Unearthed

In fact I've seen far worse ..... Worse story, worse dialogue, worse acting. I have to say the creature cgi was pretty bad, again not quite as bad as some others I've seen. Fortunately, or perhaps cleverly, they kept the number of scenes where the creature was fully visible to a minimum. The shots that gave us close ups the creatures head, claws etc were done with physical structures and were actually pretty good, better than expected.

This movie had enough story to keep me interested, flowed well enough to be watchable, and as a bonus the ending was not what I thought it would be. It was good enough that I thought I'd add my 2 cents review wise.

I don't regret watching this movie, although I'll probably never watch it again.

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.

In 2004, director Matthew Leutwyler's first feature 'Dead & Breakfast' received praise for some circles; none of which included me. Unfortunately three years on and while at least he's moved away from rubbish zombie films; he has unfortunately gone on to rubbish sci-fi/horror films, and this desert-set rendition of Alien is just that. It's a shame that this film is so terrible because the plot actually sounds like it could turn into something quite decent. The film takes place in New Mexico and focuses on a small town. A bunch of cows have been found dead and naturally the local farmers believe that a wolf is to blame. The farmers send for a Sheriff to deal with that, and a big truck accident that's blocking the road...but things take a turn for the unexpected when the Sheriff discovers that there's been an archaeological dig in the area, and that an Indian has accidentally released a giant CGI alien creature into the town. Then a bunch of people end up getting stuck and the alien picks them all off one by one.

OK, so let's break it down. Acting - terrible, special effects - terrible, plot - clichéd, death scenes - routine...so it really doesn't have all that much going for it. Emmanuelle Vaugier is the lead actress and she's very good looking, but doesn't have enough about her to carry the film. Luke Goss, one half of the awful eighties pop group 'Bros' also appears in the film (luckily, the other half isn't in it, and even luckier is the fact that he doesn't sing). The plot is turgid and uninteresting and basically gives us a little bit of info, followed by a death scene, followed by a bit more info. The central creature doesn't appear all that often - and that's really a good thing because it when it does appear, it's just disappointing CGI nonsense. The action sequences are no good either, mainly because director Matthew Leutwyler has opted for the MTv style quick cuts that never fail to ruin a movie (even, it would appear, one that is already ruined). Overall, this is a dreary and boring horror film that definitely isn't recommended.

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...

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.