The Dark Below

Was really intrigued by the premise, which was one of the better, more interesting and more creative premises of any modest/low budget films seen recently, and with appreciation for the genre. Was also a bit apprehensive with the low rating and some less than enthusiastic reviews, which from personal experience watching modest/low-budget horror films recently have not been a good sign and most were poorly executed.

The good news is that 'The Dark Below' fared better than expected and as far as recent low-budget viewings go it is one of the better ones. Coming from somebody who seen a lot of weak or less films lately, that is saying a fair bit. 'The Dark Below' is far from a great film, or even a good one, but is watchable and not a complete waste of great potential. Some good things, also some bad things that will be outlined in the rest of the review.

Lets start with the positives. 'The Dark Below' looks quite good, nicely photographed with an atmospheric setting and lighting and editing that is at least coherent and not too cheap. The score doesn't quite fit admittedly, but as music in its own right it does have an unsettling creepiness that one wishes was matched by the story and atmosphere.

A few creepy moments, the film is not incoherent and the acting is better than average and make the most with what they're given. That the film is nearly wordless excepting three words was not really a hindrance.

Sadly, 'The Dark Below' is let down by that it has a creative premise yet executes it rather ordinarily and with not enough impact. There aren't enough scares, tension or suspense (the latter two only appearing in spurts), and not enough thrills. Down to too much of the story being nonsensical with a lot of silly, contrived and illogical moments and confusing and frustrating decision making that makes one endear to the characters even less.

Character development is sketchy at best and too much of the pacing is leaden. Some of the sound is obvious and the direction tends to be merely workmanlike and never more than that.

On the whole, better than expected but not a film recommended highly by me. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Where to start? This resembles a bad television film more so than an actual feature. Thin plot, weak characterizations, no explanation of the characters motivations and minimal exposition.Toward the end of the film you start to realize what is occurring; however, by that point, you just don't care.

Basically for nearly 90 minutes you watch characters who don't care about do things that don't make much sense. Coupled with the near total lack of logic in the plot, this film is like watching a documentary about a subject for which you have no interest.

Bad film that can easily missed.

Just came out of the premiere in L'Etrange film festival, in Paris. The theater was full, promising plot, expectations high up. Yet, what a disappointment. I admit it is about an experimental thriller, and budget is rather tight, but at least you expect some sort of coherence in the story. The film is almost unspoken, so that the soundtrack takes over as a role play, although even the music is out of swing, off line. Plenty of details impossible to believe, like the tempos underwater without oxygen, long staying in freezing waters eyes wide open and yet no sign of damage or deep frozen fingers that can get cured miraculously overnight...film concept though is good, yet bad resolved. Just as well its 75 minutes length made it easier to go through.

For a film with no words you'd expect the story, direction and acting to pick up the slack. Unfortunately it doesn't, you're left with no feelings towards the characters either good or bad as it leads you to the predictable ending.

A woman (Lauren Mae Shafer) struggles for survival beneath a frozen lake while a metrosexual killer (David G. B. Brown) stalks her from the surface and we slowly find out they are not strangers.

The mad genius behind this film is writer-producer-director Douglas Schulze, who has been a rising force in the world of indie horror. But although we tend to associate a film mostly with the director, Jonathan D'Ambrosio really deserves as much credit for "Dark Below", with his serving as co-writer, editor and art / production design. His fingerprints are all over this one.

The film has a slim cast, with the most notable name being Veronica Cartwright. The lead, Lauren Mae Shafer, may be building a reputation among horror fans with her roles in "Mimesis" (also from Douglas Schulze and co-starring Brown) and "Secrets in the Walls". A few others show up in flashbacks, but are really unimportant. Shafer virtually carries the entire film on her shoulders.

The creators make a very bold decision going for the complete lack of dialogue, which makes it almost like watching a symphony rather than a film – this, in turn, makes it very much a showcase for composer David Bateman. The modern silent film, as well as the plot of using a woman's expert swimming abilities against her, are absolutely original. Originality is rare in any genre, but especially in horror. (Can we stop making zombie movies yet?)

If any criticism could be thrown at the film, it would be to ask: did it need to be feature-length? Already very short by feature standards, it could have been a longer short film just as effectively. I suppose for marketing purposes, you would prefer to have the feature. Few theaters, at least outside of festivals, screen short films. (Maybe they should.)

All in all, an original and innovative film. It may not appeal to all audiences, but those who want to see something different and who have a little patience (this is not a bloody slasher film) will be rewarded.