Long Buried creature is dug up at an archaeological dig, it then goes off and terrorizes the people around a remote filing station. good characters are lost in a movie that just doesn't work. It looks good, the actors are there but there is something about this that just doesn't work. To be certain the monster scenes don't make a hell of a lot of sense. They seem to be more structured to produce an effect rather than follow the plot. The problem is the early scenes where we don't see the creature are just confused and then once we do see the monster-which looks like a version of HR Giger's Alien with a smaller head, it just feels like we've been here before. A misfire thats more of interest as puzzle to unlock as to why it doesn't work, rather than as a scary movie. I really do wish the characters (and the actors) had something better to be in.
51 Reviews
Should have stayed 'Earthed'
The_Void12 October 2008
In 2004, director Matthew Leutwyler's first feature 'Dead & Breakfast' received praise for some circles; none of which included me. Unfortunately three years on and while at least he's moved away from rubbish zombie films; he has unfortunately gone on to rubbish sci-fi/horror films, and this desert-set rendition of Alien is just that. It's a shame that this film is so terrible because the plot actually sounds like it could turn into something quite decent. The film takes place in New Mexico and focuses on a small town. A bunch of cows have been found dead and naturally the local farmers believe that a wolf is to blame. The farmers send for a Sheriff to deal with that, and a big truck accident that's blocking the road...but things take a turn for the unexpected when the Sheriff discovers that there's been an archaeological dig in the area, and that an Indian has accidentally released a giant CGI alien creature into the town. Then a bunch of people end up getting stuck and the alien picks them all off one by one.
OK, so let's break it down. Acting - terrible, special effects - terrible, plot - clichéd, death scenes - routine...so it really doesn't have all that much going for it. Emmanuelle Vaugier is the lead actress and she's very good looking, but doesn't have enough about her to carry the film. Luke Goss, one half of the awful eighties pop group 'Bros' also appears in the film (luckily, the other half isn't in it, and even luckier is the fact that he doesn't sing). The plot is turgid and uninteresting and basically gives us a little bit of info, followed by a death scene, followed by a bit more info. The central creature doesn't appear all that often - and that's really a good thing because it when it does appear, it's just disappointing CGI nonsense. The action sequences are no good either, mainly because director Matthew Leutwyler has opted for the MTv style quick cuts that never fail to ruin a movie (even, it would appear, one that is already ruined). Overall, this is a dreary and boring horror film that definitely isn't recommended.
OK, so let's break it down. Acting - terrible, special effects - terrible, plot - clichéd, death scenes - routine...so it really doesn't have all that much going for it. Emmanuelle Vaugier is the lead actress and she's very good looking, but doesn't have enough about her to carry the film. Luke Goss, one half of the awful eighties pop group 'Bros' also appears in the film (luckily, the other half isn't in it, and even luckier is the fact that he doesn't sing). The plot is turgid and uninteresting and basically gives us a little bit of info, followed by a death scene, followed by a bit more info. The central creature doesn't appear all that often - and that's really a good thing because it when it does appear, it's just disappointing CGI nonsense. The action sequences are no good either, mainly because director Matthew Leutwyler has opted for the MTv style quick cuts that never fail to ruin a movie (even, it would appear, one that is already ruined). Overall, this is a dreary and boring horror film that definitely isn't recommended.
Well the plot summary made it sound like it would be good.
Aaron13758 April 2008
I thought this movie would be the best film of the new Afterdark releases, however, upon watching it I am hoping that is not the case. It had promise and for a second there I thought it would be good, but it just has way to many flaws. I will get to them later, but first the plot. Something is unearthed in a cave and goes on the rampage, a sheriff with a past is on the case. A truck isolates the town leaving four strangers in town stranded, monster begins rampage. An Indian girl and this other guy seem to know a way to stop it and there is some cat and mouse as the survivors and their decreasing numbers hide here and there. So what are its flaws? First, the whole sheriff with a past thing. It is a female sheriff and she had an incident that was so troubling to her that she has been drinking and having problems for a year. A plot straight out of a lifetime channel movie plot. Do not get me wrong and I am not disparaging the channel, but those types of plot points do not belong in horror movie of this type. Also, when it is revealed what she did you will wonder how the heck she has stayed sheriff for a year. It did seem to be because of incompetence on her part and I don't see how anyone could have let her be sheriff after that. She is also way to pretty for someone who has been drinking for a year and living under the sun. Most would have developed wrinkles and would have aged considerably, however she is still quite modelesque. Then there are the four strangers in town, never before has there been four more pointless and underdeveloped characters to enter a movie. You know not their motivations, or anything. The girl bit by the rattler, her friend, the city dude, and the broken down hitchhiker. Heck, you learn more about the trucker whose rig crashes five minutes into the movie than you do any of the four strangers. However, all is not bad as there are a couple of good kills...the dude in the car at the end and the girl in the café. The one rancher is actually a good character, to bad he is not in the movie much and the monster is okay too, although it is just a cheap version of the alien and its origin is a bit far fetched.
93 Minutes of Wasted Time
t-h-fields18 November 2007
This movie was playing at the Union Station cinema in Washington, at 7:30 on a Saturday night. The place should have been completely packed, but it was nearly empty. We soon learned why.
Unearthed has a generic, by-the-numbers plot crammed full of the same old tired horror-movie clichés. It had no direction to speak of. The camera work was amateurish at best, and the dialog nearly incoherent. The camera was pointing all over the place, providing an occasional glimpse of something like a face, a vehicle, or a building. Most scenes were too dark and cluttered to make out anything clearly.
Don't even imagine that this stuff belongs in the "so-bad-it's-good" category. Those movies at least have some originality, humor (even if it's unintentional), and other qualities that make them stand out. They are the kind of movies that people remember, whether they want to or not. Unearthed has nothing worth remembering. I can barely recall even one single scene; the only thing I can remember clearly is waiting for it to be over. It seemed to drag on for several hours or more.
