Deep in the Darkness (2014) - Deep in the Darkness (2014) - User Reviews - IMDb
Deep in the Darkness (2014) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
30 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
I for one, quite enjoyed it.
Patient44425 June 2014
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!
58 out of 72 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Ignore the detractors
s327616927 April 2015
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.
31 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A Solid B-
zandertowne21 October 2018
That's my opinion: a solid B-. Decent premise, sort of a Jack Ketchum throwback with Wicker Man/Harvest Home overtones (a community tied to the local "legend"). The acting is acceptable to pretty good and I, for one, rather liked the concept of the Isolates (with a dash of Morlock thrown in for good measure) and accepted the premise of this group of creatures living in the woods. Why only a B- then? Because it never rises to being anything better; characters aren't really defined (the husband blandly accepts his wife suddenly acting totally different and suspicious). People do dumb things (not as dumb as in most plot-only horror films) but if creatures rule the night why not leave during the day? Why not get a gun? Or call outside help? And it's not effectively shot - sort of pedestrian - as if the director never saw how much more he could get out of his location or scenes. And the score is over the top and the script too often "on the nose" with characters saying just enough to keep the plot moving but not enough to flesh anything out or feel particularly real. Even the child is only interested in plot: "wheres the dog?" or "I see ghosts" with no one asking for explanations or offering comfort or anything believable. But its serviceable overall. I can't wait for a decent remake.
8 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
What Lurks Below...
gavin694212 March 2015
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.
16 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Just not good
damianphelps28 August 2020
The first half of this movie is simply awful. The characters over react to every little thing with so much suspicion by the time things actually start to happen I was kind of over them. It has the premise of an ok story (nothing original but still workable) that is lost as I said by unrealistic responses to things like, omg I saw my wife go into a church with some other women, that's suspicious at a church picnic, I must follow her!!! (play dramatic music).

It comes across as a lack of confidence from the director in the quality of the story. Instead of trusting that the movie will deliver he forces tension where it doesn't belong.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
idk why all the bad reviews, i loved it!!
sabrina_makela1 May 2015
Some people gave this movie bad reviews but i don't understand why. This movie is one for horror lovers. To me it didn't seem like a TV movie and I am the queen of B-movies to the folks around me. The sets are well done, the makeup excellent, the monster makeup well done and the blood and gore pretty decent. Nothing was obviously, ridiculously fake like most TV movies. This movie is creepy as heck. It starts out creepy from the first two minutes and the hits just keep coming. Some people said the monsters have too much exposure but the monsters are an integral part of everything that happens in the movie. There is plenty of mystery left to the monsters, including their origin and other things I can't say because, spoilers! The acting is great. I felt for the characters because they really seemed to be in distress, anger, pain, etc. There were some nice twists and, overall, the movie was fun to watch! It was nice and dark, creepy and scary. I'm from a small town in the woods, so I really enjoy creepy small town movies. You'd like this movie if you enjoy movies with dark atmosphere, creepy small towns, creepy neighbors, creepy people in general, monsters, or if you have a fear of the dark or the woods. I recommend you try it with an open mind. Don't let the bad reviews make you miss this one.
20 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Too much in a small space
scythertitus21 February 2016
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.
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Deep In the Nonsense
parnell-rj30 October 2018
Deep In the Darkness is pretty bad overall. The acting is acceptable, with the protagonist carrying most of the scenes. It starts off relatively well, building feelings of suspense and mystery, but quickly devolves into nonsense thanks to a horrible plot and absolutely silly creatures. Unfortunately, the weak and nonsensical plot only gets worse as the movie drags on and ultimately what you get is a very poor and forgettable movie.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
No
Pnkprinses30928 February 2021
Warning: Spoilers
So they understand English....except when they don't. They are wild...except when they need modern medicine. They need a live sacrifice...unless you're useful. This infuriated me. Needless dog killing. And why didn't the whole town get weapons and get them all?! And that BS ENDING!!! This is beyond crazy and imbecilic.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
LEGENDS NEVER GO AWAY
nogodnomasters24 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
The early clues coupled with the DVD cover made the film very predictable as one might guess it is Thomas Tryon plus Troglodytes. A doctor (Sean Patrick Thomas) and his family move into the small, quaint, quirky community of Ashborough NH. The town has Isolates, an indigenous group that missed the early American genocide. They prove to be beyond annoying in a story that made as much sense as a Thomas Tryon novel with Troglodytes. The movie had a made-for-TV feel to it.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Massively disappointing creature feature
kannibalcorpsegrinder10 June 2014
After moving to a small town, a doctor and his family learn the truth about the series of sacrifices the townspeople do to appease the mysterious race of savages living in the area and must keep them safe after accidentally angering the creatures.

This turned out to be quite the disappointing effort and really becomes a huge missed opportunity. The fact that there's just a huge and rather egregious amount of plot-holes in this is the biggest culprit really dooming this one, since that leaves so much about the film as a huge opportunity gone. Leaving the revelation about the move there of all places makes for a long period of time with no reason why the family has to stay there as the whole thing becomes quite frustrating as to why they're there to begin with, and the whole revelation seems forced once it's revealed. As well, there's next to nothing learned about the creatures, where they came from and why they hold this level of intimidation over the people there that allows them to both live in fear of them while never being able to do anything to stop the cycle of violence they leave, since it seems quite obvious that they're easily derailed and not that hard to stop, so his actions against them make the townspeople look all the weaker for being unable to do anything to them in all this time. Beyond the plot-holes, there's just a whole slew of messy filmmaking that really takes this one down a notch as the build-up with the concerned, secretive regulations and behavior of the townspeople toward the family doesn't provide any suspense but become rather infuriating with them due to how route and cliché they are towards them while not actually doing anything to levy the suspicions raised. It's a slew of different scenes that supposedly build to a creepy resolution by their desired-hidden motives but do nothing to deflect that once it's become obvious something is up, and the running around with the different townspeople trying to figure this out leaves so much wasted screen time that it really doesn't become creepy or suspenseful at all but rather annoyed. It does get some thing right, as the creatures themselves look amazingly creepy and quite chilling, perfectly appearing to be the kind of creatures that would instill that kind of fear in people. They're behavior and viciousness makes for a truly well-rounded villain and they're quite adept at being a horror-film creature. As well, once the whole thing's loose and the creatures are allowed to roam free, it's actually quite entertaining with a strong encounter at the house during an escape attempt and the finale in the caves is quite chilling, almost as much for the darkened location than the actions taking place within. It raises this up somewhat, but there's still a lot more wrong here that holds it back.

Rated Unrated/R: Graphic Violence, Language, Brief Nudity and children-in-jeopardy.
13 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Nifty creature feature
Woodyanders31 January 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Dr. Michael Coyle (a solid and credible performance by Sean Patrick Thomas) leaves the hustle and bustle of New York City by moving his practice and family to the quiet and remote country hamlet of Ashborough. However, Ashborough turns out to be run by a lethal race of ghastly underground-dwelling mutants.

Director Colin Theys relates the engrossing story at a steady pace, takes time to develop the main characters, delivers a few bits of nasty gore, and ably crafts an eerie and unsettling mood along with a strong isolated small town atmosphere. John Doolan's compelling script not only provides a starling surprise grim ending, but also offers a novel spin on the monster horror genre by making the hideous humanoid beasts sickly beings who need the protagonist's medical expertise to keep them alive. The sound acting by the capable cast rates as another substantial asset: Kristen Bush brings a winning blend of charm and spark to her role as Michael's perky wife Christine, Dean Stockwell contributes fine support as amiable old-timer Phil Deighton, and Blanch Baker does well as the sinister Zellis. The subterranean creatures are genuinely creepy. Both Matthew Lewellyn's shivery score and the sharp widescreen cinematography by Claudio Rietti and Adrian Peng Correia are up to speed. Worth a watch.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Mysterious first half, badly done (and too vague) second half
Wuchakk7 February 2018
RELEASED IN 2014 and directed by Colin Theys, "Deep in the Darkness" chronicles events when a doctor (Sean Patrick Thomas), his wife (Kristen Bush) and daughter move to a quaint New England town where they learn very strange things are happening. Dean Stockwell plays an eccentric neighbor and Anthony Del Negro his grandson. Blanche Baker appears as the matriarch of the town while Cara Loften plays a troubled blonde.

