उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

The movie begins interestingly enough as we are introduced to the characters. There are subtitles as the characters speak a language developed for the film and the story telling around the fire does have a good atmospheric effect, but very quickly the characters begin to distract from that atmosphere. This group of Northern Europeans from 45,000 years ago is made up of what appears to be three people of at least partial African descent, one of Middle Eastern descent and one Caucasian, all of whom have short or close cropped haircuts you'd be unsurprised to see today. The skins they wear are almost modern in their appearance and they are sewn and stitched again in what appears a very modern way. From here the movie continues to be an uneven mashup of entertaining suspense followed by confusing choices while not quite allowing the viewer to suspend disbelief. Loose ends abound from the odd black goo discovered after a major plot point, to the gory "slaughterhouse" area found all the while decrying the lack of game to hunt. It seems forced and manufactured and worst of all the villainous force at the end is comical and absurd. Also, the slaughtered mammoth that is found seems to be related to the villain, but again, that too adds to the absurdity. By the end of the movie, I was out of patience and ready to leave. Very mediocre and ok to watch for free somewhere but don't pay for it.

A small, hungry, group of Stone Age hipsters are hunted through a harsh landscape (the wilds of Scotland) by an unseen, seemingly supernatural, presence. More of a low-key indie survival thriller than an actual horror film, which I think it is being marketed as. In fact, if you go in expecting a horror film, you may be quite disappointed (or even want your money back). Despite the occasional bloody scene, it's a little like a horror film that's been made by and for people who don't really like horror films, but want a bit of that 'Saint Maud' action.

Grumbling about lack of 'horror' aside, the performances are fine, the cinematography, sound and costumes are excellent, and it's impressive that it was made for a low budget, out in the cold and rain, under covid restrictions. It's a good-looking, atmospheric film. If someone you knew had made it, you'd be very impressed. But compared to films that share a similar plot, like Predator, The Ritual, Valhalla Rising, Deliverance...well, it just can't compete. It lacks the tension, suspense, thrills, catharsis, tight script, and great characterisation. It's just not that engaging. That said, if you enjoy slightly arty low-budget UK indie films, you might find something to enjoy here.

So a group of Stone Age wanderers are searching the bleak wilderness for a new home when they begin to suspect that they are being stalked. Noises in the woods unsettle them, but they see nothing. Suddenly, though, one of their number is taken and the leader "Adem" (Chuku Modu) must make some difficult choices to ensure the survival of both his son and of his pregnant wife. The denseness of the Scottish forestry along with some creative use of light, shadow and audio goes some way to keep the film interesting but the plot itself is really weak and the actors - perfect teeth, skin, leather clothing that wouldn't look out of place at a gay pride gathering - all deprive the thing of any sense of menace or grittiness. It's difficult to watch without thinking the production caravan is just three feet out of shot! The redeeming feature may be an impressibly natural performance from Safia Oakley-Green ("Beyah") but I'm afraid for the most part, I struggled to remain engaged and the ending, well that was just rushed and a little disappointing too. I would still suggest you watch it, if you get the opportunity - but on the television is fine and don't expect to be scared.

45,000 years ago, a group of people desperately try to evade a malevolent force, they must hone their survival skills to stay alive.

I watched this at The Odeon, as part of the Screen Unseen releases, I'd like to rewatch again at home, just to try and understand it a little better.

Billed to me as a horror movie, and whilst I'd say there are horror elements, please don't go expecting a horror movie, if you do, you'll be disappointed.

Whilst I wouldn't say it's my type of film, there are several positives I took away. The cinematography is quite something, it looks amazing, and the actors do a grand job, consider the language they're using, and there is a degree of tension and expectation. The music is good too, very 80's.

Sadly it just go anywhere, and the pacing for me was the major frustration, when I'm in the cinema and fidgeting, I know I'm at the wrong film.

I can't really go much higher than a five, as it committed the biggest film sin of all, it was boring, but it's not without merit.

5/10.

I just saw The Origin at Sitges Film Festival 2022, and I'm so happy I chose to watch this movie.

Without getting into the slightest spoiler, the film takes place thousands of years ago, which makes makeup and costume designs incredibly important. Luckily everything looks great (aside perhaps from a haircut or two, but I'll let it slide, hence I'm no expert on the subject) and the acting is equally impressive. The actors all speak a makeup language, made solely for the film, and they still manage to come off convincing. The script is great - there's a few scenes we've seen in other film of the same genre, that being survival thriller/horror, but the film manages to stand on its own feet for the vast majority of the movie. The locations are beautiful and the camerawork is simply stunning. There's also a great core-message underneath and several thematics throughout the film.

Surprisingly for this type of film, the pacing is good for the entirety of the movie, and my only gripe is that there is a few cliches along the way as well as a message that regardless of importance is a bit too explicit towards the end.

8/10.

This movie depends on almost endless scenes of its six stone age characters running through scrubby open terrain and dark forests, with whip pans and intercut close-ups of terrified faces, to create a sense of danger and unseen horror. Trouble is, this obvious packing of the narrative with ginned-up suspense achieves nothing in terms of drama or horror. Added to that are a lot of unanswered questions about character motivation and the plausibility of the so-called demons tracking our hapless sextet. The inevitable "reveal" is both laughable and inexplicable. I truly appreciate the attempt by the filmmakers to create a low-budget feature out of spare elements and a minimalist sensibility, but at times I felt insulted that this movie expected to get away with what was clearly a woefully under-imagined scenario.

People save your money and your time. This was the stupidest movie. Both my husband and I looked at each other and said, "That's it?" We kept hoping for more. First off the characters don't even look like they belong in that "era". The dialog and acting is terrible. These people are supposed to be an ancient civilization but the coats they're wearing look modern? The production value looks low and...what more can I say to fill out the six hundred characters? It's so bad I have nothing else to say. Do not waste your time. It's not even good enough for tv. I don't know how this got to theatres. I don't know.

My wife and I attended a screening of the UK film 🇬🇧 Out of Darkness (2022) in theaters last night. The storyline follows a group of individuals working together during prehistoric times, seeking a new home and means of survival. Arriving in a new land with limited resources, they hunt for survival only to discover they are not the sole hunters.

Directed by Andrew Cumming in his major motion picture debut, the film stars Chuku Modu (Captain Marvel), Safia Oakley-Green (She Said), Kit Young (Shadow and Bone), Arno Lüning (Bad Girls), and Luna Mwezi (Needle Park Baby).

A well-crafted picture with a premise reminiscent of 13th Warrior, the cinematography, attire, and props authentically transport you to the era, conveying the desperation for survival and lack of hope. The characters' unity in the face of madness is palpable. While the big reveal didn't resonate with me as expected, it's a smart twist depicting evolution. The film captures a time that could well be a forgotten true story. Solid horror elements, noteworthy kills, and impressive gore contribute to the experience.

In conclusion, Out of Darkness possesses worthwhile elements but falls slightly short of its potential. I would give it a 5.5-6/10 and recommend watching it at least once.

I watched Out of Darkness "early" as part of AMC's Screen Unseen. I put early in quotes because apparently this is a 2022 movie that took two years to reach theaters. I can see why. It doesn't belong in theaters. It belongs in the endless abyss of underwhelming and unmemorable streaming movies.

This movie has very little substance. Not much happens. I can summarize the entire thing in a few short sentences. The story is not engaging. You barely learn anything about the characters. So you don't care about them or understand their decisions.

They spend the entire movie teasing you until a fully underwhelming and generic "payoff." It made me roll my eyes. And it has a message we've seen a million times before, but executed in a clunky fashion.

(1 viewing, early screening Screen Unseen 1/29/2024)

They advertised it as a (pre-historic) horror, but I would call it a thriller. It's rather slow-paced and the creepiness is mainly atmospheric: long scenes on barren hills and valleys and in dense woods, often in pitch-black nights. In between there are a few exciting outbursts of frenetic action in confrontations with what seem to be monsters; the relentless violence is impressively realistic. The cinematography is beautiful, but with so many dark scenes and with people who are difficult to tell apart since they're packed in thick layers of fur and have smeared faces, it's at many times hard to follow exactly what is happening.

The actors are made to speak the whole movie through some ancient (made up?) foreign language. I suppose this was meant to enhance the feeling of authenticity, but it's a bit tiresome to have to read subtitles for 85 minutes, distracting me from following the images. I also kept imagining what a strain it must have been to learn all these incomprehensible words and sentences. Personally, I wouldn't have minded it when they had chosen for English dialogues. And by the way, how did leader Adem get such a perfectly shaven head, did they have back then some kind of trimmers?

There's a nice twist in the end, with even an existential message: however different people may outwardly look and act, inside they are basically the same human beings. So in spite of the rather cynical and violent conclusion, the movie ended with at least a hopeful touch.

This can be put in the growing category of horror movies that get some critical acclaim for reasons that cannot possibly be associated with the film itself. Dreadfully acted, cringeworthy story, misleading marketing indicating a horror film, I could go on and on but just don't spend a penny on this. Other movies that could be put in that same bracket would be anything from the Adams family eg. Hellbender or Outwaters is another. It is a major issue when trying to decide what movies to spend your time and money on. Review sites have clear affiliations with studios/producers/directors and sadly they cannot be trusted to provide an honest review anymore.

How do you breathe new life into a really over-done horror concept: a group of humans, often with competing priorities and loyalties, is thrust into a situation where a monster or supernatural force or "something" is after them and slowly picking them off (often brutally)? Whether handled in a deeply serious manner (ALIEN, THE GREY, THE DESCENT) or in a campy manner (DEEP BLUE SEA), this basic concept is so baked into the DNA of cinema and is adjacent to the slasher film, where the group may not literally be together all the time (NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET), but are picked off one by one. I separate the two in my head because some of the tropes are a bit different.

Anyway, these films can be fun, but are rarely terribly original anymore. A good director and a decent script can still wring a lot of entertainment for the setup, but still... So what a delight when a film like OUT OF DARKNESS comes along. It's set, very convincingly, in the STONE AGE!! Right there, I was interested. But in viewing the film, I discovered I had set my expectations too low. This is a pretty solid film!

We meet six Stone Age humans as they are arriving in a new land, having fled their earlier hunting grounds because the usual herd they preyed on was not to be found. While we don't know where they've landed in the story, the film was made in the Scottish Highlands. And they obviously found the bleakest, most windswept part of that beautiful area of the world, because you can sure see on the faces of these 6 desperate people that they don't see a lot of hope in the new land. Forbidding mountains surrounding valleys of relentless scrubby grasses and NO animals. Even the forest they come across is forbidding and bereft of life. No birds, even. They've clearly gone from a difficult land to a completely blighted one.

The leader of this group, Adem, and his brother Geirr, go on a scouting trip and discovered the completely (but recently) picked-over remains of a mammoth. Rather than rejoicing that mammoths are in the area; they are full of mis-givings. How did the animal die? Who picked it clean? Clearly, there is someone or something in the area...is it watching them? Even stalking them?

If you know this is a horror movie, you know it's likely to be stalking and not just watching. As these 6 huddle around their sad fire at night, surrounded by utter darkness, we can feel their fear and vulnerability. They know they are easy targets, yet they have nowhere to hide and no great place to run. So in their fear, they begin to bicker with each other, stirring up resentments and passions and superstitions that have them making some grave errors. When Adem's son Heron is snatched by whatever monster is stalking them, the group springs into action...but not the kind of action where cooler heads prevail. Adem rages impotently and wrecklessly. His brother, the reserved (cowardly?) Geirr is torn between loyalty to his brother and an interest in a young "stray" the group has picked up named Beyah, who knows how precarious her place in this group is. Adem's mate Ave, who is pregnant, knows her value to Adem is purely that she might bear him a child, and she sees that Adem is already telling Beyah that if Ave dies in childbirth, he will be her next choice. And if Ave doesn't die...well, there may just not be any use for Beyah afterall. The elderly Odal is the most superstitious of the bunch, speaking of the need to appease the monsters with sacrifices. It's a brew for internal discontent. So we have a great mix of deeply personal politics and a frightening, unseen monster stalking the group.

Director Andrew Cumming, working with a script he co-wrote with Ruth Greenberg and Oliver Kassman, does several crucial things really well. He quickly gives us the backstory we need for these characters, but not one bit more than is needed to create the context for the story we're witnessing. He establishes the characters, their ties, their motives and their fears very neatly, and his cast of relative unknowns rises to the task as well. Each actor must give a deeply physical performance, but must also juggle a language that was created for them. And as I said, the details of the lives of Stone Age humans are very convincingly rendered. I don't know what an anthropologist would say, but certainly I felt very immersed in this world.

So why not give the film a perfect score? I would say that the actual horror elements are handled less well. The action sequences are too dark and disjointed. While the mood is fabulously well established, and a sense of doom presides over everything...when IT hits the fan, I wasn't properly jolted. And, despite a brief run time, there are at least two or three minutes that could have been cut. There was perhaps just a bit too much of them trekking around their landscape. The bleakness had long since been established; it started to feel like filler.

Seeing OUT OF DARKNESS, I realized that I want to see a movie about the very difficult lives of Stone Age people. The contrasts (and similarities) between how they lived and how we live were very interesting. (I know we don't know all these details about folks from 45,000 years ago, but the film speculates very convincingly. These are humans who are really just starting to distinguish themselves from animals.)

OUT OF DARKNESS, when I think back on it in years to come, will be less of a horror movie and more of a movie that takes old clichés and imbues them with new life by giving us a group of characters we've really not seen before. (I look forward to a physical media release that includes lots of good "making-of" stuff. The movie was very low budget, but clearly made with great care.)