This film begins like so many others of its genre -- namely, a young couple on their way to a far away destination pull into an eerie, almost deserted motel where things aren't what they seem.
If you think you've seen it before, likely you have. Beneath the Dark has strong echoes of the 2003 John Cusack film Identity, though it pales in comparison. Ahh, what to say about this movie? I enjoyed watching it, but then I am a fan of the suspense genre which has been in a serious state of drought lately. Is it a good movie? Not really. Is it a bad movie? No. The plot line does catch your interest as you watch the two very different back stories of the young traveler and the motel manager unfold. The narrative of the film makes the viewers expect the inevitable connection, which is mildly interesting once revealed. However the entire conceit of the movie is nearly immediately obvious. I suppose in a world where twisty thrillers have been around for so long, it is far more difficult to pull off true surprise. Yet I feel that the director/writer Chad Feehan missed the opportunities to misdirect the audience. One can only hope Chad was not trying for an M. Night Shyamalan production.
The film used so many clichés, that it could have been the product of a university class on the genre: the isolated motel in the Midwest and the slightly off motel manager are photocopied directly from Psycho. The jukebox that plays the same song over and over is also lifted. (Didn't we see that in a number of Rod Serling productions?). Yet all is not as grim as this review seems. Mr. Feehan studied well, and utilized these and other familiar elements effectively.
So a sense of mild suspense persists throughout the movie. The ending is a bit of a let down -- but the journey was fun.
Bottom line: If you like this genre, this movie is serviceable. I certainly wasn't sorry I watched it, although I thought that the motel manager needed to be cast with a stronger performer. If you have nothing to do on a Saturday afternoon, punch this one up. Keep your expectations low and you might enjoy it.
If you think you've seen it before, likely you have. Beneath the Dark has strong echoes of the 2003 John Cusack film Identity, though it pales in comparison. Ahh, what to say about this movie? I enjoyed watching it, but then I am a fan of the suspense genre which has been in a serious state of drought lately. Is it a good movie? Not really. Is it a bad movie? No. The plot line does catch your interest as you watch the two very different back stories of the young traveler and the motel manager unfold. The narrative of the film makes the viewers expect the inevitable connection, which is mildly interesting once revealed. However the entire conceit of the movie is nearly immediately obvious. I suppose in a world where twisty thrillers have been around for so long, it is far more difficult to pull off true surprise. Yet I feel that the director/writer Chad Feehan missed the opportunities to misdirect the audience. One can only hope Chad was not trying for an M. Night Shyamalan production.
The film used so many clichés, that it could have been the product of a university class on the genre: the isolated motel in the Midwest and the slightly off motel manager are photocopied directly from Psycho. The jukebox that plays the same song over and over is also lifted. (Didn't we see that in a number of Rod Serling productions?). Yet all is not as grim as this review seems. Mr. Feehan studied well, and utilized these and other familiar elements effectively.
So a sense of mild suspense persists throughout the movie. The ending is a bit of a let down -- but the journey was fun.
Bottom line: If you like this genre, this movie is serviceable. I certainly wasn't sorry I watched it, although I thought that the motel manager needed to be cast with a stronger performer. If you have nothing to do on a Saturday afternoon, punch this one up. Keep your expectations low and you might enjoy it.