Unearthed

1. Some people can't watch "shaky camera" scenes. It makes us sick. In this case there was no reason for it. If you want people to not be able to watch your movie, why even make it? Shaking the camera is not a substitute for special effects

2. Painfully loud is not scary. It's not dramatic. When the conversation scenes and the action scenes differ by 100 decibels, it's just painful and unpleasant.

When I have to spend the entire movie making drastic changes to the volume, I'm not being entertained.

I thought this movie would be the best film of the new Afterdark releases, however, upon watching it I am hoping that is not the case. It had promise and for a second there I thought it would be good, but it just has way to many flaws. I will get to them later, but first the plot. Something is unearthed in a cave and goes on the rampage, a sheriff with a past is on the case. A truck isolates the town leaving four strangers in town stranded, monster begins rampage. An Indian girl and this other guy seem to know a way to stop it and there is some cat and mouse as the survivors and their decreasing numbers hide here and there. So what are its flaws? First, the whole sheriff with a past thing. It is a female sheriff and she had an incident that was so troubling to her that she has been drinking and having problems for a year. A plot straight out of a lifetime channel movie plot. Do not get me wrong and I am not disparaging the channel, but those types of plot points do not belong in horror movie of this type. Also, when it is revealed what she did you will wonder how the heck she has stayed sheriff for a year. It did seem to be because of incompetence on her part and I don't see how anyone could have let her be sheriff after that. She is also way to pretty for someone who has been drinking for a year and living under the sun. Most would have developed wrinkles and would have aged considerably, however she is still quite modelesque. Then there are the four strangers in town, never before has there been four more pointless and underdeveloped characters to enter a movie. You know not their motivations, or anything. The girl bit by the rattler, her friend, the city dude, and the broken down hitchhiker. Heck, you learn more about the trucker whose rig crashes five minutes into the movie than you do any of the four strangers. However, all is not bad as there are a couple of good kills...the dude in the car at the end and the girl in the café. The one rancher is actually a good character, to bad he is not in the movie much and the monster is okay too, although it is just a cheap version of the alien and its origin is a bit far fetched.

This movie was playing at the Union Station cinema in Washington, at 7:30 on a Saturday night. The place should have been completely packed, but it was nearly empty. We soon learned why.

Unearthed has a generic, by-the-numbers plot crammed full of the same old tired horror-movie clichés. It had no direction to speak of. The camera work was amateurish at best, and the dialog nearly incoherent. The camera was pointing all over the place, providing an occasional glimpse of something like a face, a vehicle, or a building. Most scenes were too dark and cluttered to make out anything clearly.

Don't even imagine that this stuff belongs in the "so-bad-it's-good" category. Those movies at least have some originality, humor (even if it's unintentional), and other qualities that make them stand out. They are the kind of movies that people remember, whether they want to or not. Unearthed has nothing worth remembering. I can barely recall even one single scene; the only thing I can remember clearly is waiting for it to be over. It seemed to drag on for several hours or more.

Very soon, this thing will be dead, buried, and totally forgotten. May it rest in peace--FOREVER.

Kind of a bit confused by this one, as the 2006 films were so much better and seemed to push the boundaries of independent horror. So far, I've viewed "Borderland", "Deaths Of Ian Stone" and this little stinker, yet none have had much of an impact on me, especially not this one... Besides the obvious sub-par special effects, I found the dialog to be incredibly weak and amateurish. The acting (for the most part) is not that bad, but when talented actors are forced to deliver such unintelligible lines, you begin to feel a bit sorry for them. I found this most offensive when veteran character actor M.C. Gainey was on screen, I've always respected his talent, which is horribly wasted here. As for the special effects... What can I say? They suck, and suck real bad at that... Crappy CGI mixed in with shaky camera tricks and quick cuts, make it next to impossible to see what is supposed to be taking place, and the story doesn't fare much better. On a good note, much of the (daytime) cinematography looked above average and added a grainy feel to the desert scenery. I believe director Matthew Leutwyler will have a bright future as long as he leaves the writing to others, and throws away his CGI software.

After-all, no-one is frightened by Dr. Zoidberg...

I'm the first to be critical of these types of -monsters on the loose in isolated community films-, but if you can get past the stunningly bad cgi monster there's a reasonable amount to like here. There's nothing original but name me one that is original in the last 20yrs, there aren't any. The stories are the same it's how they're handled that varies.

The story:- Out in the dry wastelands of America an archaeological dig unearths and sets loose an ancient monster not seen for 900yrs. Several outsiders stop for gas which has run out due to the tanker being attacked by said monster en route to gas station. They mix with and are stranded with several locals, all of whom become stranded and spend the night fighting for survival.

On the whole the acting is good but unusually Goss seems to struggle with his dialogue as if his heart's not in it. However I blame that on the director and the script rather than Goss. There's very little in the way of excess, unnecessary or cheesy dialogue, which is always a big plus in my eyes. There is also a totally unnecessary flashback thread running through the film. The camera work is a bit shaky and often too dark which does at times detract from the fun. The musical score is fine. The body count is low because there are few characters but the deaths are nice and gruesome. There's a great Eddie Murphy wannabe who gets wot he deserves (and provides the only laugh).

There are two big problems with this film as far as I can see.

1. The monster effects are on a par with the original Jason and the Argonauts from way back when - seriously they're that bad. The actual design of the monster is rubbish as well, it copies too much from alien and it's head is laughable with eyes and teeth all over the place. If you can imagine an alien working at a circus as a clown you'll get some idea.

2. There's a local biologist who keeps telling everyone she knows nothing but keeps coming up with the answers via massive jumps in her conclusions and it just gets stupid when she finds a Geiger counter lying around and then proclaims 'I've got a uranium extractor back at the house.'

If you can ignore these things, and accept that this was done on a tight budget, this is an okay movie.

I watched this back to back with 'Living Hell' and what confuses the hell out of me is that that piece of total garbage got the thumps up from the IMDb reviewers and an average score of 4.7 while this gets a total roasting from the reviewers and an average of 4.8. I feel 4.8 is fair for this film (coz i'm critical) but only if living hell received 0.0 otherwise this deserves more.