The first half is effective as a haunting mystery/horror flick with Thomas compelling as the protagonist. Naturally, I thought I was in for a good movie. At the mid-point, however, the secret of the town is revealed and it's serviceable, but not wholly successful, although the creatures (or whatever you want to call them) look great. From there, the movie goes off the rails and loses the viewer's attention. The captivating power of the first half disappears as the remaining scenes are strung together without any dramatic or aesthetic merit. Worse, the film's too ambiguous with way too many questions left unanswered or, if you try to connect the dots, the answers don't add up (speaking as someone who enjoys 'figuring out' challenging movies).

The curious differences in quality of the two halves can perhaps be explained by the fact that the first half follows the book quite closely whereas the second half deviates and the director/writer/editors simply didn't know how to complete what they effectively set-up in the first half. They tried to do their own thing and failed miserably.

THE FILM RUNS 1 hours & 40 minutes and was shot in Moodus, Connecticut. WRITERS: Michael Laimo (novel) and John Doolan (screenplay).

GRADE: C-
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Ah, those hospitable folks from New Hampshire!
Coventry28 June 2017
In case you read some of my user comments in the past, you might know that I'm an incurable sucker for two things when it comes to horror movies, namely juicy titles and imaginatively sinister movie posters! If I stumble upon a film that has one or preferably both of those aspects in place, I completely disregard all possible ratings and reviews – hardly even look at them, in fact – and make it a top- priority to watch it! Needless to say that this peculiar and rather superficial habit already resulted in me watching a copious amount of downright dreadful movies that I could have avoided by a simple and quick glance at the IMDb rating, but I keep on making the same mistake…

Even though not nearly as hopeless as, say, "Invasion of the Blood Farmers", "Deep in the Darkness" sort of falls into the same category. I was immediately hooked on its title (containing two horror key words) and intrigued by the poster image of the house with all the branching of roots into the soil, but it quickly became obvious that "Deep in the Darkness" is a routine, inconspicuous and mediocre-at-best genre effort. The plot contains a handful of good and ambitious ideas, and it's fairly clear that director Colin Theys is an enthusiast young director that knows his classics, but the film eventually reverts to familiar clichés and features too many dull & redundant moments. It's another variation on the classic "small town with a dark secret" horror premise, in which a family of new arrivals are either warned to leave their new home as quick as possible or gradually pushed to participate in bizarre rituals. Doctor Michael Cayle initially laughs away the advice to bring an animal sacrifice to the so-called "Isolates" living in caves and tunnels underneath the forests nearby Ashborough, New Hampshire, but naturally comes to regret that he didn't. "Deep in the Darkness" benefices mostly from realistic character drawings and a few moments of admirable tension-building. The make-up effects, particularly on the Isolate creatures, are also quite professional. Being a horror movie like there are thirteen in a dozen, however, there definitely should have been more carnage and on-screen violence.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Perfect Lazy Friday Day Horror Flick
balletjen12318 August 2017
Am not one to watch horror films, but after recording it a few days before decided to watch in daytime in my home office. Was not 100% present to watching it, but if I thought I missed something, I rewound & watched again. Kind of bloody, kind of silly, kind of scary, but passed the time enough for me to want to look up all the info on this film on IMDb. Director seems to have his niche and good actors seem to have nice careers. So...bottom line.....I wonder if there will be a D in D 2 ? I doubt it, but would I watch it? Yes!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Deep In The Darkness
a_baron11 January 2015
In some ways this film is original. So is gravy with raw fish, custard and ice cream; you wouldn't want that either.

A black doctor moves to a small town - town indeed - and is given a friendly welcome. The widow who sells him her late husband's practice and home gives him a hint that people from small towns can be narrow-minded. He puts this down to the race issue, and he does have a white wife. Race has nothing to do with it, but face it, you wouldn't want you daughter to marry one of these.

The town/village/hamlet, has a bizarre secret, beneath it lives a species of, well, nightmarish creatures. Maybe you should've stayed in the big city, doc.

The purpose of horror is to horrify, frighten, or at least entertain. If this film had a surreal quality to it, it might pass muster, but it strives for realism, something that makes it look just stoopid. Even the ending is sooo predictable.
9 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
I loved it
wassa-7378115 April 2020
Watched this 4 years ago, but posting my review here just because this hasn't got enough good reviews and ratings. Hereditary is my all time favourite movie, and this is more like a stepping stone in that direction although this has got nothing to compare with that movie.

I loved the eerie air that was prevalent throughout and also the way the doc tackles he issues he faces. The expected never happens, and both the story and acting manages to grab your attention throughout the movie.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Solid flick
dominicdom2 September 2018
Great creepy story, fantastic acting, good visual effects... can't ask for anything more. Love seeing ingredients come together and deliver exactly what it's supposed to.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
M. Night Shayamalan Reject
view_and_review7 February 2016
The word "dark" is really being overused in movie titles. Maybe once it had some real impact but now it's old hat.

This movie started off with a lot of promise. There were the clichés: isolated area, no cell phone service, weird townsfolk--but even with that the movie had a chance to do something good. Well, it didn't. It fell incredibly flat. Partially due to the acting of Sean Patrick Thomas and the other part due to the story and the complete lack of sense in it.

Sean played Dr. Michael Cayle who was in the small town to escape the big city of New York. When he wasn't sleeping he spent most of the movie looking confused and perplexed in situations which dictated fear, panic, or resolve. If we were to swim past his acting job then we'd enter the waters of the story.

The story had something to it. Some hidden creatures keep the townsfolk in fear and in line. Dr. Michael finds out the secret but is then powerless to escape so he must find another way to keep his family and himself safe. I can dig it. But the movie fell off the tracks with some real illogical plot points, some improbable factors and a bad ending. This movie seemed like an M. Night Shayamalan reject.
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A good movie for horror/monster fans.
i-3425219 July 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Definitely spoiler alert.

Good horror/monster pictures are few and far between. While "Deep in the Darkness" does have its own share of problems, it's definitely one of the good ones as judged by the relative standards of its own class of movie. I would encourage devotees of the genre, willing to engage in an enthusiastic "willing suspension of disbelief" (a prerequisite for the genre), to give this movie a tumble. People with a lot of convicted, film-student notions about what constitutes high-art cinema would be best advised to look elsewhere.

Stylistically, the movie has echoes of "Harvest Home" and "Wicker Man" with its depiction of something unhealthy just beneath the surface of a closely-knit small-town community and the progressive isolating of the masculine lead, leaving him an outsider even within the context of his own small family.

Be warned: the wife of the protagonist appears to blow hot and cold in her relationship with her husband as the movie progresses. This reads as out of place or inconsistent and gives one the sense of a poorly-crafted plot element. At the very end of the picture we see it's actually a fairly legitimate expression of someone vacillating between loyalties.

Within the context of its own genre, if I had any significant criticisms to level at this movie it would be with the nature of the ending. All of the questions about how we got here, what's going on here, and so on, are neatly tied up. But the movie does not seem to carry all of the way to a final conclusion. It's as if it quit about 10 minutes before a final resolution. There is a definite "-and where does he go from here…?" sort of feeling at credit-roll that was unfortunate. The movie makes the stylistic choice to end on an explanatory note that gives our hero an opportunity to understand clearly how he ended up in this situation that explains much of his wife's peculiar actions during the course of the film, but there are still a few issues he needs to resolve and the movie just stops. He's put up an effective and determine fight throughout the film and he's unlikely to stop at this point, and so neither should the picture.

Some examples of questions that could use answering are: 1. The hero has apparently wiped out the entire nest of monsters except perhaps for one newborn infant monster and a couple of half- monster-half- humans. Why is he still isolated? Hasn't he won? 2. The community has apparently run off with his half-breed wife and his kid. It's a very small community. How far do they think they can go? And why is the community still helping the monsters? 3. Unlike "Harvest Home" and "Wicker Man", our hero has been left alive, healthy, and kicking at the end of the picture. Yet some of the townspeople appear to be trying to help the monsters along, and not just the half-breed townspeople. Clearly our hero is going to persist in creating a problem; why was he left alive?

And so on. The list is long.

