PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
4,6/10
2,9 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Añade un argumento en tu idiomaA 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... Leer todoA 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.
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
Reseñas destacadas
Dr. Michael Cayle (Sean Patrick Thomas) thought leaving the chaotic life-style of New York City behind for the quiet, small town of Ashborough would bring his family closer together. Soon after arriving, however, he discovers the town's deepest secret: a terrifying and controlling race of creatures that live amongst the darkness in the forest behind his home.
This film is based on a 2004 book by Michael Laimo (Dead Souls), which was influenced by the 1973 made for television film "Don't Be Afraid of the Dark", starring Kim Darby (not to be confused with the 2011 remake with Katie Holmes. One could probably compare all three films, but suffice it to say the inspiration is rather loose and this film is not the same as those other two.
Dean Stockwell has aged a bit since his glory days of "Quantum Leap", but he is still a commanding figure. One scene involving a plastic bag of eyeballs could have been silly, but he manages to make it deathly serious. Sean Patrick Thomas is a strong lead and a solid actor, providing much more emotional depth to his character than we typically see in horror films. While this film may be lacking at times, it never lacks because of Thomas.
Shock Till You Drop gave the movie a score of five out of ten, stating that while it had some effective jump scares and a good cast, they felt that the film was mostly unmemorable. The New York Times panned the film, expressing disappointment that the film did not live up to its full potential.
The disappointment is understandable, as this overall good film has a flaw or two. Indeed, the creatures are revealed a bit too early, and seem to be somewhat lacking in believability, looking possibly like a poor man's imitation of the creatures from "The Descent". And because the creatures appear so early, the film seems to run on too long. Had the surprise been saved until later, they could have milked more suspense out of the plot. (This may depend on the version you watch; the full film is 100 minutes but was cut to 88 for TV. In this case, the shorter may be paced better.)
Whether this is worth owning is really up to the viewer, but it is probably worth a watch or two. For those who are curious, it hits your home video shelves from Scream Factory this spring.
This film is based on a 2004 book by Michael Laimo (Dead Souls), which was influenced by the 1973 made for television film "Don't Be Afraid of the Dark", starring Kim Darby (not to be confused with the 2011 remake with Katie Holmes. One could probably compare all three films, but suffice it to say the inspiration is rather loose and this film is not the same as those other two.
Dean Stockwell has aged a bit since his glory days of "Quantum Leap", but he is still a commanding figure. One scene involving a plastic bag of eyeballs could have been silly, but he manages to make it deathly serious. Sean Patrick Thomas is a strong lead and a solid actor, providing much more emotional depth to his character than we typically see in horror films. While this film may be lacking at times, it never lacks because of Thomas.
Shock Till You Drop gave the movie a score of five out of ten, stating that while it had some effective jump scares and a good cast, they felt that the film was mostly unmemorable. The New York Times panned the film, expressing disappointment that the film did not live up to its full potential.
The disappointment is understandable, as this overall good film has a flaw or two. Indeed, the creatures are revealed a bit too early, and seem to be somewhat lacking in believability, looking possibly like a poor man's imitation of the creatures from "The Descent". And because the creatures appear so early, the film seems to run on too long. Had the surprise been saved until later, they could have milked more suspense out of the plot. (This may depend on the version you watch; the full film is 100 minutes but was cut to 88 for TV. In this case, the shorter may be paced better.)
Whether this is worth owning is really up to the viewer, but it is probably worth a watch or two. For those who are curious, it hits your home video shelves from Scream Factory this spring.
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.
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.
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!
Some people gave this movie bad reviews but i don't understand why. This movie is one for horror lovers. To me it didn't seem like a TV movie and I am the queen of B-movies to the folks around me. The sets are well done, the makeup excellent, the monster makeup well done and the blood and gore pretty decent. Nothing was obviously, ridiculously fake like most TV movies. This movie is creepy as heck. It starts out creepy from the first two minutes and the hits just keep coming. Some people said the monsters have too much exposure but the monsters are an integral part of everything that happens in the movie. There is plenty of mystery left to the monsters, including their origin and other things I can't say because, spoilers! The acting is great. I felt for the characters because they really seemed to be in distress, anger, pain, etc. There were some nice twists and, overall, the movie was fun to watch! It was nice and dark, creepy and scary. I'm from a small town in the woods, so I really enjoy creepy small town movies. You'd like this movie if you enjoy movies with dark atmosphere, creepy small towns, creepy neighbors, creepy people in general, monsters, or if you have a fear of the dark or the woods. I recommend you try it with an open mind. Don't let the bad reviews make you miss this one.
¿Sabías que...?
- Citas
Jessica Cayle: What is a "troglodyte"?
- ConexionesReferences Scooby-Doo, ¿dónde estás? (1969)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Deep in the Darkness?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Duración1 hora 40 minutos
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta