IMDb-BEWERTUNG
4,6/10
2882
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuA doctor and his family move to a quiet, small town. Soon he discovers the town's dark secret: A terrifying race of controlling creatures that live in the darkness in the forest behind their... Alles lesenA doctor and his family move to a quiet, small town. Soon he discovers the town's dark secret: A terrifying race of controlling creatures that live in the darkness in the forest behind their home.A doctor and his family move to a quiet, small town. Soon he discovers the town's dark secret: A terrifying race of controlling creatures that live in the darkness in the forest behind their home.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Deep In the Darkness is pretty bad overall. The acting is acceptable, with the protagonist carrying most of the scenes.
It starts off relatively well, building feelings of suspense and mystery, but quickly devolves into nonsense thanks to a horrible plot and absolutely silly creatures.
Unfortunately, the weak and nonsensical plot only gets worse as the movie drags on and ultimately what you get is a very poor and forgettable movie.
OK, I see only negative reviews here, won't go bashing them, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, therefore I am going to present you mine. So let's see why I enjoyed "Deep in the darkness".
Well for starters, it's a horror where bad decisions aren't taken at every step and boy did that feel good. Quite refreshing seeing people using their brain, trying to survive and not fell for the dumbest traps possible. Afterwards, the acting was good, believable. The creature concept I see is a hard pill to swallow for most, I for one think it is simple and easy to go with. I approve to it! You get to see a few deaths, a few fight scenes, some interesting facts about those creatures, and other variables making their way throughout the movie, making it more complex than your usual B horror. So all in all, in my books, this is a winner, as I enjoyed it, and stayed for the entire ride.
Now, as I am putting down this comment, the score is 3:1 for the negative reviews, therefore it will seem hard to take my word for it. But, if you are a horror junkie, if you approve to more underground productions, this one is smarter than most. It has more to offer, providing a good plot, execution and minutes well spent. Therefore, I recommend "Deep in the darkness" as I missed a woods/creature horror, done right.
Cheers!
Well for starters, it's a horror where bad decisions aren't taken at every step and boy did that feel good. Quite refreshing seeing people using their brain, trying to survive and not fell for the dumbest traps possible. Afterwards, the acting was good, believable. The creature concept I see is a hard pill to swallow for most, I for one think it is simple and easy to go with. I approve to it! You get to see a few deaths, a few fight scenes, some interesting facts about those creatures, and other variables making their way throughout the movie, making it more complex than your usual B horror. So all in all, in my books, this is a winner, as I enjoyed it, and stayed for the entire ride.
Now, as I am putting down this comment, the score is 3:1 for the negative reviews, therefore it will seem hard to take my word for it. But, if you are a horror junkie, if you approve to more underground productions, this one is smarter than most. It has more to offer, providing a good plot, execution and minutes well spent. Therefore, I recommend "Deep in the darkness" as I missed a woods/creature horror, done right.
Cheers!
Am not one to watch horror films, but after recording it a few days before decided to watch in daytime in my home office. Was not 100% present to watching it, but if I thought I missed something, I rewound & watched again. Kind of bloody, kind of silly, kind of scary, but passed the time enough for me to want to look up all the info on this film on IMDb. Director seems to have his niche and good actors seem to have nice careers. So...bottom line.....I wonder if there will be a D in D 2 ? I doubt it, but would I watch it? Yes!
That's my opinion: a solid B-. Decent premise, sort of a Jack Ketchum throwback with Wicker Man/Harvest Home overtones (a community tied to the local "legend"). The acting is acceptable to pretty good and I, for one, rather liked the concept of the Isolates (with a dash of Morlock thrown in for good measure) and accepted the premise of this group of creatures living in the woods. Why only a B- then? Because it never rises to being anything better; characters aren't really defined (the husband blandly accepts his wife suddenly acting totally different and suspicious). People do dumb things (not as dumb as in most plot-only horror films) but if creatures rule the night why not leave during the day? Why not get a gun? Or call outside help? And it's not effectively shot - sort of pedestrian - as if the director never saw how much more he could get out of his location or scenes. And the score is over the top and the script too often "on the nose" with characters saying just enough to keep the plot moving but not enough to flesh anything out or feel particularly real. Even the child is only interested in plot: "wheres the dog?" or "I see ghosts" with no one asking for explanations or offering comfort or anything believable. But its serviceable overall. I can't wait for a decent remake.
There are definitely good points about this movie; it is shot well, the acting is good and the story is compelling. However lots of the quality is lost due to the confusion that is created by having too many events occur without any real explanation or pacing.
The story clearly works much better in book form and probably would have better suited a mini-series format akin to Wayward Pines rather than being condensed into a film. That way the plot points that go completely unexplained could have had the time to be explored and digested by the viewer.
Overall there is a lot of good here, it is just too much in too short a time and so the story suffers greatly, still a good watch though.
The story clearly works much better in book form and probably would have better suited a mini-series format akin to Wayward Pines rather than being condensed into a film. That way the plot points that go completely unexplained could have had the time to be explored and digested by the viewer.
Overall there is a lot of good here, it is just too much in too short a time and so the story suffers greatly, still a good watch though.
Wusstest du schon
- Zitate
Jessica Cayle: What is a "troglodyte"?
- VerbindungenReferences Scooby-Doo, wo bist du? (1969)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Deep in the Darkness?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 40 Min.(100 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.35 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen