Out of the Dark

Greetings from Lithuania.

"Out of the Dark" (2014) is more of a mystery thriller with some horror elements rather then a horror movie. It's not scary, yet it has some jump scare moments, which are kinda generic and predictable. If you will start watching this movie in hope to see a great horror movie, you will end up disappointed.

That said, "Out of the Dark" is more of a mystery movie. Plot is simple, yet not that bad. The best parts of this movie in my opinion was solid cinematography, gorgeous locations (shoot at location in Columbia), nice acting by J.Stiles (unfortunately Scott Speedman was miscast here) and some very nice pacing of this movie. Director did kinda nice job, but script in here should have been improved.

Overall, "Out of the Dark" is not a bad movie, it's just not a horror as it's advertisement says. It's nice to see some scenery change once in a while, and this movie has one. Good pacing, nice acting by lead actress, solid cinematography and some mystery story with horror elements makes this movie a worth seeing once.

Not a whole lot to say about this film. It probably could have been decent given that that they seemed to have a good budget and some good actors, but they chose to go a very mediocre clichéd route with it instead.

The story was very predictable, which really hurt the film since this is pretty much all story. Aside from a few jump scares, the entire thing was pretty dull and boring.

It wasn't horrible, I watched the whole thing with out any temptation to shut it off, but it just felt like something I have already seen over and over again.

4/10

I think that some movie creators really believe that if they put the word "dark" in the title it'll automatically be scary.

This was one very generic ghost story.

Let's look at the typical ghost story formula (the rest MAY be considered a spoiler so avert thy eyes now if you don't want this movie to potentially be ruined).

1.) someone killed in an unjust manner.

2.) unjustly killed has a ghost that terrorizes.

3.) character being terrorized finds out the history/true story behind the unjust death.

4.) ghost is placated or subdued due to the discovery.

The jump scares, spooky music and ominous setting is all there for setting the mood. If this is your first ghost movie go-round then maybe you were impressed; as for me, SMH.

Not scary (often boring) ghost movie about an American family in Colombia terrorized by local spooks mad at grandpa. Gramps is a businessman so, like every movie businessman ever, he's got blood on his hands. It's all pretty clichéd stuff and not the least bit unnerving or frightening. The jump scares didn't even make me twitch. My butt was asleep by the end of it. Speaking of the end, there's at least one bit that's unbelievably corny. If you have the guts to sit through this, you'll see what I'm referring to.

Julia Stiles and Scott Speedman have both done better. They have no chemistry and their work here is forgettable. Pixie Davies plays the young daughter in constant danger. While she is certainly a cutie patootie, she's not a very good little actress. She has a heavy British accent while both of her parents are Americans. Even Stephen Rea, playing her grandpa, is using an American accent. I missed it when I watched but apparently there was a throwaway line of dialogue in the beginning that said the family had been living in London. Pretty flimsy but there you go. This was the first English-language film from this production company so perhaps it went unnoticed by everybody that Pixie couldn't change her accent until it was too late to recast. Or maybe they just didn't give a flip. It's not like it would have saved the movie or anything. It's a dud regardless.

As a Horror fan, the ghost-story and haunting sub-genre has always been my favourite. As a general cinema fan, Julia Stiles has been one of my favourite actresses since 10 Things I hate About You. And then we have the privilege of a child actress taking her first steps in what might become a long and successful career! What could possibly go wrong? The answer is everything else.

Yes, the acting is decent, though I would really like to see Stiles starring as a main character in a Horror film. When your favourite actors aren't usually taking part in films from your favourite genre, it's frustrating at times. Yes, little Pixie Davies is everything a passive child victim is cut out to be in such films - innocent, adorable and helpless. Here ends anything really positive I have to say.

While I can't think of an example for this story being used before, it doesn't feel original or innovative, and doesn't really keep you on edge guessing till the end. The ghosts are simply not scary. The "jump scares" are predictable and ineffective, and that's really saying something, since as we all know well thought off and finely designed jump=scares work even when you're expecting them (how could a film mess up the cheapest horror trick of the 21st century?). I actually found myself bored towards the second half of the film. Me? Bored in a horror film? Never happens. Honestly. Never.

I can't stress how much I wanted to be able to give a good review. Getting Julia Stiles in a ghost-story was a dream come true. But the dream turned into a nightmare, and not in a good horror kind of way. I'm painfully disappointed. Then again, my disappointment is probably due to my high expectations. If you watch this with no expectations whatsoever - you will probably enjoy it. It's good for a few scares, especially for people who aren't usual horror viewers. But personally and subjectively - ugh, what a let down...