Who knows? Maybe these questions have been saved for "Deep in the Darkness 2".
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
too bad
slhma1024 June 2014
i loved it until the first sighting of the creatures in the window.I think it was a creature anyways.I shut it off since i wsasnt scared and there was zero suspense left.Too many otherwise good movies get ruined by the "monster(s)" being silly.I always say-less is more..and the more left to the imagination the better.I wish film makers would work on suspense and mystery and atmosphere and stop ruining their movies by revealing the creature or monster or whatever it is too soon.Worse yet is they kill spookiness with lame obvious plot devices and scenarios.Oh well.Too bad.If you're interested in a movie but OK with little to no suspense or mystery or spookiness,then give it a try.
12 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Time practically Stood Still.
benzed17 August 2019
I found this film a failure on so many different levels. Every aspect of what pulls a movie together or holds it together was fascinatingly missing.

One of those movies where you think it might be near the end only to discover by checking time you only watched 2/5. Seemed to go on forever.

Fails; lighting, acting, sound, dialog, story, continuity, directing, and editing
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
So far out there that the storyline suffered terribly...
paul_haakonsen27 May 2022
Stumbling upon the 2014 horror movie "Deep in the Darkness" here in 2022, of course I opted to sit down to watch it on the account of it being a horror movie that I hadn't already seen. Sure, I had never even heard about this movie from writer John Doolan and director Colin Theys, nor have I ever read the novel, so I wasn't sure what I was in for here.

I will say that the movie starts out interestingly enough, and the people that lives in the small town and the strange events definitely have a genuinely creepy atmosphere to it, but movie sort of loses its momentum and the storyline goes from interesting to pseudo-rubbish in almost a split second.

How true the movie is to the novel I have no idea, nor can I say that the movie has planted any seeds spurning me to go fetch a copy of the book to read. The storyline told in "Deep in the Darkness" was just a bit too ridiculous.

Sure, it should also be said that the appearance of the Isolates was definitely interesting, and I loved the effects with the eyes. But the whole concept was just a bit too far out there to find any solid ground for rooting in my mind.

For a horror movie then "Deep in the Darkness" just simply didn't cut it. The movie wasn't a particularly outstanding or memorable horror movie experience. And this is definitely not a horror movie that I would recommend you rush out to get a copy of. For me, "Deep in the Darkness" came and went without leaving a lasting memory.

My rating of "Deep in the Darkness" lands on a three out of ten stars.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
GET OUT Meets BONE TOMAHAWK
philip_desaulniers15 April 2020
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.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A small town, bizarre ritual, secrets amongst neighbor and no internet. Scary stuff.
quincytheodore28 April 2015
Moving can be tough, meeting new people in new environment and wondering whether they are mentally sound or downright brainwashed drones. Deep in the Darkness plays with the sense of seclusion and lack of familiarity to its advantage, up until halfway point. There lies a few good thrills in store, however the plot falls apart as the so called creature looks lees authentic as the movie progresses and some of the decisions the characters make are so ridiculously bad it feels like a parody.

Dr. Michael Cayle (Sean Patrick Thomas) moves with his family to the small town of Ashborough. He works as the town's doctor and it seems like the people are nice enough, but strange occurrences begin to haunt him and his family. Sean Patrick Thomas performs his best, his character may be the most logically sound as he displays seemingly genius reactions. The confusion and anger he feels are just, they are almost expected from a man who is now confined against his will.

Most of the actors also do their part well, the setting of the quiet and secretive town is eerie in moderation. Unfortunately, as the secrets are revealed, the plot stumbles significantly. The movie provides a few suspenseful scenes at early act, yet it ventures to the realm of comically bad decisions. Characters would do the least beneficial things for their survival.

Not to mention there are plenty of scenes which are near supernatural just because the plot deems it. This creates a repetitive theme and considerably slows down the pace. The more the movie displays the threat, the less effective they become. At latter half it loses momentum as silly plot devices and character interactions erase any mirage of the thrill.

Deep in the Darkness slowly weaves questions and threats, they play out decently with contrasting quaint back drop of the small town. Sadly, neither the revelation nor the conclusion has any touch of appropriate horror to be taken seriously.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed