Wuchak 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-

view_and_review 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.

i-34252 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".

quincytheodore 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.