Terror na Escuridão

Like the title says.

This wasn't a poorly made film. It was competently directed and acted. Just lacked charm. Things happen that don't make sense, just like in practically every horror movie. Passable make up effects.

Basically just a super average horror.

It was cool to see Dean Stockwell still acting though. Love that guy.

Dr. Michael Cayle (Sean Patrick Thomas) thought leaving the chaotic life-style of New York City behind for the quiet, small town of Ashborough would bring his family closer together. Soon after arriving, however, he discovers the town's deepest secret: a terrifying and controlling race of creatures that live amongst the darkness in the forest behind his home.

This film is based on a 2004 book by Michael Laimo (Dead Souls), which was influenced by the 1973 made for television film "Don't Be Afraid of the Dark", starring Kim Darby (not to be confused with the 2011 remake with Katie Holmes. One could probably compare all three films, but suffice it to say the inspiration is rather loose and this film is not the same as those other two.

Dean Stockwell has aged a bit since his glory days of "Quantum Leap", but he is still a commanding figure. One scene involving a plastic bag of eyeballs could have been silly, but he manages to make it deathly serious. Sean Patrick Thomas is a strong lead and a solid actor, providing much more emotional depth to his character than we typically see in horror films. While this film may be lacking at times, it never lacks because of Thomas.

Shock Till You Drop gave the movie a score of five out of ten, stating that while it had some effective jump scares and a good cast, they felt that the film was mostly unmemorable. The New York Times panned the film, expressing disappointment that the film did not live up to its full potential.

The disappointment is understandable, as this overall good film has a flaw or two. Indeed, the creatures are revealed a bit too early, and seem to be somewhat lacking in believability, looking possibly like a poor man's imitation of the creatures from "The Descent". And because the creatures appear so early, the film seems to run on too long. Had the surprise been saved until later, they could have milked more suspense out of the plot. (This may depend on the version you watch; the full film is 100 minutes but was cut to 88 for TV. In this case, the shorter may be paced better.)

Whether this is worth owning is really up to the viewer, but it is probably worth a watch or two. For those who are curious, it hits your home video shelves from Scream Factory this spring.

There are definitely good points about this movie; it is shot well, the acting is good and the story is compelling. However lots of the quality is lost due to the confusion that is created by having too many events occur without any real explanation or pacing.

The story clearly works much better in book form and probably would have better suited a mini-series format akin to Wayward Pines rather than being condensed into a film. That way the plot points that go completely unexplained could have had the time to be explored and digested by the viewer.

Overall there is a lot of good here, it is just too much in too short a time and so the story suffers greatly, still a good watch though.

OK, I see only negative reviews here, won't go bashing them, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, therefore I am going to present you mine. So let's see why I enjoyed "Deep in the darkness".

Well for starters, it's a horror where bad decisions aren't taken at every step and boy did that feel good. Quite refreshing seeing people using their brain, trying to survive and not fell for the dumbest traps possible. Afterwards, the acting was good, believable. The creature concept I see is a hard pill to swallow for most, I for one think it is simple and easy to go with. I approve to it! You get to see a few deaths, a few fight scenes, some interesting facts about those creatures, and other variables making their way throughout the movie, making it more complex than your usual B horror. So all in all, in my books, this is a winner, as I enjoyed it, and stayed for the entire ride.

Now, as I am putting down this comment, the score is 3:1 for the negative reviews, therefore it will seem hard to take my word for it. But, if you are a horror junkie, if you approve to more underground productions, this one is smarter than most. It has more to offer, providing a good plot, execution and minutes well spent. Therefore, I recommend "Deep in the darkness" as I missed a woods/creature horror, done right.

Cheers!

I have seen a lot of negative comments about this film. My advice, ignore them.

Deep in the Darkness takes a now familiar horror premise and reinvents it, more than competently, in my opinion. Its not a terrifying film but it has enough menace, to infuse the story with a sense of unease and edginess it definitely benefits from. Nowhere is safe in this film, including the family home, which is anything but the idyllic country haven it first appears to be.

The acting is solid and includes a few old favorites from television such as Dean Stockwell, who is probably best remembered for TV series Quantum Leap. Given there are no big names in this film, some might be tempted to label it a "B" movie. In my view this is an unfair assessment. There is a heck of a lot to like here. So much so Id go so far as to say this title does a good job of putting a lot of so called "A" grade horror flicks to shame.

My advice give this film a go. Its not superb but its by no stretch of the imagination rubbish either. Seven out of ten from me.