Hank Braxtan brings us our third killer bear film of 2015.
'Into The Grizzly Maze,' didn't live up to expectations, with it's major cast, and horrible editing, more fit for television than big screen. 'Backcountry,' on the other hand, exceeded expectations, as more of a survival flick, with one gruesome kill scene.
So, how does 'Unnatural' hold up?
Creature features really depend on the type of director/writer involved. Are they less is more kind of guys, or do they believe in going all out? Believe it or not, bears are rather frightening and dangerous without being genetically modified (Backcountry.) Personally, I would have preferred your normal, ornery, territorial polar bear, but Hank Braxtan wasn't having any of that. He decided to overcompensate for something... So, what could have been a solid experience, ended up being 'Into The Grizzly Maze' set in Alaska. 'Unnatural' just throws in an unnecessary back story about genetics, that no one will care about. We just want to see the bear rip through those typical, annoying characters - played by your typical bad actors/actresses.
Oh yes, the cast - Somehow, James Remar continues to get work - and he's as wooden as ever here. Seriously, though, this guy supplies more wood than your local paper mill. Graham Greene pops up for about 3 minutes of screen time (It's nice to see he's still alive.) Sherilyn Fenn may or may not be involved here. I couldn't really tell - She used to be attractive.
Random Ramblings of a Madman: If you're going to spend 95% of the film avoiding actual shots of your enormous, genetically modified bear, why not just, you know, use a regular sized Polar bear? I hear those things pack a mean bite. 'Unnatural,' however, does not.
'Into The Grizzly Maze,' didn't live up to expectations, with it's major cast, and horrible editing, more fit for television than big screen. 'Backcountry,' on the other hand, exceeded expectations, as more of a survival flick, with one gruesome kill scene.
So, how does 'Unnatural' hold up?
Creature features really depend on the type of director/writer involved. Are they less is more kind of guys, or do they believe in going all out? Believe it or not, bears are rather frightening and dangerous without being genetically modified (Backcountry.) Personally, I would have preferred your normal, ornery, territorial polar bear, but Hank Braxtan wasn't having any of that. He decided to overcompensate for something... So, what could have been a solid experience, ended up being 'Into The Grizzly Maze' set in Alaska. 'Unnatural' just throws in an unnecessary back story about genetics, that no one will care about. We just want to see the bear rip through those typical, annoying characters - played by your typical bad actors/actresses.
Oh yes, the cast - Somehow, James Remar continues to get work - and he's as wooden as ever here. Seriously, though, this guy supplies more wood than your local paper mill. Graham Greene pops up for about 3 minutes of screen time (It's nice to see he's still alive.) Sherilyn Fenn may or may not be involved here. I couldn't really tell - She used to be attractive.
Random Ramblings of a Madman: If you're going to spend 95% of the film avoiding actual shots of your enormous, genetically modified bear, why not just, you know, use a regular sized Polar bear? I hear those things pack a mean bite. 'Unnatural,' however, does not.