Very soon, this thing will be dead, buried, and totally forgotten. May it rest in peace--FOREVER.
Unearthed has a generic, by-the-numbers plot crammed full of the same old tired horror-movie clichés. It had no direction to speak of. The camera work was amateurish at best, and the dialog nearly incoherent. The camera was pointing all over the place, providing an occasional glimpse of something like a face, a vehicle, or a building. Most scenes were too dark and cluttered to make out anything clearly.
Don't even imagine that this stuff belongs in the "so-bad-it's-good" category. Those movies at least have some originality, humor (even if it's unintentional), and other qualities that make them stand out. They are the kind of movies that people remember, whether they want to or not. Unearthed has nothing worth remembering. I can barely recall even one single scene; the only thing I can remember clearly is waiting for it to be over. It seemed to drag on for several hours or more.
Very soon, this thing will be dead, buried, and totally forgotten. May it rest in peace--FOREVER.
Could'a been good, but made every effort to be bad.
indyj19 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Let me preface this review by saying, while there may be some plot spoilers contained below, I doubt that if I transcribed the script word-for-word I would spoil the movie for anyone. The director/producers managed to spoil this movie quite well on their own.
OK, a movie about an archaeological dig unearthing some ancient creature that starts killing people stranded in the area. Certainly nothing original there, but, ya never know. The director may come up with some new twists. Well, if the director did, he did an impressive job of not sharing it with the audience. Nor did he make any attempt to reveal whatever he had in mind for tying all the unidentified story-lines behind the characters together. Characters are barely introduced at the beginning of the movie, and there is but a hint of character development for anyone but Sheriff Annie.
As far as the filming goes, I've seen camera phone recordings of higher quality than was used in this movie. Apparently, the director dealt with a shoe-string budget by making extensive use of shaky out-of-focus shots whenever there's action, the monster attacking people, people running, caves collapsing, etc. And in today's film-making age, where night shots are shot in daylight/artificial light and then darkened on a computer in the editing room, this film nonetheless shoots it's night scenes outside at night using cheesy night-vision filters. How innovative. Let the audience barely see what's going on so they can feel like they're truly in the dark.
The computer graphics are state of the art....were this still 1992. It's blatantly apparent that one of the director's favorite films is Alien3, as the monster graphics look like he pulled old footage of the alien scampering along the walls from the David Fincher film. And worse than that, he copies the scene in which the alien moves its face close to Sigourney Weaver by having Unearthed's monster, dripping goo from its mouth and all, move its head close to the face of a cringing Tonantzin Carmelo (who is covered in radioactive muck, yet never seems the least bit bothered to be so). What's really sad is, the real creature apparatus which is used in only a handful of shots did look well-crafted. However, most of the scenes of the creature are such pitiful CGI, they make made-for-Sci-Fi channel movie special effects look good.
Had any effort been made to develop the characters, explain what was really going on with them early in the film, and some legitimate filming done instead of rough-shod disjointed quick cuts and camera angles, this COULD have been a decent film.
OK, a movie about an archaeological dig unearthing some ancient creature that starts killing people stranded in the area. Certainly nothing original there, but, ya never know. The director may come up with some new twists. Well, if the director did, he did an impressive job of not sharing it with the audience. Nor did he make any attempt to reveal whatever he had in mind for tying all the unidentified story-lines behind the characters together. Characters are barely introduced at the beginning of the movie, and there is but a hint of character development for anyone but Sheriff Annie.
As far as the filming goes, I've seen camera phone recordings of higher quality than was used in this movie. Apparently, the director dealt with a shoe-string budget by making extensive use of shaky out-of-focus shots whenever there's action, the monster attacking people, people running, caves collapsing, etc. And in today's film-making age, where night shots are shot in daylight/artificial light and then darkened on a computer in the editing room, this film nonetheless shoots it's night scenes outside at night using cheesy night-vision filters. How innovative. Let the audience barely see what's going on so they can feel like they're truly in the dark.
The computer graphics are state of the art....were this still 1992. It's blatantly apparent that one of the director's favorite films is Alien3, as the monster graphics look like he pulled old footage of the alien scampering along the walls from the David Fincher film. And worse than that, he copies the scene in which the alien moves its face close to Sigourney Weaver by having Unearthed's monster, dripping goo from its mouth and all, move its head close to the face of a cringing Tonantzin Carmelo (who is covered in radioactive muck, yet never seems the least bit bothered to be so). What's really sad is, the real creature apparatus which is used in only a handful of shots did look well-crafted. However, most of the scenes of the creature are such pitiful CGI, they make made-for-Sci-Fi channel movie special effects look good.
Had any effort been made to develop the characters, explain what was really going on with them early in the film, and some legitimate filming done instead of rough-shod disjointed quick cuts and camera angles, this COULD have been a decent film.
better than the other reviewers would have you believe
inkslug6 March 2008
I'm the first to be critical of these types of -monsters on the loose in isolated community films-, but if you can get past the stunningly bad cgi monster there's a reasonable amount to like here. There's nothing original but name me one that is original in the last 20yrs, there aren't any. The stories are the same it's how they're handled that varies.
The story:- Out in the dry wastelands of America an archaeological dig unearths and sets loose an ancient monster not seen for 900yrs. Several outsiders stop for gas which has run out due to the tanker being attacked by said monster en route to gas station. They mix with and are stranded with several locals, all of whom become stranded and spend the night fighting for survival.
On the whole the acting is good but unusually Goss seems to struggle with his dialogue as if his heart's not in it. However I blame that on the director and the script rather than Goss. There's very little in the way of excess, unnecessary or cheesy dialogue, which is always a big plus in my eyes. There is also a totally unnecessary flashback thread running through the film. The camera work is a bit shaky and often too dark which does at times detract from the fun. The musical score is fine. The body count is low because there are few characters but the deaths are nice and gruesome. There's a great Eddie Murphy wannabe who gets wot he deserves (and provides the only laugh).
There are two big problems with this film as far as I can see.
1. The monster effects are on a par with the original Jason and the Argonauts from way back when - seriously they're that bad. The actual design of the monster is rubbish as well, it copies too much from alien and it's head is laughable with eyes and teeth all over the place. If you can imagine an alien working at a circus as a clown you'll get some idea.
2. There's a local biologist who keeps telling everyone she knows nothing but keeps coming up with the answers via massive jumps in her conclusions and it just gets stupid when she finds a Geiger counter lying around and then proclaims 'I've got a uranium extractor back at the house.'
If you can ignore these things, and accept that this was done on a tight budget, this is an okay movie.
I watched this back to back with 'Living Hell' and what confuses the hell out of me is that that piece of total garbage got the thumps up from the IMDb reviewers and an average score of 4.7 while this gets a total roasting from the reviewers and an average of 4.8. I feel 4.8 is fair for this film (coz i'm critical) but only if living hell received 0.0 otherwise this deserves more.
The story:- Out in the dry wastelands of America an archaeological dig unearths and sets loose an ancient monster not seen for 900yrs. Several outsiders stop for gas which has run out due to the tanker being attacked by said monster en route to gas station. They mix with and are stranded with several locals, all of whom become stranded and spend the night fighting for survival.
On the whole the acting is good but unusually Goss seems to struggle with his dialogue as if his heart's not in it. However I blame that on the director and the script rather than Goss. There's very little in the way of excess, unnecessary or cheesy dialogue, which is always a big plus in my eyes. There is also a totally unnecessary flashback thread running through the film. The camera work is a bit shaky and often too dark which does at times detract from the fun. The musical score is fine. The body count is low because there are few characters but the deaths are nice and gruesome. There's a great Eddie Murphy wannabe who gets wot he deserves (and provides the only laugh).
There are two big problems with this film as far as I can see.
1. The monster effects are on a par with the original Jason and the Argonauts from way back when - seriously they're that bad. The actual design of the monster is rubbish as well, it copies too much from alien and it's head is laughable with eyes and teeth all over the place. If you can imagine an alien working at a circus as a clown you'll get some idea.
2. There's a local biologist who keeps telling everyone she knows nothing but keeps coming up with the answers via massive jumps in her conclusions and it just gets stupid when she finds a Geiger counter lying around and then proclaims 'I've got a uranium extractor back at the house.'
If you can ignore these things, and accept that this was done on a tight budget, this is an okay movie.
I watched this back to back with 'Living Hell' and what confuses the hell out of me is that that piece of total garbage got the thumps up from the IMDb reviewers and an average score of 4.7 while this gets a total roasting from the reviewers and an average of 4.8. I feel 4.8 is fair for this film (coz i'm critical) but only if living hell received 0.0 otherwise this deserves more.
Alien? Oh no, more like Zoidberg...
terrible230 April 2008
Kind of a bit confused by this one, as the 2006 films were so much better and seemed to push the boundaries of independent horror. So far, I've viewed "Borderland", "Deaths Of Ian Stone" and this little stinker, yet none have had much of an impact on me, especially not this one... Besides the obvious sub-par special effects, I found the dialog to be incredibly weak and amateurish. The acting (for the most part) is not that bad, but when talented actors are forced to deliver such unintelligible lines, you begin to feel a bit sorry for them. I found this most offensive when veteran character actor M.C. Gainey was on screen, I've always respected his talent, which is horribly wasted here. As for the special effects... What can I say? They suck, and suck real bad at that... Crappy CGI mixed in with shaky camera tricks and quick cuts, make it next to impossible to see what is supposed to be taking place, and the story doesn't fare much better. On a good note, much of the (daytime) cinematography looked above average and added a grainy feel to the desert scenery. I believe director Matthew Leutwyler will have a bright future as long as he leaves the writing to others, and throws away his CGI software.
After-all, no-one is frightened by Dr. Zoidberg...
After-all, no-one is frightened by Dr. Zoidberg...
Why?
morrigan198217 February 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Why? why would someone make this film? why would someone want to see it?why did I see it? We have an archaeological dig with an ancient alien creature buried inside.this creature looks a lot like the xenomorph from the movie Alien! The characters where flat, even the main character there hasn't anything there.You see some flash backs that you could do without because they don't make a lot of sense and their only work the end of the film. Actually even at the end i don't think they fit!!! Also sometimes it is not easy to see what is going on in the movie, it is too dark and it moves too fast not in a scary good sense.
A Waste of Time
claudio_carvalho9 September 2008
In the desert area of Hat Creek, cows are found partially devoured and the farmers believe that a wolf is attacking the cattle. The alcoholic Sheriff Annie Flynn (Emmanuelle Vaugier) is called by the local farmer Rob Horn (M.C. Gainey) to witness the remains of an animal to request reimbursement from the government and for an accident with a tank truck that is blocking the road. However, Annie sooner discovers that an ancient alien creature sent to annihilate life on Earth hundreds of years ago was released by the Indian Kale (Luke Goss) during an archaeological excavation in the desert. The Indian Caya (Beau Garrett) and a group of travelers stranded in the spot without gas together with Annie and Kale try to find a means to destroy the alien and save mankind.
Watching "Unearthed" is a waste of time, since the forgettable story is nothing but a collection of clichés. Most of the characters are unpleasant and non-charismatic and the lead character is actually the anti-heroine Annie Flynn that is a drunken sheriff tormented by the accidental death of an Indian girl. The scene of Caya and the alien creature is another ridiculous rip-off of the classic scene of "Alien" with Sigourney Weaver. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Aniquilação" ("Annihilation")
Watching "Unearthed" is a waste of time, since the forgettable story is nothing but a collection of clichés. Most of the characters are unpleasant and non-charismatic and the lead character is actually the anti-heroine Annie Flynn that is a drunken sheriff tormented by the accidental death of an Indian girl. The scene of Caya and the alien creature is another ridiculous rip-off of the classic scene of "Alien" with Sigourney Weaver. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Aniquilação" ("Annihilation")
Ever heard of tyranids ?
Frederic_B15 April 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I usually don't post reviews but since there was no comment yet about the creature I had to make one.And well people who already watched the movie may learn something about the creature they didn't know.
I found the movie a bit boring, it was dark all the time and the action scenes felt like a movie trailer, a flash of action here and there, a lot of it but always very fast and where it seems like you miss half the action. Something just didn't "work" in this movie for me, I have nothing against simple stories or the characters or the acting or even the creature FXs but the movie in the end isn't that good sadly.
!!! HUGE SPOILER !!!! The whole concept of the creature has been entirely copied from a tabletop game called warhammer 40'000 made by Games Workshop.I'm not an expert considering I only read the "tyranids codex" for fun but I can tell you that the creature is some kind of "Genestealer" from the Tyranids alien race in that game (there are many different kind of tyranids and it may be closer to another unit type) I don't know if the movie producers ever mentioned any link to this but it's obvious, the "gene collecting" goal the scientist explain in the movie, the creature design which looks exactly has the miniatures in the tabletop game and even the burrowing worms that are shot by the alien by some kind of bio-gun.
I found the movie a bit boring, it was dark all the time and the action scenes felt like a movie trailer, a flash of action here and there, a lot of it but always very fast and where it seems like you miss half the action. Something just didn't "work" in this movie for me, I have nothing against simple stories or the characters or the acting or even the creature FXs but the movie in the end isn't that good sadly.
!!! HUGE SPOILER !!!! The whole concept of the creature has been entirely copied from a tabletop game called warhammer 40'000 made by Games Workshop.I'm not an expert considering I only read the "tyranids codex" for fun but I can tell you that the creature is some kind of "Genestealer" from the Tyranids alien race in that game (there are many different kind of tyranids and it may be closer to another unit type) I don't know if the movie producers ever mentioned any link to this but it's obvious, the "gene collecting" goal the scientist explain in the movie, the creature design which looks exactly has the miniatures in the tabletop game and even the burrowing worms that are shot by the alien by some kind of bio-gun.
Great Inspirational Film
jamhorner10 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I completely underestimated this movie; I thought that this would be another stupid zombie or plat-thing movie, where the antagonist or antagonist rises from the ground to cause mass panic and mayhem. For the most part it was true, however, there is not zombies or plants, in fact, this movie is about a Native American myth that was buried under ground after it nearly whipped out the Anasazi tribe. Much to my liking of the plot, it goes further to explain that this "thing" may not have come from this world, but another, though not directly implied. I will be boldly honest and sat that I did jump a fair amount of times though this movie and it did satisfy my need for a creature feature. The camera angles were very well done except for some parts where it was a bit too "Bourne Ultimatum," the acting was okay and the creature was a sight for sore eyes.
This movie had a very Alien look and feel to it; in fact the creature looked a lot like the Xenomorphs from the Alien films intermixed with the creatures from Feast (2006). The barn scene where the "headhugger-like" thing attached to the creature is let loose is very reminiscent of the classic boiler room scene from Aliens. I enjoyed these obvious inspirational scenes and plot more that I usually do. There were some great establishing shots including silhouettes and angular shots. The film had three natural colors including green (glow stick scenes), warm colors (daylight scenes) and blue colors (night time shots). However, when the action heightens and the creature attacks, the camera goes from steady shots to shaky hand-held shots and it's hard to see what is going on. Almost keeping you on the edge of you seat and hoping to catch a glimpse of what is going on.
The acting was pretty good and had some great emotional feeling to it, there where points were the acting was a bit over the top and points were it wasn't over the top as it should, but overall I enjoyed the performances by them. Russell Means, who plays Grandpa, had a very seldom part in this film, and I think he could have had a bigger role rather than getting a small part. He knows more about these things, aside from Kale, than anybody else does and seems like the kind of guy to go postal on those things. Emmanuelle Vaugier, who plays the town sheriff and drunk hits home along with Beau Garrett, who plays the female scientist and granddaughter. Luke Goss, who plays Kale, had a very strange part. He played the sadistic adventurer, who knows about those creatures and acts nasty and angry towards the survivor group, who in a split second becomes befriends them. I was hoping for a more gradual character development that in just a second or two. Nonetheless, Luke does a great job. M.C. Gainey, plays a rich rancher who is mad at the town sheriff for financial and moral issues.
This movie was very well done for what seems like a low budget, this movie also does a great job blinding you with flashlights and glow sticks. When the group is walking through the caves with a flashlight, they move it directly at the camera in a split second, thereby blinding you at the same time. There were some great scares that reminded me of Neil Marshall's Descent, as a matter of fact, the cave scenes were a great tribute to that exact film. The directors where heavily influenced by some of the more classic and modern horror films and they did a great job applying those aspects to this movie. Sure there are some pretty cheesy parts (The sheriff is hot young babe, the girls seem to be more brave than the guys, it's all hot girls and only the more innocent beautiful girl survives), but other that that, this movie was pretty good.
I would recommend this movie to any horror fan that loves creature features, horror-action, and Neil Marshall or Ridley Scott films. I would go as far to say that if you enjoyed Tremors or the Abyss, you would like this film. There are some great scares and I would strongly recommend this movie to any horror fan.
