flaquita75 I'm sorry to say that this movie was illogical and not at all scary. The story line of a cadaver that is still trying to take its revenge might actually have been interesting. But it wasn't and I'm not even sure that was the story line here. There was some door slamming and things turning off by themselves typical of the paranormal genre and then some unexplained deaths that never made any sense. And then the weird sort of African tribal music or something that would pop up throughout the film....sometimes at points where nothing was really happening. There was talk of human sacrifices and possessions that really weren't explained. It was almost as if the creators were like, "ok, what are some things that are scary? Demon possession? Human sacrifices? OK, let's just throw that in here somewhere to scare things up a bit. Oh and let's make a few doors slam and some lights flicker while we are at it. And better get some actors and actresses That look pretty good with very few clothes on to distract people from the fact that this film just really sucks." Poor acting, poorly executed story line and no scares= a total yawn fest.

Spikeopath Could it be that the spirit of a dead cadaver is killing off all those who have medical dealings with her body?Judging by the unfairly low rating it has on the main internet movie sites, it's very likely that the slow pace and lack of gore has counted against Unrest, which is a big shame. Jason Todd Ipson (director) draws on his real life experiences as a Boston general surgery employee to produce a film of skin itching substance. The premise is nifty and the real location shooting really adds weight to this mortality gone awry tinged horror.There's a freshness to the film that leaps out, finding a film maker not merely content to pander to the formulaic hordes to win plaudits. Having an impossibly gorgeous female lead (Corri English) as the main protagonist would lend one to think that is not the case, but there's a rawness to English's acting that suits the character perfectly. There's a splendid realism factor to the picture, the blend of the real and the smart effects work nestling nicely together on the mortuary slab.Atmosphere is a word that has always been key in non blood letting horror parlance, and Unrest has it in abundance. It would have been easy for Ipson to rely on boo-jump shocks, but he doesn't, he uses his knowledge of setting and subject matter to craft a tight and tense thriller that manages to gnaw away at the senses, even ensuring that the cadaver, as dead as she apparently is, is a full and rich character holding court as the body count starts to tot up.The musical score (Michael Cohen) is a bit intrusive at times, a romantic sub-plot a little pointless, while the finale doesn't quite hit great heights given what has led up to it, but this is a smart dark mood accentuated piece and it is well worth checking out. 7.5/10

theomere I'm rusty at writing reviews so please bear with me.Before I go on, the dead bodies question: As far as I can work out the film DOESN'T use real cadavers but was filmed in a real morgue. However, even if the bodies were real it would not have been the first film to use real human remains. Personally I don't care either way. I think it might tie in with the main "theme" of the story.I won't bother giving a plot summary as you can find one on this IMDb page but I don't think it is a spoiler to say that the main running theme is respecting/disrespecting the dead. This on its own is pretty standard to me in terms of horror stories - don't f*** with a dead spirit or it will f*** you up. Even so, the beginning of the story was quite promising to me in that the body in question was behaving in a strange way, although the med student characters were quick to explain these occurrences away at first.I was hopeful that they would expand on this and yet the body itself isn't used as much as I would have liked. I think they could have done a lot more with the physical "unusual cadaver" rather than focus more on the "disturbed spirit". If they at least had given more effort to the latter then I think the film could have really built on the parts which could be considered somewhat original. Unfortunately it falls short of this and simply becomes a relatively bland film saved by decent pacing (pacing seems to be one of the main areas of fault in a lot of horrors I've seen).It is a shame, as later on an Aztec goddess comes into the mix. I hadn't realised that the Aztecs had not spread further than Mexico until last night and evidently neither did the film makers. Silly little mistakes like this are generally not important in my reckoning of a film, but it feels worthwhile to point that out. The film makers could have double-checked this fact and in my opinion should have - when making a film or writing a book, it's nice to stick to the facts unless you're going to use your deviation as a plot device.Aside from the error, the Aztec angle could have saved this movie from mediocrity as it moves on a little further than "this is one angry stiff" but unfortunately it sort of feels shoved in at the end as an excuse for an explanation. That is possibly rather harsh, I'll admit. I was simply very disappointed when it more or less rushed to the end after this.As for the possible INTENTIONAL sexism: I think that along with disrespect for the dead, sexism towards women was another theme to the film unless I've misinterpreted the point.I don't want to give the game away so I won't go too far into the details but it's there even from the very first scene where there are two morgue workers talking about another body's "big tits" and one of them says the main body has "an ugly pussy". The way one character talks to the female lead (Corri English), the way most of the men throughout the film look at her, what is said about the body later... I think this was all on purpose, intentional in an artistic manner. My main reason for suspecting this is a) what you find out later about the dead woman, and b) the use of Tlazolteotl, the Aztec goddess. I can't go into much else without ruining parts of the story so I'll simply say that if this was the intent and it was more than just a plot device then it seems to have failed in any point it was trying to make as it apparently has gone largely unnoticed.I've spoken about the parts I have the most to say about so I'll try to quickly cover some of the other relevant points: -ACTING: In most cases the acting is fairly weak although I personally can overlook that, having watched an awful lot of horrendous films. I would say that apart from some awkward cringe-worthy flirting/pillow talk most of it could be likened to one of the more decent soap operas.CAMERA WORK/SHOTS/ETC: I am not great on passing an opinion on the technical side of this sort of thing but for me it seemed pretty solid. In fact, I was a little surprised to find out that this was an indie movie. I thought it was a failed Hollywood flick.PACING: As I've already said, the pacing is decent which you could say partially makes up for the lack of scares and the wobbly plot.PLOT: Has a lot of potential which it did not tap into and seems somewhat messy.CONCLUSION: If you don't go into this film expecting much and if you don't mind a horror which does not actually scare you then you'll probably get a certain level of enjoyment out of this film. Don't pay too much for it and you'll be able to happily use it as something to pass the time when you can't find anything else to watch.Average but let-down by unused potential: 4/10

BakuryuuTyranno Oh the movie isn't exactly bad although essentially it's another one of those ghost films Hollywood's constantly regurgitating into cinemas, minus the jump "scares" (seriously, if you're going to try making scary films, try making films that are scary, loud blaring noises don't cut it). At least Afterdark Horrorfest only made this mistake once.Mysterious deaths, protagonist gets tormented rather than offed, meets love interest who then tries helping her before they too fall victim to the murderous spirit. Oh and naturally, they're required to investigate what could have angered the spirit enough to start killing.Sound familiar? Thought so.Not exactly bad, just overdone to the extent it feels like lifeless filler. I understand Hollywood making ridiculous amounts of films like this for commercial purposes, but horror festivals, generally being run by people with understanding of the genre, should know better.