Les ombres du désert

OK, I saw the previews, and immediatly said to myself, there's some possibilities with that one. I watched it, and I must admit, I was held captive for the two hours. I mean, I didn't want to turn it off, or go channel surfing. It was entertainning, and suspenceful. Now, I MUST admit, it had an ALFUL lot of tv horror movie CLICHES. The very first scene was a bit over done and almost turned me off. There was NOTHING original about it, I had that feeling of seen it, been there, done this before. But yet, it still was kinda fun to do it again.

It didn't really drag anywhere, the pace was decent, but the ending left me a bit confussed. I don't know if it just was a total let-down and cop-out, or a stroke of genius on the story-line. Actually, it had that Jeepers Creepers ending feeling, kinda like the evil won nad the good was over-come. All the question were left UN-ANSWERED, and left you with an unsolved mystery.

Is it demonic? Is it aliens? What is it? What is happening? Were those the REAl people at the end? Does everyone die and get "replaced" with mindless drones?

I wonder if they are planning a sequel to this, because it felt like part one to a mini-series, and I'm still waiting for part two.

This movie held my interest for the first hour or so. The ending was horrid however!! They never even showed the mutants that were spoken of. The mutants that were supposedely made that way through radiation! Uggg, the ending was stupid and a let down. I saw this on a rainy morning.

Overall, the movie was good. There wasn't much originality but a really big plus was given because there wasn't much violence. Don't get me wrong: I don't hate horror/mystery movies with gore, but it is a very refreshing change when a movie comes out with little or no violence. Yes, the end of the movie was open-ended but that was intended to leave the viewer's imagination run wild. For those of you who hate making sense of the ending and don't want to think up what happened...I came up with one. So, if you haven't seen this movie yet, please don't read the rest unless you want the ending to be spoiled for you. I've decided that the boy, Matt, who took pictures of everything became that black-bird...because, remember, at the very end we see the desert in the bird's point-of-view and then it takes a snapshot of it's view, like Matt would have. I'm thinking that the old man in the begining at the restuarant took the body of the little girl since at the very end she sees a motorcycle and says "Nice bike" as the old man looked at the family's car in the begining and says "Nice car." There's lots of symbolism in this. I'd also like to say that I think that there wasn't just one "creature." It was probably a cross between a bird and human. How else would things like that be able to walk and fly?

Good movie. Good ending.

I was surprised when I realized how many people don't like this movie because it leaves many question unanswered. Throughout the history of mankind most frightening things were those which couldn't be seen or explained. Expecting evil is usually more scary than meeting it. (That's why the best of Halloween is first part of the first movie). In fact, I was pleasantly surprised that such a movie came from USA, especially from TV, and after watching these reviews I'm even more glad that someone still makes movies for those who don't rank movies according to gallons of ketchup-blood on screen. Of course: Friday the 13th fans should avoid this film.

Recently I saw a Swedish horror "Det okanda", and I suggest it to those who want to check my statements about fear of unexplained. From USA movies I could chose an early Spielberg movie "Something Evil" which didn't become as great hit as his later works, probably because audience didn't get enough explicit horror scenes, and a final answer. Also, most of the monsters (aliens, genetic freaks etc) look rather funny than scary when they appear on screen. If not at once, surely some years later - try to watch giant bugs, or Martians in 50's or even earlier horrors.

Finally, I don't say this is a great movie. Though I like to think during and after watching, and explain things to myself, I still have no idea what is the meaning of the raven, especially in last minute or two. But I do hope that there will be no sequel: some questions should stay unanswered.

Disappearance is about a couple who take their family on vacation in New Mexico and find themselves in deep trouble after taking a detour off the main highway to visit a town that was seemingly abandoned in 1948 for unknown reasons. The town of Weaver seems harmless at first and has tourist appeal until the family is stranded there overnight and they begin to have good reason to suspect that others have experienced their same predicament with fatal outcomes. The Henleys watch a Blair-Witch-Project-esquire video diary left by the town's last victim, which ironically demonstrates the best performance of anyone in this movie. Although Hamlin and Dey's performances are much better than the supporting casts', their emotional affect seems "flat" to me throughout the movie.

Disappearance has appeal for most of the movie as there is much suspense and good direction. However, the plot takes unexpected and implausible turns that seemingly make no sense. Worse yet it that there really is no understanding of what exactly is going on in the movie, which makes the bizarre ending less tolerable. It appeared to me that the movie makers were so focused on making a stream of suspenseful scenes, that they threw away all the elements of good story making: plot development, gradual explanation of themes and symbols that lead to a cohesive solution/outcome.

The most difficult aspect of the movie for me was that the first three-quarter of it was spent building up tension and curiosity about certain aspects of the plot that were then suddenly disposed of as if we didn't deserve an explanation:

What was the significance of the Indian symbols on the walls? What happened to the original people of Weaver? What was the connection with the people at the dinner? What did the Sheriff know? What did the missing boy discover if anything?

This was, I believe, a bad move, since it engendered some resentment. I had invested quite a bit of brainpower into hypothesizing some plausible explanations for some of these plot turns and strange events, only to have the movie makers simply end it without giving an answer to any of these things. These are some nice cliffhangers for the ending of a miniseries that is about to pickup again next week, but a totally frustrating and inappropriate ending for a stand-alone movie.