Unnatural

It's an hour before you see this dangerous mutated "polar bear" whose deleted half of the team, and by the time you do, you're already semi invested in some of the characters.

So when a dude in a football mascot outfit appears, you kinda feel like you have to finish the rest. Even though it would have been turned off if the creature was revealed in the first 10 minutes or so.

Really bad CGI "beast" A Bearly (🤣) watchable movie.

Nice location shots. Just so "mehhhh" on the creature.

Saw this on a rented dvd. The poster was very convincing n so was the Alaska set up but the movie wasnt good. Period. The creature was pathetic but i will still forgive that coz of the budget. The poster had a menacing bear though. A low budget creature film without any good kills, nudity n tension zero. Two female models r doing a bikini photo shoot in the snowy Alaska n we dont even get to see good tits. There is a lousy sex scene that too without any nudity. Most of the kills r offscreen n the grizzly violence is pathetic. In fact some of the old bear movies has better kills. Grizzly made in the 70s, n among the new ones, Backcountry n Grizzly park were decent too. I hav yet to see Into the grizzly maze. Since imdb has allowed shorter reviews, so from now on i will make a shorter review for bad horror films. Yeehaw!

Unnatural has the feel of a 90's horror. There's a straightforward simplicity and almost an innocence about this film that sets it apart from the standard 21st century fare.

Lets start by stating the obvious. This is a "B" movie and I'll review it on that basis. Its in no way exceptional but in one sense its refreshing. Its not gratuitously violent and it has a simple premise thats not really all that new but it is moderately entertaining.

The cast do a reasonable if not exceptional job and for myself I rather enjoyed this film. I also liked its message about the responsibility of corporations and science to be good governors to the planet and not destroyers.

All in all, a nice little horror flick. Don't come to it with exaggerated expectations, its not a horror master class but it is certainly watchable. Six out of ten from me.

"Unnatural" could have been a better movie if there was more of what people watch horror movies for. Morbid as it may be, horror movies focus on gore and blood and disfigurement, but "Unnatural" fails to provide much of that. Aside from a cast of mostly unlikable characters, except for the role played by James Remar, one doesn't really care much when each one gets eaten up along the way. The trouble is most of the gore occurs in the dark and basically all you see is the blood. The villains in this movie are generally not the focus, and it is unclear exactly what the company at hand was trying to do when it seems their mission was to preserve species. I was surprised who survived these attacks but all in all, a disappointing movie.

While "Unnatural" was every bit as generic and stereotypical as these types of movies go, then it should be said that writers Arch Stanton and Ron Carlson actually managed to put together an entertaining man-eater feature.

The creature itself had some interesting aspects to it, but it was painstakingly clear that they had not blown their entire budget on the creature effects.

The storyline was straight to the point, albeit very predictable. And that fact was working against the overall enjoyment of the movie, of course.

They had some interesting enough names on the cast list to spice up the movie, such as James Remar and Sherilynn Fenn.

"Unnatural" is not the most innovative of movies, but still worth a watch if you got some time to kill - pardon the pun.