So very, very alone (Alone In The Dark (DVD))

Member Name: pmcds

Product:	Alone In The Dark (DVD)
Date:	17/02/09 (69 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Some CGI

Disadvantages: Literally EVERYTHING else

Most of the people who have reviewed 'Alone In The Dark' have done some sort of play on words to make good use of a literary and relevant way of explaining just how bad this film is. To be honest, the film is that bad, I really can't be bothered to waste my time finding a play on words. Oh, hang on: how about: 'Watch this alone in the dark so no else knows you've seen it and takes the proverbial out of you for doing so!' Ooh, ooh, I've got another one: 'This film makes me want to sit alone in the dark and cry because I've just wasted an hour of my time!' Similarly, you could use: 'Alone In The Dark is a pile of crap!'

Yes, you've guessed it. I didn't particularly like this one. I plan on searching for the box set that contains Alone In The Dark, Ultraviolet, and Police Academy 7: Mission To Moscow, and saving them for when I am old and lonely. They've really squeezed this one out, haven't they? Uwe Boll does have a bit of a reputation for making dodgy films (in terms of quality, not pirate films!) but this one takes the biscuit. The plot says it all: paranormal investigator uncovers ancient plot for creatures from another world to do something vicious but we're not exactly sure what for.

And this pretty much sums it up. The film opens by giving us a scrolling text on the screen which seems to go on for longer than the Star Wars credits, with worse music and an awkward voiceover that doesn't sound all that different to Christopher Lambert. This text essentially explains to us that the Abkani, and ancient American civilisation, opens up a gateway to another world and let in some horrible nasty things. Uh-oh! Years later, a mad scientist, Professor Lionel Hudgens (Matthew Walker), used all 20 orphans in an orphanage as an experiment make a symbiotic relationship between us and the things from the other world. 22 years on from this, an ancient relic is found and activated, summoning the creatures within the orphans to waken and do something really, really nasty. The film is based on the computer game of the same name, although the makers of the game and film have stated that they have used the characters and the general idea of the game, but that is about all. I know they haven't used the plot of the game because, well, there isn't really a plot here to compare it to!

I apologise for my slightly scathing opening and also for saying that they are going to do something really, really nasty. It is rather obtuse and not at all explicatory. But that is just it: it is obvious to see that they have all been triggered into becoming nasty zombie-like creatures, and there are some CGI monsters patrolling around with them, but the whole reason for their existence seems to have been overlooked when they got to the 'things to explain' section of scriptwriting. They have no goal, merely to reconvene where the experiments took place and be really scary. Or rather, just menacing. The monsters are the scary ones.

Paranormal investigator Edward Carnby (Christian Slater) was one of the orphans, but he managed to escape the clutches of the mad scientist and joined an elite task force created to combat the paranormal, called the 713. The Unit is now run by Burke (Stephen Dorff), and the pair are forced to team up, as well as with the pointless presence of Carnby's ex-girlfriend Aline (Tara Reid), whose only point in existence as a character seems to be to try and balance out the level of testosterone Boll has cast.

And that's about it for a plot. Lots of darkness, lots of shooting, some menacing and scary CGI creatures, which are actually very well transposed onto the screen, and some wooden acting, I'm afraid, are all the film is about. Slater just doesn't seem comfortable, and Dorff doesn't look like he could care less about the role. Reid's character has vague relevance to the majority of the film, and there is a random scene where they suddenly have sex and then carry on as if nothing have happened, leaving you wondering if the whole thing is just to conform to a Hollywood norm for sci-fi films. A bit of darkness, some creatures, guns, a sex scene, and two Alpha males banging heads. Oh, and the mad scientist who makes things worse by thinking he can do the world a favour.

I wasn't particularly glad to have watched this film. I struggled to maintain focus, and broke off halfway through to watch the grass grow for a bit. Still, at least there won't be a sequel...........................I'm sorry, what was that? There IS a sequel? Well, I'm just speechless. The cunningly titled Alone In The Dark 2 was made last year, in 2008. It's due for release at some point this year, although I'll be first to put my hand up to give someone else my seat at the cinema. I'm feeling generous.

I'm afraid to say that I can't recommend this film. I really did struggle to see any plus points, although some of the CGI was surprisingy good. The acting and camerawork was bad enough as a combination to stop any kind of flow with the film, and as such, it is one of the rare films I regret seeing. It's not even so bad that it can earn cult status, like some of the older horror films that are just diabolically brilliant. Alone In The Dark is just pants.

If, however, you still want desperately to see this wonder of a film, then Alone In The Dark is currently available fom amazon.co.uk for around the £3 mark. No my cup of tea, but if it was, I probably wouldn't drink it anyway!!!

Summary: This makes my top 10 worst ever films!