to watch and memorable, with the fitting atmospheric score making them more effective. The cast is really great, especially the town villains - really psychotic and dangerous.

I don't know what's in the heads of those who said it tries to be like Tarantino, it's just a complete lie. I watched all Tarantino movies, Drifter is nothing like them at all. It much more closer to the movies like Hobo With a Shotgun - grimdark post-apocalypse with specific coloring and mood.

I had no idea what to expect from this movie. I checked imdb score 5 mins in as it looked good. I presumed it would be brutal then but it wasn't at all. Super acting from everyone. Some super weird characters in the film. I really liked the music too. I can't understand the overall poor imdb rating. Give it a shot if you like very weird films.

I was really disappointed with this movie. It was very unoriginal in this particular "western/revenge zombie/cannibal horde" type films that became so noteworthy and rehashed from the master Quentin Tarantino. I was praying for a plot twist or something to make it worthy of distinction. Instead it was a complete flop and 85 minutes of extremely racist, misogynist tropes utterly demeaning to black women that didn't even serve any "eye candy"/soft porn purpose (if you're a straight male into the baffling irrelevant to plot industry standard gratuitous nudity). Save yourself the time and just enjoy Quentin Tarantino movies.