This movie had a very Alien look and feel to it; in fact the creature looked a lot like the Xenomorphs from the Alien films intermixed with the creatures from Feast (2006). The barn scene where the "headhugger-like" thing attached to the creature is let loose is very reminiscent of the classic boiler room scene from Aliens. I enjoyed these obvious inspirational scenes and plot more that I usually do. There were some great establishing shots including silhouettes and angular shots. The film had three natural colors including green (glow stick scenes), warm colors (daylight scenes) and blue colors (night time shots). However, when the action heightens and the creature attacks, the camera goes from steady shots to shaky hand-held shots and it's hard to see what is going on. Almost keeping you on the edge of you seat and hoping to catch a glimpse of what is going on.
The acting was pretty good and had some great emotional feeling to it, there where points were the acting was a bit over the top and points were it wasn't over the top as it should, but overall I enjoyed the performances by them. Russell Means, who plays Grandpa, had a very seldom part in this film, and I think he could have had a bigger role rather than getting a small part. He knows more about these things, aside from Kale, than anybody else does and seems like the kind of guy to go postal on those things. Emmanuelle Vaugier, who plays the town sheriff and drunk hits home along with Beau Garrett, who plays the female scientist and granddaughter. Luke Goss, who plays Kale, had a very strange part. He played the sadistic adventurer, who knows about those creatures and acts nasty and angry towards the survivor group, who in a split second becomes befriends them. I was hoping for a more gradual character development that in just a second or two. Nonetheless, Luke does a great job. M.C. Gainey, plays a rich rancher who is mad at the town sheriff for financial and moral issues.
This movie was very well done for what seems like a low budget, this movie also does a great job blinding you with flashlights and glow sticks. When the group is walking through the caves with a flashlight, they move it directly at the camera in a split second, thereby blinding you at the same time. There were some great scares that reminded me of Neil Marshall's Descent, as a matter of fact, the cave scenes were a great tribute to that exact film. The directors where heavily influenced by some of the more classic and modern horror films and they did a great job applying those aspects to this movie. Sure there are some pretty cheesy parts (The sheriff is hot young babe, the girls seem to be more brave than the guys, it's all hot girls and only the more innocent beautiful girl survives), but other that that, this movie was pretty good.
I would recommend this movie to any horror fan that loves creature features, horror-action, and Neil Marshall or Ridley Scott films. I would go as far to say that if you enjoyed Tremors or the Abyss, you would like this film. There are some great scares and I would strongly recommend this movie to any horror fan.
Good start, pathetic ending
siderite7 May 2008
In this film Emmanuelle Vaugier does her best impersonation of Erica Cerra (the deputy sheriff from the Eureka series) as the sheriff of a small American town. So you have some Amerindians, some annoying hillbillies, farmers, truckers, etc, to which you add some attractive tourists and the ever present "jerk from the city". What else is missing? The monster!
The film actually started pretty good. Obviously low budget, I didn't expect a good monster, only a well presented state of tension. And it did present well. At about half the duration of the movie I thought it is going to be a more serious Tremors, which I also liked. And in a sense it was, only it lost itself in senseless gore, inept "scientific" explanations and silly Indian legends solution.
Bottom line: watch the first half, until the monster is going on the extended killing spree, stop the film, then think all day long about how it should continue. Then get intoxicated and watch the end, laughing your posterior off.
The film actually started pretty good. Obviously low budget, I didn't expect a good monster, only a well presented state of tension. And it did present well. At about half the duration of the movie I thought it is going to be a more serious Tremors, which I also liked. And in a sense it was, only it lost itself in senseless gore, inept "scientific" explanations and silly Indian legends solution.
Bottom line: watch the first half, until the monster is going on the extended killing spree, stop the film, then think all day long about how it should continue. Then get intoxicated and watch the end, laughing your posterior off.
Not just bad, but the worst movie ever!
kingdjcj11 November 2007
If I was a junior high A/V Teacher, and my students made this, I would expel them.
I've seen porn movies with more interesting characters, more realistic plot lines, better dialogue and less groaners. No amount of drugs or alcohol could make this a decent movie.
The monster, or whatever it was, looks like it came from the old "Adventures of Hercules Show," which is an insult to Kevin Sorbo.
The editing is so fast it is impossible to see what is going on. A few posts have been enamored by the blood and gore, but unless you have hummingbird-like reflexes or a slow-motion button you would never be able to see them. Literally, it's a split second and they scenes are over.
Please, save your money and your time.
I've seen porn movies with more interesting characters, more realistic plot lines, better dialogue and less groaners. No amount of drugs or alcohol could make this a decent movie.
The monster, or whatever it was, looks like it came from the old "Adventures of Hercules Show," which is an insult to Kevin Sorbo.
The editing is so fast it is impossible to see what is going on. A few posts have been enamored by the blood and gore, but unless you have hummingbird-like reflexes or a slow-motion button you would never be able to see them. Literally, it's a split second and they scenes are over.
Please, save your money and your time.
Dire
editor-929 November 2007
This film is absolute rubbish. I don't know what "training" this filmmaker had but it couldn't have been much. The camera work was so bad that 75% of the time I had no bloody idea what was going on. The lead actress - who plays an angsty drunken sheriff - looks like the lead singer of the Pussycat Dolls and mistakes scowly for sullen. I'm sure they cast her simply on her looks. The plot is abysmal. An archaeologist awakens some ancient creature that starts killing. Boy, that's original. "Relic" anyone? But this is just dire. The creature is so obviously CGI, and there is no purpose for most of what it does. At some point you might think it would get tired of eating. Ha ha. What told me that the film was beyond repair was when one guy gets shot and in the next scene is running around. Russell Means is in this stinker. Why, Russell, why? Avoid this film or at least bring a pillow to the cinema. It will put you to sleep.
