Beast Beneath

Yeah it scared me for all the wrong reasons. "BEAST BENEATH" is something you might catch on late-night cable -- a feeble experience in terror. You know the kind which eventually puts you to sleep. Technically it's surprisingly sound for such a cheapie, yet this is an all-flat, long-winded ghost/creature-feature, of sorts. When I say, of sorts, you don't get much and when you do, you only see flashes of the beast (a cheap, scruffy looking werewolf costume) and those few attack scenes we do witness quickly cuts away from the full carnage. There are a few nasty looking facial / neck scratches (with better than expected latex work) and body limbs popping up here and there. And the odd eye ball too. But this fun is short-lived.

Being plot-heavy should be a positive, but when it's half-baked in its ideas, boringly acted (although a real test of patience is the over-the-top mugging of Bertie Higgins -- father of the director) and all this lethargic investigating about a curse and treasure taking up so much of the running time. It begins to take a toll, becoming a padded-out history lesson of a trip down memory lane. The fragmented story starts off as a modern-day wraparound campfire tale with a father telling his douche-bag teenage son the legend of a family curse, ancient map and a hidden ancestral treasure that was discovered in Los Angeles' Griffith Park. The same park they're camping in. And our beast just happens to be the protector of this treasure. Some say, it still haunts the area. So just wait around for one of *THOSE* endings.

Sadly this followed Seven Samurai (1954), how could any movie possibly follow Seven Samurai?

It tells the supposedly true story revolving around a curse, a monster and a girl searching for her ancestors gold. Any "True story" that involves a monster loses credibility immediatly.

The rating at time of writing is an abyssmal 2.8, it's not that bad at all but it's still pretty naff.

It makes best use of it's budget to the movies credit, it limits the amount you see the monster and places it wisely to mask it's limitations. The creators clearly knew what they were doing, but the lack of budget and questionable cast really damaged it.

This is one of those harmless enough films to burn away 90 minutes with, it's not terrible it just isn't very good either.

The Good:

Has it's moments

Plot is actually alright

Creators do a decent enough job with the minimal budget

The Bad:

Flaws left, right and centre

Head scratchingly stupid finale

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

The best types of homeless folk are pirates

This movie goes back and forth between horror and "teen quest" with the main characters trying to solve the mystery of an old family map. Overall the story is as good a reason as any to have a monster running around and the main characters are played well. The flashback sequences are excellent. They almost seem to be from a higher budgeted movie, but it may just be that "period piece" footage tends to look more polished when done correctly.

The creature itself isn't show stopping, but he's tough customer and shown sparingly enough to come across well. I like my monsters movies with a monster in them and this one delivers. The beast even has a purpose, although it seems to deviate from its motivation from time to time.

The wrap around story is completely unnecessary to the telling of the tale, with the possible exception that it was needed for feature length run time. The movie also suffers from a common horror movie shortcoming of not knowing it's over. Footage that would been have better used as credits overlay or extra material is used within the movie.

Overall, if you can't get enough of monster movies and SyFy's CG monstrosities are leaving you cold, give this one a spin.

In the 18th century, a blind girl curses the man who stole her father's land while he was on his deathbed. Generations later, a woman who shares the same bloodline finds an ancient map that leads to the under grounds of Griffith Park and treasure, but an evil monster awaits.

I found good long chunks of this film boring, which could've been alleviated if the characters were interesting or the acting was of such a quality that it kept my rapt attention. Neither is the case sadly and the films running time seemed to drag on so very slowly. Also it doesn't help that the wraparound of an old man telling all this to his "teenage" son is idiotic. Skip this one.

Streaming on Netflix as of 5/15/13