Recensioni degli utenti

I both was and was not surprised to learn that this film was once scheduled to be helmed by John Carpenter in the 1990's, before he dropped out. While I didn't expect to hear that news, it made a lot of sense, since this seems like the sort of film that Carpenter could really sink his teeth into, and I'm actually quite sad that we never saw his version of the film.

Regardless, Anthony Walker stepped in to fill Carpenter's empty director's chair, with a cast including Adrian Paul of "Highlander: The Series" fame, and Kate Nauta, known for roles in films like "Transporter 2" and "The Game Plan." And despite this being a very obvious and often-times heavily flawed B-movie, it's actually fairly well made for the most part. Though unfortunately its flaws are too great for it to elevate itself to anything beyond "average."

Based loosely on the infamous "Well to Hell" hoax (a sort-of social experiment/prank in which heavily modified audio from 70's horror film "Baron Blood" was circulated with the claim that it was audio from deep underground of people being tortured in Hell), the story focuses on tormented Security Expert Thomas "Jack" Jackman (Paul), who is sent out to investigate a remote drilling facility in the Sahara. He discovers that the team working at the facility on a deep-drilling experiment have suffered many casualties, with only one member remaining- JC, portrayed by Nauta. After a series of grisly discoveries, including wording written in blood and a bizarre audio clip from deep underground that sounds eerily similar to the wailing of people being tortured, "Jack" begins to question his sanity, and whether or not the situation has a logical explanation... or if the situation is being controlled by the forces of Hell itself.

The acting unfortunately is fairly underwhelming. As much as I liked Adrian Paul in his "Highlander" glory days, he's unfortunately just not a particularly skilled actor. But I will give him credit, because he is at very least clearly trying to give a good, compelling performance. And he is quite charming in the role. The same could be said for Nauta, who similarly is just not very good here, but is giving it a very decent shot. Bit parts by the likes of Amanda Douge and even director Anthony Walker are decently played, however.

Walker's direction is the standout part of the film. While I have hated some of his earlier works ("An American Werewolf in Paris" being particularly noteworthy of being poor-quality), here, he gives us a very stylish, slick visual representation of the story, and I liked a lot of the touches and ideas he brought to the film. Although I will question some of his choices, including a bizarre and unintentionally funny detail during the opening sequence, in which "Jack" investigates the drilling facility, and every single one of the hanging lights is "wobbling" for creepiness-effect. It just seems forced and silly that every single light in every single shot is wobbling.

The script by Walker and Everett De Roche is unfortunately the undoing of the film, and is the main factor in bringing it down a few points. Because, frankly, despite having a lot of cool ideas, it's very confused, contrived and convoluted. And it is so over-stuffed with double-crosses, tonal shifts, twists and turns to maintain a sense of ambiguity, that I ended up finding myself losing interest, since it was trying too darned hard and giving me a headache trying to follow the story in any capacity. I understand that Walker and De Roche want the film to be dripping with mystery, intrigue and have an ambiguous tone where the audience has to decide what is happening... but it's just so forced here. It feels very amateurish in how the story was constructed. Ambiguity can be accomplished with tact, class and deliberation in good films, but here, it's accomplished through poor writing and needless amounts of twists. And without spoiling anything, the final 20 minutes are a cluster of constant twists and shifts that are so overwhelming and needlessly confusing, it almost ruined the entire film for me. I also will admit that I found a recurring motif of suicide (as "Jack" lost his family when his wife killed herself and their children in a murder-suicide) to be very uncomfortable, off-putting and somewhat too exploitive for the film. (Though this could just be my gut reaction as someone who is dealing with the recent suicide of a friend.)

And unfortunately, that script drags down what would have been an otherwise pretty good, decent film down to the score I am giving it- a very average and sadly underwhelming 5 out of 10. I would still say that horror fans should give it a shot, because the direction is very good, and there are things to like about it, but the sloppy script holds it back from achieving its full potential.

There's really not many directions you can go with this type of movie. Anybody whose seen the pathetic attempts to reboot The Exorcist (i.e. Exorcist: The Beginning) has seen this premise. I'm not really sure it was a great idea to begin with, and beating it to death isn't helping. Still, this movie's got some going for it. Most of the horror is based on jumpy, sudden moves of creepy imagery. Yes, that's a bit cheap but that doesn't make it less effective. The actors do fine. Not outstanding, but they get the job done.

The story is pretty basic. Security officer Brit McStudly and scientist Dr. Hotpants (ok, not their real names but they were clearly chosen for their looks rather than talent) get stuck in the middle of nowhere in a research/drilling station where things have apparently gotten very real. So the two of them hang out there and one of them may or may not be under assault by demons. There's some vague connections to religious angles and a good deal of psychological tension. Again, decent...but not great.

Would I recommend it? Sure, if you've got nothing better to do. It's not stellar but it's far from the worst thing you've ever seen (then again this is IMDb so I'm sure at least one person will claim it is...and that person will be an idiot).

The effects, scares, creepiness - all work very well. The "going out of his mind" sequences are all very well done. The dialog his horrendous. Had there been more care taken with this and some better editing this could have easily been a 8 to 9 on the imdb scale. Instead too much focus on the "horror movie" look and feel.

While it does have some effective atmosphere and a couple of original creepy moments especially one involving mirrors this increasingly idiotic tale of an official checking why there has been no response from a team doing a dig under the Sahara. He goes alone and despite numerous interactions with a woman on a phone, none of his requests for leaving or backup ever materialize, but what does materialize out the desert is a stunning blonde woman. It's first misfortune is that the star of this is Adrian Paul and he simply cannot act. The rest of this is either the bizarre concept that the miners, mostly still missing, went so deep they created an opening to hell (?!) or is he going mad. He does seem to be going mad, but the final scene leaves one wondering, however it's not worth trying to decipher any of this mess especially if you see the print that I did, among the worst I have seen in decades. The cost $22 million (?!), but despite that it sure looks like a 2009 made for network TV movie.

This is yet another of those "not" horror movies. I was intrigued by the blurb, based on a myth that Russia had drilled so deep into the earths crust they could hear the screams of the damned from hell. Obviously filmed under a tight budget, the majority of the film features just two actors. And neither of them will win any awards for their performances, not even from the local drama club. I would have to class this as a psychological thriller rather than a horror movie. Nothing much actually happens through out the film, just some cat and mouse between the two main characters. And the ending is a bit of a mess. Not sure how this rates 5.5.

It's one of those movies that had potential but somehow does not really uses it.

The storyline is your typical ingredients for a good psychological thriller/horror movie that constantly has you and the viewer questioning their mind. A man is sent to a deserted drill site in the Sahara desert, where a series of unexplained deaths have taken place. As soon as he arrives, a mysterious woman appears who claims to be the survivor of the scientific team, but who is she really ?

Already at the start the movie just rushes by without letting the atmosphere really do its' work. And as soon as the storyline really gets off, the film deteriorates into one big confusing mess. It just uses the same old "hallucinations within an hallucination within an hallucinations etc." formula over and over again ad tedium.

The female character barely adds anything to the storyline, she's just eye candy and the ending still doesn't explain anything about her.

Shame, because the movie did have some potential. Oh well, still better than Rob Zombie I guess.

Having seen the trailer to make sure it was OK, i thought the movie looked quite good delivering a story that contained a little horror, drama and mystery all rolled in to one.

There is nothing bad about the acting or the idea behind the story. It was just that the plot was weak and confusing at times (for me at least).

If you are looking for something that will scare you then, you will be disappointed, it may have you wondering at times like the previous comment mentioned as to whether "hell is real, or a state of mind." but that is about all. The characters are just planted in the middle of no where with no introduction as to who they are or what they doing in the sahara.

The howling wind and the sand beating against the facility windows and doors in the first 5 minutes, is probably the most frightening thing about the movie but the rest is just average looking for cheap thrills with peeks at partial nudity at times and the old scary hag routine.

There are however elements of good effects giving you a glimpse as to what could have been if it had been thought about more but instead you are left feeling a bit disappointed knowing there was so much more scope to the storyline and the female character at the end.

When you see a 5.5 rating usually you expect near-trash stuff. Well it turned out to be so much better than expected. The strongest thing about this film is, you get what you expect from a thriller (suspense, twists, gore etc), but in a believable way. You don't get bored and constantly you have to question whether reality or insanity is driving the characters of the film. Adrian Paul is above average, Kate Nauta is fine but surely cannot pass as a... scientist. If it was shot with bigger star power, it would get the rate it deserves, but still a 7/10 is fine, considering the budget. Now the 100 people that rated it with 1 or 2, where surely expecting something else. My recommendation: see it

***UPDATED 2024-07-28

I just re-watched this, and sure enough my opinion of it has changed quite a bit for the better. Initially I rated it a '5', now I have changed that to a '7'...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(Older review below - edited, leaving the basic points of my initial impression 9/2015)

To me personally, although I REALLY liked the premise and even, in CONCEPT, liked the basic way the story was plotted and what the underlying 'truth' eventually turned out to be, it was the way the story was handled and primarily the 'STYLE' in which it was done I felt were just not nearly as effective or satisfying as it could have been, given the excellent subject matter.

I feel that if the filmmakers had approached the movie with more of a 'SESSION 9' type of film in mind, rather than an 'MTV' type of style, THEN I probably would have really liked it a LOT better. It started out really well with a ponderous, moody tone (very much like 'SESSION 9', one of my all time favourite Horror films) BUT... about half way into the story as they began to 'ratchet up the tension', the movie kind of lost me mainly because of it's visual and editorial style. I don't mean to say that there were a lot of mindless quick edits, or anything quite THAT awful or stupid, but still, the overall approach really leaned a lot more towards quicker edits, strobed visuals, and intercut scares.

SOMETIMES that can work with a Horror film, but in my lowly and wretched opinion, NOT with this kind of premise where you clearly have the potentially Dark, Mysterious, and Biblically Supernatural possibilities that this story has. I feel that with a movie of THIS type, constructing a strong mood is far, ***FAR*** more important than flashy visuals. [***EDIT (UPDATE) I now feel the visuals did indeed lend themselves to a more Apocalyptic, Supernatural theme than I did then]

That is why, in my thinking, the premise and the setting to me were MUCH more strongly reminiscent of 'SESSION 9' with it's abandoned research station instead of an abandoned asylum, and the people there clearly being affected mentally (or spiritually) also as in 'SESSION 9' So, to me their visual and tonal approach with this film just didn't quite seem to be as Darkly effective as it could have been. Don't get me wrong, there WERE several nice, creepy individual scenes. The recorded sounds were quite effective. But, instead of ramping up the visuals to such a frenzied and kinetic degree, to me it seems that a more Dark and ponderous approach would have worked a LOT better. In other words, instead of what I perceived as a more superficial and kind of obvious visual approach, I think a more Dark, vague, and almost subconsciously disturbing mood would have fit this story much better.

The acting and overall technical competence was good. I would say that even the writing and the direction that the story took and the eventual underlying 'truth' and outcome were just fine. I just think that the actual STYLE of the movie, if it had been approached differently, could have REALLY had a MUCH more powerful impact on the audience, and could have been far more disturbing and unsettling (thus fitting the premise better) and a LOT more effective in creating a sense of true 'Horror' for the audience.

***END ORIGINAL REVIEW

UPDATED THOUGHTS:

Heh... I thought I'd leave in my first primary impressions because I think there is a bit of validity to them, although now I do not feel that the stylistic approach that the filmmakers used brings down the entire movie overall as much as I did originally.

I THINK that maybe I had seen the excellent 'SESSION 9' fairly recently before seeing this one, and it is indeed one of my VERY favourite Psychological Horror films. So, when I saw a dark, oppressive premise in this one similar to S9 I was initially more put off by the flashier visuals feeling that they didn't 'mesh' with the darker, moodier theme of this story.