Shaky camera 100 decibel variations. Not scary, just unpleasant
timwedge19 August 2017
1. Some people can't watch "shaky camera" scenes. It makes us sick. In this case there was no reason for it. If you want people to not be able to watch your movie, why even make it? Shaking the camera is not a substitute for special effects
2. Painfully loud is not scary. It's not dramatic. When the conversation scenes and the action scenes differ by 100 decibels, it's just painful and unpleasant.
When I have to spend the entire movie making drastic changes to the volume, I'm not being entertained.
2. Painfully loud is not scary. It's not dramatic. When the conversation scenes and the action scenes differ by 100 decibels, it's just painful and unpleasant.
When I have to spend the entire movie making drastic changes to the volume, I'm not being entertained.
a disaster on every level
rivertam269 November 2007
I went into this film despite the bad press it was getting because I liked Deada nd Breakfast and I like Emmanuel Vaugier and I'm a big fan of horror flicks and horror fest in general. But this film felt so amateur poorly written, filmed, acted, constructed. The film is confusing and pretty plot less and features some of the worst CGI I've ever seen it looks like the cgi beasties of the castlevania Nintendo game. I usually am open to pretty much everything. But you have to drawn the line somewhere and this film if you can call it that is far past it.Do yourself a favor and miss this so the once promising director could try and make up for this attrocity.
Head for the exits........
merklekranz7 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
First the good news, the movie is only 93 minutes long. Now the really good news, you can turn it off after the first half hour and spend the other hour watching your clock tick. It will prove more interesting than finishing "Unearthed". Scenes with a frantic wobbling camera that are illuminated only with flashlights and glow-sticks, will leave you in the dark about what is going on. Not that you will be missing anything, because you've seen this monster on the loose plot dozens of times already. It goes something like this, people and animals killed, more people killed, monster killed....................................... end of story. - MERK.
Swedish DVD cover says Mix between The Descent & Alien
gialli5 March 2008
Alien monster terrorize people in an isolated American town.Sheriff Annie Flynn(Emananulle Vaugier)try to solve the case.Swedish DVD cover says a mix between Neil Marshalls Masterpiece The Descent&cult classic Alien.I say no,no,no...only thing they have common is some parts in the film is in a cave and the monster look reminds in a cheap way of the Alien one.I didn't like it for sure,it didn't give me anything.To be fair I first watched an hour some days ago and last half hour today.Acting is not the worst I seen,some pretty fine.Emanuelle Vaugier did her work good.The movie has no scary parts and the monster looks just silly.Last half hour was better than rest of the film,but I do not recommend it.By the way in Sweden its called Deep Fear.I give it 2/10.
O death, where is thy stingalingling
thefan-221 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
These scuzzball horror flicks share the same handful of shopworn techniques and stock characters. In this case, there are the dimly lit interiors and nocturnal exteriors, the cartoonish "urban" black guy, the cute but ditzy starlet-wannabe, the noble Native American, the don't-mess-with-me hardass, the alarmed scientist nobody listens to until it's too late, the "Alien" ripoff monster, the interminable and absolutely pointless conversations and creeping around cluttered sets -- and, last but not least, one character who's gone all guilty and depressed and alcoholic over some mistake he or she once made, and who, we have to admit, would probably be better off dead. In this movie, it's ***************SPOILER ALERT*************** the lady sheriff, whose flashbacks about the little girl she accidentally killed make it very clear that she will sacrifice herself in the end to kill the monster and save her friends. Which she does. The scientist and the ditzy blond survive, everyone else is killed. And most of the time when there's a sudden noise and everyone spins around and points their guns at it, it's just one of the other characters tripping over something. Also, I think it has something to do with nuclear testing (it takes place in New Mexico), so it's kind of a Godzilla movie underneath it all. There, now you don't have to see it.
Aliens and Native Americans should never be this boring
das41717 May 2008
Warning: Spoilers
A remote town in the American Southwest faces a terror that has been buried and forgotten. Only the wisdom of the Native American people, and a few shotguns and other weapons, can save the world.
Or something like that. What is promised to be a strong horror film, that is as one of the "8 Films to Die For", Unearthed is actually a bore that lacks any real drive and delivers a clichéd plot. What made someone want to include this in the "8 Films" group is beyond me.
Sheriff Ann Flynn (Emmanuelle Vaugier) is on her last leg both job wise and emotionally. After an accident which leads to her responsibility for the death of a young child, Sheriff Flynn finds herself questioned by the people who she is supposed to serve. In particular Rob Horn (M. C. Gainey), a powerful rancher, seems determined to end her short lived career as sheriff. With lack of support it seems that Flynn will be out of a job.
Nodine (Tonantzin Carmelo) and her grandfather (Russell Means) are two of the few friends that Flynn has left. Native Americans who live outside of the town where Nodein's grandfather runs a small gas station, Nodine herself is preoccupied with her botanical work while her grandfather spends time with his pottery. Their lives are quiet and calm and otherwise devoid of anything threatening.
That is until one night a mysterious accident leaves a trucker dead and the town without power. It seems that somehow an alien creature, one that was responsible for the near extinction of the Anasazi (yes those Anasazi who disappeared "suddenly from history), has returned. Grandfather, who along with a mysterious former professor named Kale (Luke Goss), are the only ones who know how to defeat the aliens and save humanity once more. Using the wisdom of the Anasazi, who somehow managed to defeat it before with no technology, it is hoped that the alien can once more be defeated.
Unearthed, however, is a complete failure in terms of horror. The violence and gore where Horn, some town people, a few strangers stuck at the gas station, and some cows are killed by the aliens and consumed from the inside out, is typical of low budget horror films. The plot itself tapers off into a few inexplicable chase scenes which by the end of the movie seem redundant and, well, boring. Unearthed is typical of such a movie and a weak plot doesn't help. The actors gave their best but when there is nothing really to work with there isn't much that can be done. Unearthed should remain buried.
