Les ombres du désert

This movie kept me on the edge of my seat until the final few minutes of it. The conclusion left many unanswered questions. With a different ending it would be 5 stars. I would give it 4. The characters are believable and the kids' weren't annoying. I would compare it to a 2 hour Twilight Zone episode.

We rented this film from our local store. Was disspointed that it wasn't a real movie, but a TV story transfered to DVD. The quality is pretty good, and the acting is adequate. In the very first scene, I thought it was really going to suck. When they start out, there is a large SUV driving in the desert with the family in it, and the obviouse reflection of the film truck in the vehicle was the worst I have ever seen. But then, the movie got better and better from there. It is a story about a family traveling through a desert region. They decide to spend some extra time in a ghost town and get caught up in an mystery. This is a well made "made for Tv movie". It was acceptable for our family and young teen age children. It is frustrating at points to see those characters behave in ways we think we would not. But thats entertainment. Its Family Vacation meets twilight Zone on a Pancake budget. The movie wraps up with a mysterious settlement of characters that is unanticipated as will as undefined. Some very high level thought going on there. It is a movie that seems familiar due to all the regular plot gratuities.

I was surprised when I realized how many people don't like this movie because it leaves many question unanswered. Throughout the history of mankind most frightening things were those which couldn't be seen or explained. Expecting evil is usually more scary than meeting it. (That's why the best of Halloween is first part of the first movie). In fact, I was pleasantly surprised that such a movie came from USA, especially from TV, and after watching these reviews I'm even more glad that someone still makes movies for those who don't rank movies according to gallons of ketchup-blood on screen. Of course: Friday the 13th fans should avoid this film.

Recently I saw a Swedish horror "Det okanda", and I suggest it to those who want to check my statements about fear of unexplained. From USA movies I could chose an early Spielberg movie "Something Evil" which didn't become as great hit as his later works, probably because audience didn't get enough explicit horror scenes, and a final answer. Also, most of the monsters (aliens, genetic freaks etc) look rather funny than scary when they appear on screen. If not at once, surely some years later - try to watch giant bugs, or Martians in 50's or even earlier horrors.

Finally, I don't say this is a great movie. Though I like to think during and after watching, and explain things to myself, I still have no idea what is the meaning of the raven, especially in last minute or two. But I do hope that there will be no sequel: some questions should stay unanswered.

Well, although many have found otherwise, I found this film intriguing due to its inconclusive nature. If you have not seen this film, DO NOT READ THIS as your own conclusion is the whole basis of the film! I think part of the key to the story actually lies in the explosion, which in my opinion never happened. It is more likely however, due to major similarities with the Siberian Ball of Fire of 1908, that the explosion was meant to be a UFO crash (read up to see similarities, it is exactly the same)! Thus, the reference to Area 51. Therefore, I don't think the strange 'creatures' in the town were anything to do with aliens, more likely to be some humans, probably deformed that had mixed or breeded with an ancient Indian civilisation or had dabbled with the occult. The graves in my opinion were as a result of sacrafices concerning the occult, thus the 'creatures' making people disappear! The crow is very symbolic of this, and the human shaped skin also points in this direction. The ending does leave a little to be desired perhaps, although the crow taking the picture of the desert as the boy had done throughout the film gave some of it away.

What had quite happened at the end is not fully resolved, but the main puzzling thing is the sheriff in the nearby town. Leaving the man in the cell next to the fire in the town he denied the existence of had to be a trade for the missing boy, but he certainly was a very big part in the film, much bigger than most would think.

One idea of mine was that the nearby town was also a ghost town but I have given up thinking about it now!

Overall, 8 out of 10, a good film with an interesting story line, as long as you don't mind thinking about it!

Disappearance is about a couple who take their family on vacation in New Mexico and find themselves in deep trouble after taking a detour off the main highway to visit a town that was seemingly abandoned in 1948 for unknown reasons. The town of Weaver seems harmless at first and has tourist appeal until the family is stranded there overnight and they begin to have good reason to suspect that others have experienced their same predicament with fatal outcomes. The Henleys watch a Blair-Witch-Project-esquire video diary left by the town's last victim, which ironically demonstrates the best performance of anyone in this movie. Although Hamlin and Dey's performances are much better than the supporting casts', their emotional affect seems "flat" to me throughout the movie.

Disappearance has appeal for most of the movie as there is much suspense and good direction. However, the plot takes unexpected and implausible turns that seemingly make no sense. Worse yet it that there really is no understanding of what exactly is going on in the movie, which makes the bizarre ending less tolerable. It appeared to me that the movie makers were so focused on making a stream of suspenseful scenes, that they threw away all the elements of good story making: plot development, gradual explanation of themes and symbols that lead to a cohesive solution/outcome.

The most difficult aspect of the movie for me was that the first three-quarter of it was spent building up tension and curiosity about certain aspects of the plot that were then suddenly disposed of as if we didn't deserve an explanation:

What was the significance of the Indian symbols on the walls? What happened to the original people of Weaver? What was the connection with the people at the dinner? What did the Sheriff know? What did the missing boy discover if anything?

This was, I believe, a bad move, since it engendered some resentment. I had invested quite a bit of brainpower into hypothesizing some plausible explanations for some of these plot turns and strange events, only to have the movie makers simply end it without giving an answer to any of these things. These are some nice cliffhangers for the ending of a miniseries that is about to pickup again next week, but a totally frustrating and inappropriate ending for a stand-alone movie.