But now, after re-watching it, true, I do still feel that a more darker, less 'Flashy' approach would have served the story somewhat better, but honestly the entire movie was done so well, well acted, well shot, and still with a considerable amount of moodiness, that the quicker edits and visuals did not put me off nearly as much this time.

I now feel that especially compared to many of the Horror movies that are turned out today, that the quality of this one was quite a bit higher than I initially thought. So, now yes, I would very much recommend this movie for those who like a Darker, Supernatural eerie premise, set in a deserted station in a veritable wasteland. It is indeed after all a good film...

Despite the somewhat weak rating, I must say I enjoyed many aspects of Nine Miles Down. The movie shares similarities with several films we've enjoyed, others not so much but it has a cool premise and some interesting ideas are explored.

The story follows Jackman (Adrian Paul), a security expert investigating the disappearance of a crew of scientists and drillers in a remote station located in the desert. Initially and for most of the film, the viewers follow the story from the perspective of this character. A second character is quickly introduced. It is that of Jennie Christianson (Kate Nauta), the only person left on the site who claims to be part of the scientific team.

The direction and writing aim at a somewhat claustrophobic, intimate journey for these characters and this is both where the movie shines and fails. The story is interesting but the direction lacks some punch.

But the most important thing for such a film to succeed will be the acting. The whole movie depends entirely on the performances of the two leads as the whole dramatic impact of the film is related to their relationship and their changing state of mind. And this where the film goes... nine miles down. Adrian Paul is slightly subpar in what would be a challenging role for even the finest of actors. Kate Nauta has a very important part but much easier to play. Unfortunately, I think she gives one of the worse performance I have witnessed. Quite simply, her delivery for most of the film is on par with a porno actress. She's literally "speaking" her lines as if doing a (bad) first reading.

It is very unfortunate that Nauta has not improved because she has an atypical look and style but at this rate she would be better off in secondary parts where she has few or no lines. Her body language is OK, it's the line delivery that is not there at all.

Another aspect that disappoints is the scares. I am OK with a thriller or horror movie without jump-out-of-your-seat moments. My problem is more with movies that TRY to make you jump and fail lamentably. Sadly, Nine Miles Down is in this category. A few scenes seem designed to shock you or scare you but they never do. The quality aspects are the display of the characters' mindsets (particularly Jackman). We, the viewers are constantly challenged to determine whether what we are witnessing is real, an illusion or something worse.

The script inserts cool little references and hints here and there that will keep you on your toe and might even make you want to give this a second viewing. It's just unfortunate that the direction and acting wasn't up to the task.

Could have been a 6 with better direction. Should have been a 5 with decent acting. But sadly, Kate Nauta drags this down to a 4. (she's more tolerable in the second half of the movie if you make it there).

Solid idea, shame the execution was botched a little.

Are film-makers taught in school, that they can only use women, who look like models in their films? Or are sexual favors exchanged? Did only blonds answer the casting call for this film? I just get tired of this emphasis on looks, especially for women. I guess, they don't think, that an audience could stand watching a normal person for an hour and an half? A blond model in skimpy shorts in the Sahara! A blond model at the switchboard! A blond model in the flash- backs! AAAAAAAieeeeee!!!! Even the "supposedly" great Alfred Hitchcock, stuck blond models in all his later movies. I guess 'cause sex sells . . . Other than that, the movie was well done, with a good deal of suspense.

This film could have had potential however the story lacked any depth and scenes were very diluted with long, unnecessary, and repetitive craziness. I use the term craziness since I cannot find a better way to describe such strange and pointless parts in this film.

It's as if the director himself was trying to recreate some twisted concept that popped into his mind however when put into action this did not materialize.

The film started well while unfortunately and continually progressing very predictably and lacked any positive progression. I might add the female character was rather intriguing; the second unfortunate part was they showed more ass of the guy then anything else which leads me to believe the director must be a homosexual.

At times I thought the film may redeem itself when again and again it kept letting me down and just continued to get worse until I got to the point when I couldn't wait for it to just end since I already wasted so much of my time trying to get into it.

Possibly worth a watch if you really have nothing else to watch. Don't expect anything great other then a 5 second creative skeleton demon scene and a sexy blonde in nothing but a chefs apron; I know for many of you me simply stating this will lead you to view this piece as soon as possible.

Well, well, a movie based on the infamous "Well to Hell" hoax of 1989. The title "Nine Miles Down" is based on the English depth of the hoax well (14.5 kilometers) down. Allegedly in the Hoax a Soviet geological expedition bored a hole through the earth's crust, lowered a microphone and recorded the screams of the damned in a literal Hell (the recordings to back the hoax were matched to the torture chamber scene of Mario Bava's Italian horror film "Baron Blood"). In real life, there was the Kola Superdeep Borehole that was abandoned at a depth of eight miles. Fahrenheit 360, the temperature at which Soviet scientists gave up boring at Kola.

So here I am finishing this movie on Chiller channel out of -- boredom? expiation of my sins? nah, boredom. This movie reminds me of "Event Horizon" set in the Sahara. Excruciating at times, promising at others. Watching it with commercial interruptions detracts suspense so my opinion is guarded. I must admit I have seen much, much worse. The movie is basically a two character study, from the hallucinating (maybe possessed) mind of a security officer sent to investigate a remote rig and finds a single survivor, other crew dead in the freezer (a dead giveaway something's wrong), a well where screaming voices may / may not be heard, and growing suspicion of the survivor, a woman who reminds him of his wife who committed suicide. The actress does a good job of portraying different personalities -- distraught survivor, calculating succubus -- as the plot POV demands.

I watched it, I have wasted time on worse, but I don't intend to save a copy.

Sent to a remote outpost in the desert to discover the cause of communications failure with the site, a security worker discovers the workers there uncovered the literal location of Hell beneath their feet and try to work through the continuous onslaught of hallucinations to get away alive.

This here turned out to be quite an enjoyable and creepy effort even though there's some flaws to be had here. The continuous notion of everything being a dream or hallucination gets old incredibly fast because it's hard to sustain any kind of fear or suspense with just two people the entire time and nobody else during the movie, which leaves this one as a never-ending series of visions and creepy scenes that won't affect the well-being of those around because nothing has to happen to them until the end. That, in the end, really robs the film of a lot of potentially intriguing methods to generate some suspense throughout because everything that's happening can't harm the leads so they must make it all the way through, so the forced constraint in the story doesn't really allow this one to stretch as far as it could. That said, when it relies on the creepy images and chilling story idea, this is quite solid and really has a lot going for it to be able to throw as many striking images as possible here, with all the horrific demons, personal torment and just plain crazy ideas thrown in here that make for a really enjoyable time. If it would've been able to fix that one area in the story, this could've been so much more.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language and Full Nudity.

In so many details "Nine Miles Down" was very different from the average blockbusting US-made movie telling this kind of tale. Following Jackman through that somehow horrific place in the desert is a promising start into a solid, almost old fashioned end-of-the-world adventure. Normally, nowadays the story tends to dwindle to something stupid. Not here. You can really stick with it, from the very beginning the whole thing is intriguing and every single step and turn makes sense. If there is danger, the guy uses his brains, he turns around, and a blind spot doesn't automatically mean a noisy monster jumping out of it. Dialogues are kept short, but to the point, and casually even enter deeper realms. No cheap effects, thrilling story, good acting, and guessing participation is guaranteed to the very end.

There's nothing good to say about this movie. Its over-long, the acting's bad, the special effects are crappy, the plot is weak and its utterly un-entertaining.

This is the single worst film I have seen in years. Starts out with a promising premise, but dissolves into cliché.

The no-name actors do an awful job. The acting is wooden and utterly unconvincing.

The thing thats most irritating about it is that there is virtually no plot. The premise gets ridden out after about the first 45 minutes and then its just a bunch of standard devices used over and over to try to 'keep you guessing'. The result is phenomenally tedious.

There's nothing here for lovers of this genre. Its just badly done. period. 90 mins of your life you will never get back if you are unlucky enough to get stuck in front of it.

1 out of 10.