5/10
Or something like that. What is promised to be a strong horror film, that is as one of the "8 Films to Die For", Unearthed is actually a bore that lacks any real drive and delivers a clichéd plot. What made someone want to include this in the "8 Films" group is beyond me.
Sheriff Ann Flynn (Emmanuelle Vaugier) is on her last leg both job wise and emotionally. After an accident which leads to her responsibility for the death of a young child, Sheriff Flynn finds herself questioned by the people who she is supposed to serve. In particular Rob Horn (M. C. Gainey), a powerful rancher, seems determined to end her short lived career as sheriff. With lack of support it seems that Flynn will be out of a job.
Nodine (Tonantzin Carmelo) and her grandfather (Russell Means) are two of the few friends that Flynn has left. Native Americans who live outside of the town where Nodein's grandfather runs a small gas station, Nodine herself is preoccupied with her botanical work while her grandfather spends time with his pottery. Their lives are quiet and calm and otherwise devoid of anything threatening.
That is until one night a mysterious accident leaves a trucker dead and the town without power. It seems that somehow an alien creature, one that was responsible for the near extinction of the Anasazi (yes those Anasazi who disappeared "suddenly from history), has returned. Grandfather, who along with a mysterious former professor named Kale (Luke Goss), are the only ones who know how to defeat the aliens and save humanity once more. Using the wisdom of the Anasazi, who somehow managed to defeat it before with no technology, it is hoped that the alien can once more be defeated.
Unearthed, however, is a complete failure in terms of horror. The violence and gore where Horn, some town people, a few strangers stuck at the gas station, and some cows are killed by the aliens and consumed from the inside out, is typical of low budget horror films. The plot itself tapers off into a few inexplicable chase scenes which by the end of the movie seem redundant and, well, boring. Unearthed is typical of such a movie and a weak plot doesn't help. The actors gave their best but when there is nothing really to work with there isn't much that can be done. Unearthed should remain buried.
5/10
"Some secrets should stay buried."
Backlash0076 July 2008
Warning: Spoilers
~Spoiler~
And some films should too. Unearthed was one of the few After Dark films from this year's fest I was really looking forward to. The sole reason I was anxiously awaiting this film was because of director Matthew Leutwyler. His previous movie, Dead and Breakfast, is one of the best and most fun midnite movies I've ever seen. I'm hoping this was just the sophomore slump in effect, because Unearthed sucks. There's no nicer way to put it. The plot follows a band of characters trapped in a small town where a creature who was responsible for wiping out an Indian tribe a hundred years ago has been...unearthed. We've seen this scenario a million times and the real classics are either the ones that started it or the ones that did it differently. This is nothing different. In fact, this played very much like a Sci-fi Channel flick. The characters are dull, the creature is obviously, and tiresomely, Giger-influenced, and the CG is really lame. The cast even has some good names and no one particularly stood out. Emmanuelle Vaugier (Saw II) and Luke Goss (Blade II) are the main stars, while M.C. Gainey and Russell Means provide some background support. And let me just ask what in the hell Charlie Murphy is doing in this movie? If he was supposed to be the comic relief, he didn't get any funny lines. Sadly, Unearthed is another one for the fire.
And some films should too. Unearthed was one of the few After Dark films from this year's fest I was really looking forward to. The sole reason I was anxiously awaiting this film was because of director Matthew Leutwyler. His previous movie, Dead and Breakfast, is one of the best and most fun midnite movies I've ever seen. I'm hoping this was just the sophomore slump in effect, because Unearthed sucks. There's no nicer way to put it. The plot follows a band of characters trapped in a small town where a creature who was responsible for wiping out an Indian tribe a hundred years ago has been...unearthed. We've seen this scenario a million times and the real classics are either the ones that started it or the ones that did it differently. This is nothing different. In fact, this played very much like a Sci-fi Channel flick. The characters are dull, the creature is obviously, and tiresomely, Giger-influenced, and the CG is really lame. The cast even has some good names and no one particularly stood out. Emmanuelle Vaugier (Saw II) and Luke Goss (Blade II) are the main stars, while M.C. Gainey and Russell Means provide some background support. And let me just ask what in the hell Charlie Murphy is doing in this movie? If he was supposed to be the comic relief, he didn't get any funny lines. Sadly, Unearthed is another one for the fire.
Much more entertaining than expected
kannibalcorpsegrinder24 November 2015
Trapped in their small southwestern town, a troubled sheriff and a prospector find a deadly creature released from a local archaeological dig and must save the locals from the ravenous creature.
There was a lot to like with this one as it was a great creature feature. One of the better elements at work is the impressive amount of attention paid to the creature and it's mythology within the story, as not only is the actual mythology enjoyable but there's more throughout the film that carry this along. The discovery of the embedded claw from the accident as well as the resulting study of it as well as the running storyline about the cattle mutilations from the creature's acid venom that really set-up the imposing mystery about the strange creature running around that plays nicely with the creature being kept in the shadows for several attacks that give it a great action sense altogether. That mixes nicely with the cave-drawings and all the deciphering done at the site when it goes into the story of the creature and the local tribes is all quite fun. There's also quite a large amount of action-packed encounters here that are quite fun and make the best aspect of the film by augmenting the fun story with fantastic encounters, as the early encounter around town show off the fine scenes in the garage and the extended chase in the town are really enjoyable. Even more enjoyable is other big scenes here in the first half at the house where it break the house apart in a massive sequence, a series of incredibly fun chases through the desert and a rousing finale which gets some exciting chasing and shootouts with the creature in the race to get away. Even more impressive is the encounters in the desert camp as there's a lot of chases through the area, tense encounters in the local caves and really brings out a much more frantic pace that gets a lot out of it for a highly effective sequence. As well, with the unique creature design, these here are the film's positives and manage to hold off the minute flaws here. The biggest issue is the CGI creature, which features all the traditional hallmarks with spotty execution, completely unnatural actions and continuous size-changing in the scene that is usually found here and really robs this one of the goodwill from elsewhere. The other real flaw is the film's last half where it's almost all filmed with glow-sticks that places a rather challenging light on these scenes during the best parts of the movie and make it nearly impossible to make out. These are what hold this one down.
Rated R: Graphic Violence and Graphic Language.
There was a lot to like with this one as it was a great creature feature. One of the better elements at work is the impressive amount of attention paid to the creature and it's mythology within the story, as not only is the actual mythology enjoyable but there's more throughout the film that carry this along. The discovery of the embedded claw from the accident as well as the resulting study of it as well as the running storyline about the cattle mutilations from the creature's acid venom that really set-up the imposing mystery about the strange creature running around that plays nicely with the creature being kept in the shadows for several attacks that give it a great action sense altogether. That mixes nicely with the cave-drawings and all the deciphering done at the site when it goes into the story of the creature and the local tribes is all quite fun. There's also quite a large amount of action-packed encounters here that are quite fun and make the best aspect of the film by augmenting the fun story with fantastic encounters, as the early encounter around town show off the fine scenes in the garage and the extended chase in the town are really enjoyable. Even more enjoyable is other big scenes here in the first half at the house where it break the house apart in a massive sequence, a series of incredibly fun chases through the desert and a rousing finale which gets some exciting chasing and shootouts with the creature in the race to get away. Even more impressive is the encounters in the desert camp as there's a lot of chases through the area, tense encounters in the local caves and really brings out a much more frantic pace that gets a lot out of it for a highly effective sequence. As well, with the unique creature design, these here are the film's positives and manage to hold off the minute flaws here. The biggest issue is the CGI creature, which features all the traditional hallmarks with spotty execution, completely unnatural actions and continuous size-changing in the scene that is usually found here and really robs this one of the goodwill from elsewhere. The other real flaw is the film's last half where it's almost all filmed with glow-sticks that places a rather challenging light on these scenes during the best parts of the movie and make it nearly impossible to make out. These are what hold this one down.
Rated R: Graphic Violence and Graphic Language.
Okay film
m_chubbs13 September 2008
Well, it's not a Hollywood blockbuster, so, really, think that when you see this film. It's just a dumb creature feature and thats all it's gonna be. The acting is gonna be hammy, the effects are gonna be rubbish,it's gonna be pants, but I watched it all the way through, and found it entertaining. It's music was fairly effective, electronic music aways seems to affect me more then big orchestra's and rocky tracks, it reminded me of the old 70's Grindhouse films. Gore wise, it's good, very nasty deaths, and some I found quite funny too.
Overall, an okay film, not Oscar worthy, so don't treat it like it is, I enjoyed it more taking it as a low budget creature feature.
Overall, an okay film, not Oscar worthy, so don't treat it like it is, I enjoyed it more taking it as a low budget creature feature.
Too dark to watch on television
fiberrail22 November 2016
It is my own fault for buying the movie! I should have read these reviews ahead of time but I did not know about them, then.
I tried to watch UNEARTHED and shut it off about 10 minutes from the end. It was so dark that I did not see 20 minutes of the movie. If you are going to make movies that can ONLY be watched in a theater then they should not be put on DVD and sold for $19.95. Your movie has been placed in a box for Goodwill where they will probably sell it for an appropriate price of $2. I do not even want to know the answers to the movie as I could not see enough of it to care. It seemed like a decent movie and good plot, from what I saw.
Any movie that is filmed in the dark, even blockbusters like the last version of Godzilla, and cannot be watched on television should either not be put on DVD, or labeled with "Too dark to watch on television and still be enjoyed!" so that the buyer can decide where they want to spend their $20. You are rich enough to waste your money, but a lot of people have to earn their money the hard way and cannot afford to waste it, or their time trying to imagine what is happening on the screen.
A long time movie buff, Edgar J Cormier
I tried to watch UNEARTHED and shut it off about 10 minutes from the end. It was so dark that I did not see 20 minutes of the movie. If you are going to make movies that can ONLY be watched in a theater then they should not be put on DVD and sold for $19.95. Your movie has been placed in a box for Goodwill where they will probably sell it for an appropriate price of $2. I do not even want to know the answers to the movie as I could not see enough of it to care. It seemed like a decent movie and good plot, from what I saw.
Any movie that is filmed in the dark, even blockbusters like the last version of Godzilla, and cannot be watched on television should either not be put on DVD, or labeled with "Too dark to watch on television and still be enjoyed!" so that the buyer can decide where they want to spend their $20. You are rich enough to waste your money, but a lot of people have to earn their money the hard way and cannot afford to waste it, or their time trying to imagine what is happening on the screen.
A long time movie buff, Edgar J Cormier
Excruciating
starcraftbw883 July 2008
Officially in the top 3 worst movies I've ever seen. The lightning, or lack thereof, is astoundingly horrible, 80% of the time you will be trying to figure out what's going on. The plot is inane and you never really care about anyone or anything that's happening, character development is non-existent, and the monster is boring. For me, the bad CGI is forgivable, but everything else in this train wreck is not.
Worst of all , this movie is about as scary as Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. There are no good scares and nothing memorable. Although, there is one hilarious scene worth mentioning; an explosion that blows a character back and she does a full flip in mid-air.
Painful to sit through, the best part was the end.
Worst of all , this movie is about as scary as Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. There are no good scares and nothing memorable. Although, there is one hilarious scene worth mentioning; an explosion that blows a character back and she does a full flip in mid-air.
Painful to sit through, the best part was the end.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
