Alone in the Dark (2005)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Jeff "

  
  Alone in the Dark is Uwe Boll's worst, if that's even possible. Alone in the Dark is very bad, with bad acting, story and directing. The film stumbles around trying to find a purpose, but it never elevates to anything remotely good or creative. Action scenes are sloppy, too… More
  Alone in the Dark is Uwe Boll's worst, if that's even possible. Alone in the Dark is very bad, with bad acting, story and directing. The film stumbles around trying to find a purpose, but it never elevates to anything remotely good or creative. Action scenes are sloppy, too noisy and not well done. Equally bad is Tara Reid. This is a film that fails to hit the mark on so many levels, it's not even possible to salvage even if you'd remove all the crap scenes with Tara Reid. Alone in the Dark is a misguided attempt at creating an action Horror film, and it fails. This is one film that just doesn't deliver. You end up wondering why this film wasf8inanced in the first place and you're astounded at how Boll could pull something like this off. Alone in the Dark is the prime example as to why Video game to screen adaptations are horrible ideas for films, and they rarely work. Alone in the Dark is a poorly made film and you realize that Uwe Boll doesn't care about directing a good film that he's only in the business for the money. His films sell, so there's no reason for him to direct a good film, although he's managed to make three good flick s out of the fifteen or so he's made. This might have been an interesting idea for a film if it would have been handled properly. There were signs of potential, but it quickly became apparent that it was a pure joke fest. Everything that might have been interesting is wasted from the poorly conceived script, which feels rushed, with no heart put into its story to the washed up actors; this film was set to fail right before the cameras were set to roll. Avoid this horror flick, as it a mess from start to finish, and there's nothing good to come out of it aside from the heavy metal soundtrack.

• Dean !

  
  This is really bad, nothing like the games at all. Has some well known faces and the opening 10mins are pretty good with some cool SFX. After that though it becomes an Aliens rip off that is no where near as good!

• Randy T

  
  ummmmm.... My best advice to you would be this: expect a suckfest. That way you won't be disappointed.

• Kylie B

  
  Technically I shouldn't be rating this, as I couldn't sit through the whole thing - and I managed to sit through Epic Movie. Three quaters of the way through I found out something more interesting was on the other channel and turned over. That about sums up how I feel about… More
  Technically I shouldn't be rating this, as I couldn't sit through the whole thing - and I managed to sit through Epic Movie. Three quaters of the way through I found out something more interesting was on the other channel and turned over. That about sums up how I feel about this film.

• Jani H

  
  "I don't think we're supposed to be here" What a goddamn mess. There's so much crap to write about this that I woun't even bother. The best scene is when a bomb explodes, leaving the whole screen full of dust. That's how much I liked this waste of… More
  "I don't think we're supposed to be here" What a goddamn mess. There's so much crap to write about this that I woun't even bother. The best scene is when a bomb explodes, leaving the whole screen full of dust. That's how much I liked this waste of time. I don't think we're supposed to watch this film...

• Emily A

  
  HAHAHAHA! I can't believe I saw this in theaters. This is not so bad that I would demand that Uwe Boll stop making movies entirely, but there are problems so glaring as to be impossible to ignore. I respect the pressing need to put an end to this damn mess, but more pressing… More
  HAHAHAHA! I can't believe I saw this in theaters. This is not so bad that I would demand that Uwe Boll stop making movies entirely, but there are problems so glaring as to be impossible to ignore. I respect the pressing need to put an end to this damn mess, but more pressing always is the need to end it well. There's also this hilarious sex scene that comes out of nowhere, as if spliced in from another movie. Oh man. Watch this ironically, because it's really the best way to enjoy it.

• Brian D

  
  What the fuck was this all about.

• Al S

  
  one of the worst movies ever. The plot and the characters are pathetic and just flat-out teriable.

• Bruce B

  
  For some reason I just didn't get into this movie, not sure why, can't pin point one thing. Poor Everything. Not sure where I first saw it, then ended up buying the DVD without knowing I hasd seen it.

• Lafe F

  
  This was NOTHING like the H.P. Lovecraft inspired computer game, which had a 1920's detective Edward Carnby investigating a freaky-as-hell Gothic Mansion in isometric 3-D, and later chapters had him rescuing a girl from zombie pirates during Christmas, and investigating the… More
  This was NOTHING like the H.P. Lovecraft inspired computer game, which had a 1920's detective Edward Carnby investigating a freaky-as-hell Gothic Mansion in isometric 3-D, and later chapters had him rescuing a girl from zombie pirates during Christmas, and investigating the disappearance of a crew of filmmakers in a ghost town. The filmmakers missed the point of the series entirely. This film is a lame scientific creature invasion plot ala Doom. Nothing like the game series, you idiot filmmakers!

• Luke B

  
  What can yu say about a Uwe Boll film that hasn't already been said? Like many viewers I was lured in by a sense of self-destructive curiosity. Curiosity has now not only killed the cat but also my faith in the future of cinema. I viewed Alone in The Dark for what it was, a… More
  What can yu say about a Uwe Boll film that hasn't already been said? Like many viewers I was lured in by a sense of self-destructive curiosity. Curiosity has now not only killed the cat but also my faith in the future of cinema. I viewed Alone in The Dark for what it was, a cheesy horror video game adaptation. It started with a hilariously bad title scroll informing us of some attempt made at a plot. It was quite enjoyable at first, since it was so bad. Poor old Christian Slater having to give a half arsed and very poorly scripted voice-over. The whole script in fact is tedious and iriitating. I found it hard to stay awake, but managed it. Boll please stop, you've hurt us enough.

• Drew S

  
  Okay, so...I actually watched this. The half-star rating I gave it as a knee jerk reflex to Uwe Boll's presence proved to be completely and totally accurate. His incompetent helming mars the entire film; there is not an ounce of tone, of consistency, of urgency to be found in… More
  Okay, so...I actually watched this. The half-star rating I gave it as a knee jerk reflex to Uwe Boll's presence proved to be completely and totally accurate. His incompetent helming mars the entire film; there is not an ounce of tone, of consistency, of urgency to be found in this slop heap of a movie. Tara Reid can't act. Christian Slater and Stephen Dorff are slumming, clearly in it for a paycheck. The plot is so convoluted that there's a 2 minute long rolling text introduction to tell the viewer what the movie is about. The construction of this movie is on par with that of a hyper-low-budget B-horror movie, not a 20 million dollar project. It is astonishing that one movie can be rife with so much incompetence. Don't even waste your time.

• Roy G

  
  One of the worst movies ever made.

• Nate Z

  
  [center][color=darkred][font=Arial Narrow][size=3][b][font=Times New Roman][i][img]http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/548/photo015yc.jpg[/img][/i][/font][/b][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center] [/center] [center][color=darkred][font=Arial Narrow][size=3][b][font=Times New… More
  [center][color=darkred][font=Arial Narrow][size=3][b][font=Times New Roman][i][img]http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/548/photo015yc.jpg[/img][/i][/font][/b][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center] [/center] [center][color=darkred][font=Arial Narrow][size=3][b][font=Times New Roman][/font][/b][/size][/font][/color][/center] [center][color=darkred][font=Arial Narrow][size=3][b][font=Times New Roman][/font][/b][/size][/font][/color][color=darkred][size=3][font=Arial Narrow][b][font=Times New Roman][font=Arial Narrow][i]House of the Dead[/i] (2003)[/font][/font][/b][font=Times New Roman][font=Arial Narrow]: IMDB rating: 2.0 (#20 in Bottom 100); 6% fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes[/font][/font][/font][/size][/color][/center] [center][font=Arial Narrow][size=3][color=#8b0000][/color][/size][/font] [/center] [center][color=darkred][size=3][font=Arial Narrow][font=Times New Roman][/font][/font][/size][/color][/center] [left][color=darkred][font=Arial Narrow][size=3][font=Times New Roman][/font][/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][color=darkred]House of the Dead is Uwe Boll’s first foray into the video game-to-movie niche he’s carved himself. It’s based on a first-person-shooter by Sega that lets players blast their way through a haunted house and its undead tenants. There’s not much to the game. In interviews Boll has remarked at how he hated the film’s jokey script and rewrote much of it on the fly, trapping the film between the genres of horror and action. In the DVD jacket, executive producer/co-writer Mark A. Altman says, “House of the Dead is no Citizen Kane.” This may be the understatement of the millennium, comparable only to Napoleon saying Russia might be a tad cold.[/color][/font][/left] [font=Arial][color=darkred]Matt (Steve Byers), Greg (Will Sanderson), and Simon (Tyron Leitso) are meeting with fellow college students Alicia (Ona Grauer), Karma (Enuka Okuma), and Cynthia (Sonya Salomaa). They’re ready to party at the rave of the century. This rave of raves takes place on the ominously named Isle del Muerte (The Island of the Dead). I suppose this proves that no one on the rave planning board speaks Spanish. The kids eventually hitch a ride to the island from Captain Kirk (Jurgen Prochnow) and his first mate (Clint Howard). Hot on Kirk’s heels is Casper (Ellie Kornell), a border agent after Kirk for gunrunning. Once they arrive at the island, the kids are shocked to find the rave site vacated, destroyed, and swarming with zombies. Everyone makes a run for it and regroups with some of the rave’s survivors, led by Rudy (Jonathon Cherry). The groups team up, armed by Kirk, and set out to shoot their way home. But there’s also a very evil figure roaming about that has more sinister plans for the island’s fresh meat.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]House of the Dead isn’t a horror movie at all. Boll has no idea how to stage scenes with tension. He has no feel for mood or atmosphere, which are the foundations of a good horror flick. So instead, House of the Dead is a riotously dumb action movie. But under Boll’s direction, it’s not even good at that. The action is repetitious and pedestrian. Boll’s big melee sequence becomes boring because it doesn’t progress. There’s just ten minutes of wall-to-wall shooting zombies, but there isn’t any order to it, no rhyme or reason. If you want a perfect example of Boll’s inept staging, skim to 47:20 into the DVD and watch. You’ll see a zombie leap onto a jumping platform and launch himself into the air. House of the Dead actually has scenes where we see exposed jumping pads and landing mats.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]Boll gets drunk on special effects very easily. He loves the bullet time effect and throws it in at odd points. Every single character gets a tiresome slow-mo camera spin as they fire a gun. After the ninth and tenth time, the thing gets old. The characters don’t even have the same weapons in the shots before the slow-mo jazz. Boll doesn’t use flashy effects to benefit his narrative, unlike The Matrix. Boll actually thinks using clips from the actual video game is a good device to transition between scenes. There will be moments where screen shots of the game just pop up. Boll is a kid with toys and no clue when to put them back into the box.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]This movie’s silliness is jaw dropping. The so-called rave of the century seems to be poorly attended, and the better for it since it takes place on the Island of the Dead (Isle del Muerte). Is that really the best place to host a social gathering? Perhaps everyone gets what they deserve for being stupid. Kirk, after shooting several zombies, limply remarks, “[i]Now[/i] I know why they call this the Island of the Dead.” The line should be accompanied by a rim shot. The movie doesn’t even live up to the lofty ambitions of its title. The film should be renamed Island of the Dead.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]By far the most ludicrous story element is the film’s villain, Castillo (David Palffy). It seems that before he stalked the island in a hooded cloak, looking like Robert DeNiro in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, he was a Spanish pirate/doctor. He tried to experiment on living tissue in order to unlock the secret of how to be immortal. He was imprisoned on a Spanish ship and was shipwrecked on the Island of the Dead (what are the odds?). He’s concocted a special Kool-Aid that will bring the dead back to life, though I don’t know why he’s still stuck on an island if he can’t drown. I guess he’s been biding his time and waiting for stupid college students so he can see some T&A.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]The characters are made up of people interested in attending a rave, but when the action hits they’re all instantly adept at weaponry and kung-fu. That’s not the typical raver I know, and these people must be super ravers if they’re going to the rave of the century. Simon is described as “the biggest underwear model in America,” and for all I know underwear models encounter a lot of gunfire on the runway. The DVD jacket has character profiles where it lists their name, age, weapon of choice, and skill. After having watched House of the Dead, the skills are laughable at best. Simon the runway model’s skill is “tactical planning.” I also seriously question Rudy’s “leadership” skills since he gets everyone killed.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]Of course everyone in the movie is profoundly stupid. While trapped in the island’s lone house, Rudy says the kegs of gunpowder are useless without a charge, and then he walks past a series of lit candles. The whole house upon arrival is filled with lit candles (who has the time for that, by the way?). Alicia is convinced that the rave site being deserted, destroyed, and zombie-infested is all a practical joke, as if Ashton Kutcher is just around a tree poised to yell, “You suckas just got [i]punk’d[/i]!” There are numerous moments where a character will wander into the dark and say, “[Insert name], is that you?” Kirk takes the last stick of dynamite and plans to sacrifice himself by blowing up some zombies good. He lights the stick, wanders outside their barricaded stronghold, and blows himself sky high. What Kirk failed to do was move far enough from the house, because he also blows the front door wide open and the zombies filter inside. No wonder Picard is the better Starfleet captain.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]The acting doesn’t even rise to the level of camp. The actors feel unrestrained and marooned, typical of a Uwe Boll film. The man has no feel for actors and this explains why his films have some of the worst line readings I’ve ever heard (2000’s Dungeons and Dragons is still the worst). Casper acts like a crabby fitness instructor. The dialogue is bad as is, but when added with the poor line readings it turns every spoken sentence into something of unintentional hilarity. Take this nugget from Simon: “We got to the boat but it wasn't there.” Well, then did you really get to it?[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]House of the Dead can be enjoyed for the depths it plumbs. The dialogue is cheesy and leaden. The movie is bad enough that if you have some friends over, drink steadily, you’ll have a blast laughing and hurling popcorn at the screen. The movie does have a decent amount of blood and gore and the make-up effects are good but limited. You can enjoy House of the Dead in a fun derisive way, and it’s hard to argue with the price some retailers charge (I bought it on Amazon.com for 75 cents plus shipping). The DVD commentary is also good for a laugh, that is, if Boll’s self-flagellating remarks are serious. At one point he compares his zombie action movie to Schindler’s List. Boll also marvels at an actor’s ability to carry objects and make them seem heavy. I’m not sure if Boll is serious or just making fun of the movie like everyone else.[/color][/font] [color=darkred][size=2][font=Arial][i][font=Times New Roman][font=Arial][size=2]House of the Dead[/size][/font][/font][/i][font=Times New Roman][font=Arial][size=2] is a dull action movie within the framework of a horror flick. The characters are powerfully stupid, the action is redundant, the effects are chintzy and overused, and the direction is lackluster. Boll has added little in transitioning a game about poppin’ zombies onto the silver screen. The video game is flimsy and the movie based upon it manages to be even flimsier. [i]House of the Dead[/i] is incredibly dumb entertainment and the fact that a sequel is well underway cannot be a good sign for human existence. I never thought I’d utter these words but . . . Clint Howard, you’re too good for this.[/size][/font][/font][/font][/size][/color] [color=darkred][size=2][font=Arial][font=Times New Roman][/font][/font][/size][/color] [color=darkred][size=2][font=Arial][font=Times New Roman][b][font=Arial][size=2]Nate's Grade: D[/size][/font][/b][/font][/font][/size][/color] [color=darkred][size=2][font=Arial][font=Times New Roman][/font][/font][/size][/color] [color=darkred][size=2][font=Arial][font=Courier New][/font][/font][/size][/color] [center][img]http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/3401/photo124xu.jpg[/img][/center] [font=Courier New][font=Arial][/font][/font] [font=Courier New][font=Arial][/font][/font] [center][color=darkred][font=Arial Narrow][size=3][b][i]Alone in the Dark[/i] (2005)[/b]: IMDB rating: 2.2 (#28 in Bottom 100); 1% fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes[/size][/font][/color][/center] [color=darkred][size=2][/size][/color] [color=darkred][size=2][/size][/color][font=Arial][color=darkred]Edward Camby (Christian Slater) is a paranormal investigator trying to rediscover what happened in his past. He was apart of 20 orphans taken by Fischer (Frank C. Turner), your basic mad scientist type. Camby was the only child to escape Fischer’s poking and prodding. The other orphans have become sleeper agents/zombies to assist him in opening a dimensional gate to another world, a world with bloodthirsty creatures that live in darkness. This world and its creatures were first discovered by an ancient Native American tribe who mysteriously vanished. But before doing so, they thoughtfully broke the dimensional key and hid the pieces all over North America. Aline Cedrac (Tara Reid) is a scientist/archeologist that specializes in this Native American tribe and its artifacts. She teams up with her old flame, Camby, to help stop the mad doctor. Monitoring the whole situation is Commander Burke (Stephen Dorff), the man in charge of the United States government’s bureau of the paranormal. He leads his no-nonsense super troopers to the location of the dimensional gateway, which just happens to be underneath Camby’s childhood orphanage.[/color][/font] [color=darkred][font=Arial][i]Alone in the Dark[/i] is a good film for people that felt [i]House of the Dead[/i] was too intellectual. It should be obvious after reading the plot synopsis, but [i]Alone in the Dark[/i] is a movie of unparalleled stupidity. What was the point of making orphans sleeper agents/zombies? They’re very easily disposed of and not very effective. I don’t know whether or not this is because they didn’t have a mom and dad growing up. What does this mad doctor hope to achieve by opening the door to creepy crawly monsters? I guess he thinks the monsters will be grateful and give him some kind of bureaucratic job, instead of, you know, gutting him and drinking his blood. I’ll never understand why villains align themselves with creatures whose only purpose is killing. How does Camby end up having a childhood flashback from a perspective that isn’t his own? The plot of [i]Alone in the Dark[/i] is a gigantic mess. What other film in recent memory fits together ancient Native American tribes, monsters from an alternate dimension, government agencies, orphanages, zombies, and Tara Reid as a college educated person? You know you’re in bad hands when they open the film with a ten paragraph scrawl to explain what the film, by itself, cannot. And then they add narration because they don’t trust their audience to read.[/font][/color] [font=Arial][color=darkred]The film is called [i]Alone in the Dark[/i] and tells us that killer creatures lurk where we cannot see them. This is a fine platform to engineer some good scares; really stir the audience into fearing what they cannot see. As always, nothing will be scarier than a person’s mind at work. Boll doesn’t agree. He doesn’t even toy with the idea of hiding his creatures and building tension gradually. Boll prefers to show you his monsters immediately and often, therefore eliminating any attempts at suspense. Now the characters aren’t running away from what they can’t see; they’re running away from lame CGI rat/alligator creatures. The monsters look laughable and should have staid in the shadows for as long as possible. It’s hard to spook an audience once they see what they’re supposed to be afraid of. Boll’s impatience for suspense and his love of cheesy special effects cripple [i]Alone in the Dark[/i].[/color][/font] [color=darkred][font=Arial][i]Alone in the Dark[/i] has no pulse when it comes to action. Boll stages his action sequences like different stations on a gameshow. Characters (contestants) run from station to station, picking up weapons and shooting at whatever, and then advancing to another stage with a different weapon. Much of the action just comes out of nowhere and ends in its own confused way. Boll likes to season his poorly choreographed action sequences by cranking up loud rock music and mixing in excessive, gimmicky special effects. For no reason, Camby and Aline and the soldiers will be shooting and Boll just all of sudden decides this scene should be in a strobe light. Or he’ll shove in a cheap slow-mo follow-the-bullet effect. Boll likes testing out different effects that serve little purpose other than to call attention to itself. Boll has confused this with style.[/font][/color] [font=Arial][color=darkred]Speaking of action coming out of nowhere, Boll manages to squeeze in an out-of-the-blue sex scene. Aline visits Camby in the morning, sees him sleeping, and decides on the spot to crawl into bed and have sex with him. I’m sure this is well within Reid’s character, but would she really keep her bra on the whole time? I don’t think so. Reid and Slater have no chemistry whatsoever. It’s like watching water buffalos go at it. Then the sex is never referred to again. This is just another pristine example of how carelessly Uwe Boll handles plot and characters. Rarely does Boll even bother with a transition scene to explain how a character got from Point A to Point B.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]Boll’s direction is lazy and derivative. There are scenes that openly ape superior movies, like [i]Alien[/i], [i]Raiders of the Lost Ark[/i], [i]Starship Troopers[/i], and even Boll’s own [i]House of the Dead[/i] for crissakes. The plot is a cut-and-paste job of the series finale of TV’s [i]Buffy the Vampire Slayer[/i]. Both deal with an army of creatures living under an everyday school building and involve a special key to unlock the gateway. And like in [i]Buffy[/i], some noble individual sacrifices himself to destroy the gateway’s underground entrance. No, scratch that. The plot itself is virtually a copy of [i]Super Mario Brothers[/i], the first video game based movie. Both films involve some magical key needed to unlock two alternate dimensions of creatures. No, scratch that. This is one big rip-off of [i]Darkness[/i][i]Falls[/i], since both involve crazy creatures that can only attack from the dark. Whatever it is, [i]Alone in the Dark[/i] is Boll’s opportunity to showcase his unoriginality. That is, if you can pry him away from inserting more pointless slow-mo bullet effects.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]The acting is wildly all over the map. I wonder if Boll will ever be able to direct actors. The line delivery is terrible all around. Slater is subdued and permanently cranky. Maybe somewhere inside that Jack Nicholson grin he’s realized he’s slumming it. Reid acts like an irritable child playing dress-up. Dorff seems to be the only actor having any fun, though I don’t know how intimidating this diminutive actor comes across as a military man. The actors of [i]Alone in the Dark[/i] confuse loud with emotional.[/color][/font] [font=Arial][color=darkred]Let’s take some time out to spotlight Reid and her character. The way [i]Alone in the Dark[/i] convinces us that Reid (and her black hole of eyeliner) is a scientist is by giving her some black rimmed glasses and putting her hair in a pony tail. Reid with hair down and no glasses? Trashy party girl. Reid with hair up and glasses? Respected member of the scientific community. It’s just that easy, folks. For a scientist, Reid has an awful lot of halter-tops. Maybe she’s that lone scientist that likes to go out for Mai tais after getting her hands dirty with the scientific method. Apparently being a scientist didn’t help Reid with her geography; she pronounces Newfoundland “New-[i]FOUND[/i]-land” (the correct pronunciation is “New-fin-lan”). Reid is no more believable as a scientist than a porn star. In fact, a porn star would be more believable and give a better performance.[/color][/font] [color=darkred][font=Arial]The dialogue reeks of poorly concealed exposition. A chatty security guard serves as the writer’s sloppy conduit to establish back story: “You don’t know about the Indians? Let me explain,” “You don’t know who Aline Cedrac is? Let me explain,” “How’s your [i]boooooy[/i]friend, Aline Cedrac?” [i]Alone in the Dark[/i] relies on gobs of thick exposition to cover up its insurmountable plot holes. The movie thinks it’s like a cool detective noir. It’s not. You never heard Sam Spade say, “Fear is what protects you from the things you don’t believe in.” Huh? Does that make any sense?[/font][/color] [color=darkred][font=Arial][i]Alone in the Dark[/i] is symptomatic of all of Boll’s directorial flaws. He has no feel for tone, he has no control over actors, he makes bad stylistic decisions that detract from the film, and he has no time for subtlety. Boll spoils all of his surprise by showing the monsters up and front instead of letting the human mind fill in the blanks for terror. This is a brain-dead action film that doesn’t even trust its audience to read. [i]Alone in the Dark[/i] is a film so incompetent, so ridiculous, so convoluted, and so moronic that it must bend the laws of space and time simply to exist. This makes [i]House of the Dead[/i] look well thought out. If this is indicative of what Boll has in store for his video game adaptations, then you can expect many duds yet to come on Boll’s path to eventual audience oblivion. If anyone dared venture to a theater to see this movie, they’d find themselves alone in the dark all right. And shamed. Deeply, deeply shamed.[/font][/color] [font=Times New Roman][font=Arial][size=2][color=darkred][b]Nate’s Grade: F[/b][/color][/size][/font][/font]

• George R

  
  A nun sells the children of her orphanage to some scientists for experiments, one kid manages to escape, & decides to hide in the safest spot he can think of, a high voltage electricity box. Yeah, do I have to say anything more? The Nostalgia critic's review on this movie… More
  A nun sells the children of her orphanage to some scientists for experiments, one kid manages to escape, & decides to hide in the safest spot he can think of, a high voltage electricity box. Yeah, do I have to say anything more? The Nostalgia critic's review on this movie was enough. I seriously busted a lung the day I watched the review to this movie. I'd have to be excessively drunk, high, & on methane all at the same time to watch this movie (and yet I do none of those things). Nothing in this movie makes sense, NOTHING. I think even that horrible straight to DVD movie, Hammerhead, is better than this. This movie isn't even on the quality or level of a straight to DVD film. It takes itself too damn seriously, a plot that changes & can never sit still for even 5 seconds (no for real, you'll forget you're watching the same movie), acting that makes One Missed Call's acting look Oscar-Worthy, dialogue that seemed to have been given to the characters from a 50 cent robot, & special effects that make a Sci-Fi channel original movie's effects look like Avatar's! I cannot review this movie by each category I usually do in my other reviews because my brain hurt TRYING to find ways to put them all separately. No, it really was THAT bad. We have Christian Slater's character who is the main character of the story, but the problem is, that he monologues, & let me tell you that while most movies that have character monologues aren't bad this one on the other hand, was horrible. The dialogue is horrible & makes no sense. The movie suffers from having no damn plot but having too much plot at the same time. How is that possible? I have no idea. But let me say that I was actually surprised to see that Wikipedia actually managed to find a plot about this movie. No, really, I wonder how long some of the editors on the article to this movie on Wiki must have taken to find some trace of plot on this movie. And that's not even the start. The plot goes from one plot point, & then to another, & then it has scenes that have NOTHING to do or are relevant to the story. No, I'm not kidding, you'll actually forget you're watching the same movie. And don't even get me started on how illogical it is. The characters are also fucking idiotic beyond levels. each & every one of the characters are both assholes, & are completely useless. Tara Reed's character is nothing more than a whore, who is supposed to make us believe she is an intelligent scientists simply because she has glasses. And trust me, each of them are idiots in every meaning of the word. Tara's Character: "Yeah, if each piece is a part of a puzzle, why would you hide each of them in different parts of the world?"...................................BECAUSE IT'S A PUZZLE!! Man, theses actors don't even try to make sense out of themselves! And then we have idiotic camera movements & action scenes. Slater's character gets the sense that he's being followed, when the camera suddenly makes a strange, & dynamic movement around his area, making us believe he really is being followed? Was he? No, he wasn't. Which was pretty damn pointless. And then we have action scenes of the character fighting with guns IN THE DARK. Does shooting guns in the dark sound like a good idea to you? And then the characters start to shoot a bunch of people that suddenly appear out of nowhere to attack them. the thing is, most of those could be innocent bystanders just trying to runaway from the danger, & the actors just mindlessly shoot them. And the funniest part of the entire action scene in the dark was how Slater shot one of the human evil things, & the ray of the gun didn't even hit her & she still died. No, I'm being serious, the ray shot of the gun passed over the chick's head & she falls down dead. We then have some sort of scene where these people on a ship make an amazing discovery, a box made of pure gold. Tempted by their greed, the captain's crew decides to lock him up in one of the ship's room. Which suddenly, he opens, which makes no sense because the door was LOCKED! FROM. THE. OUTSIDE. When he steps out he sees his entire crew was apparently murdered by whatever the hell was inside that box. No, but before that, as the box was opened, a specific set of actors from distant places suddenly, without question or a sign of any trance-like state or hypnotism, decide to just walk out of wherever the hell they are. What makes it even worse is that we get no information or background to where they hell they were headed & why. This movie also can't seem to stand still. We get a focus of one scene for less than 2 minutes, & then jumps to another spot, but it's worse, it just suddenly decides jumps from one location to another in almost that exact same amount of time. One minute a character is like in a cave (just an example), only then after those 2 minutes of location & talk, the film jumps to another distant location. Then Slater suddenly asks some investigator to meet him & tell him what all these missing people from the previous scene have in common; only to be told, "Nothing much in common except they all grew up in the same orphanage." Oh wow, that's all? Suddenly we go into the museum where Tara's dumbass character works in when suddenly the lights start to flicker on & off. Before I go on, let me tell you that the flickering lights look horrible. They're supposed to give the watcher of the movie a sense of terror & fear, only that they look like someone in the room is just turning the light switch on & off constantly. The security guard decides to check it out when suddenly a terrible CGI monster attacks & kills him from behind. The monster in the movie LOOK pretty cool, but the CGI on them is horrible beyond words. After the guard's death, Tara's & Slater's character see the creature & run away from it, & after running the Agency of the Paranormal decide to drop in. After that we go back yet again to Slater's garage home & more of his damn monologue. When suddenly Tara's character walks in. Does she have any information on the case or is she hear to possibly ask about the large amount of plotholes in this movie or to ask SLater why he lied about being dead? No, she isn't, only to prove she's a whore, the two suddenly make love. Yeah, & the love scene is just laughable. And and you know what, that whole sex scene would have been a good scene to actually hear some monologue. So after the two make love to each other,the lights begin to flicker again, & that's when the whole fight scene in the dark I mentioned previous mentioned comes in. What I forgot to mention is that Tara's character picks up a gun & shoots it with 100% accuracy when she looks like she's never picked one up before, just like in House of the Dead. We also get the same turning camera movements like they also did in House of the Dead. Oh but wait, I'm not even done with the review; the whole movie, especially that pitch dark fight scene, has a horrible Metal soundtrack. And I'm just saying that because I fucking hate Metal, no, I listened to the soundtrack carefully, as painful as it was, & the songs were all horribly written by shitty metal bands. You know, if you really wanted to pick shit metal music, then pick some shit metal bands that are actually better than that, like Korn &/or Slipknot. And wait just again, this movie is not even finished after that whole fight in the dark scene, no. Like I said previously, this movie somehow has no plot, but too much plot at the same time. How long is this movie? IDK, find out yourself. And I am not going to continue because there is just TOO MUCH MORE to write about this movie. And I would really like to continue but my fingers are hurting of how much typing I spent, & my brain just hurts about the same just trying to think & describe to you how bad this movie is. This movie is SURPRISINGLY worse than House of the Dead, done by the same director. This movie makes no sense, the dialogue is just horrible, the acting is atrocious, the characters are dumbasses, the effects are shit. This movie is everything a movie should not be. Why this movie wasn't placed on the #1 spot on RT's "Worst of the Worst" list is beyond me. There is so much about this movie that is bad, & I can spend about 3 hours telling you about it. Some advice, DO NOT WATCH ANYTHING Uwe Boll has made. I only saw House of the Dead (half of it to the end), & I felt my brain die after it. Seriously, it's that bad, this review, a critic's reviews, & user reviews are not enough to fully say how bad this film is. All you need to watch is the Nostalgia critic's review for this film, & you know that's all you needed to hear to know this film, & other of Boll's works are absolute garbage. The horror, THE HORROR!

• Andy S

  
  EVeryone simply must see this film. ALthough maybe they shouldn't, because it's entirely debatable whether or not this product is even a film. It just barely even fits the criteria for being one! But anyway, why everyone has to expeience this. Reason 1: one of the worst… More
  EVeryone simply must see this film. ALthough maybe they shouldn't, because it's entirely debatable whether or not this product is even a film. It just barely even fits the criteria for being one! But anyway, why everyone has to expeience this. Reason 1: one of the worst scripts in cinematic history ("I believe this map can pinpoint location." Yes, that IS an actual line from the film). Reason 2: the terrible special FX (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/alone_in_the_dark/pictures/9.php#highlighted_picture). Reason 3: the acting is some of the worst I've ever seen from a film. The only reason this film is getting a 10% rather than a 0% is because it's so easy to simply point and laugh.

• Matthew R

  
  This is so far the worst movie I've ever seen in my life. The acting is so bad, random people from off the streets could do better(Tara Reid in particular, like we're suppose to believe she's an archeologist). Don't know what the hell is going on with the plot. As… More
  This is so far the worst movie I've ever seen in my life. The acting is so bad, random people from off the streets could do better(Tara Reid in particular, like we're suppose to believe she's an archeologist). Don't know what the hell is going on with the plot. As the movie progresses it starts coming off as funny not scary. Alone in the Dark is one of a kind, it falls flat on its face from the beginning and stays there to the end. Story: F Acting: F- Direction: F- Visuals: F Overall: F- No stars out of 4

• Ryan M

  
  1.2/10 Uwe Boll's "Alone in the Dark" has nothing to do with the somewhat-forgotten and underrated 1982 slasher film of the same name. It is, instead, a big-screen adaptation of the popular video game franchise; which comes to no surprise, since Boll is infamous for… More
  1.2/10 Uwe Boll's "Alone in the Dark" has nothing to do with the somewhat-forgotten and underrated 1982 slasher film of the same name. It is, instead, a big-screen adaptation of the popular video game franchise; which comes to no surprise, since Boll is infamous for merging video games with cinema and creating the most repulsively bad and intellectually assaultive pieces of shit ever. This is my first Uwe Boll film, and now I see why he has been greeted by such infamy; he deserves every last bit of criticism. Here, he's taken a good premise and rendered it stupefying and nigh impossible to watch. If there's one thing that makes it endurable, it's the amount of time you'll bust a gut laughing your ass off. Believe me folks; this one is a real stinker. So the film opens with an overlong text that speaks of the back-story to the film, which is read aloud, to our dismay. The back-story involves an ancient tribe called the Abskani. Apparently, they worshipped otherworldly demons, who would take over the world upon being summoned. And now, they have finally been let loose onto the modern world, and we have to watch as Boll allows these badly animated CGI beasties to roam free and do little more than just kill people. But of course, there must be characters; and oh man, are there ever. You've got a paranormal investigator (Christian Slater), his girlfriend (Tara Reid), and some guy in police clothing (Stephen Dorff) intent on being badass. He isn't. Is there even a need to name these individuals? Boll cares about them just about as much as I do. A few are given the kind of back-stories that should be considered necessary, even if they are lame all-the-same. Still, every single character feels out-of-place and born of a million clichés; and the actors portraying them have each seen better days, or at least the mass majority of them have. They're just plain bad here; and they aren't even the worst to be found here when it comes to performances. No, if you know your bad movies; then you'll know that the acting that REALLY, REALLY sucks comes from the supporting cast. That's one thing that Boll seems to understand, but that's about it. I knew the movie was going to suck. I watched it because I was in the mood for something that was bad in just about every aspect of its being. So I can't say I'm disappointing when "Alone in the Dark", a film with a perfectly interesting idea going for it, turns out to be an insanely illogical and disgustingly under-made little horror movie. Boll's idea of suspense seems to be some dimly lit places (often times, the dark cinematography seemed unintentional rather than the reverse) and slimy lizards and their worm offspring that pounce from the shadowy regions of the earth and kill you. Sure, that can be creepy and effective, but the director gets nothing right and screws up any possibility for goodness. It isn't entertaining and it isn't scary; with the exception of a gratuitous and poorly-filmed sex scene between Slater and Reid. Now THAT, my friends, is some scary shit. I have not played the Alone in the Dark video games, and by the looks of things, neither has Boll. The fans reacted negatively to the lack of faithfulness in the film adaptation's story; which is a load of bull otherwise. Nothing could have saved it or improved it in terms of quality; the fact that it doesn't even stick to the franchise that it's built around makes it all the more down-right pathetic. And as it is, I've said all I can say about "Alone in the Dark". I hated it; every moment of it. It's silly, stupid, and if you're going to watch it at all; watch it for the surplus of unintentional laughs. And whether you like it or not, a laugh is a laugh. And unintentional, guilty joy is the only emotion you'll feel when watching a movie directed by the master of cinematic crap himself. So embrace whatever you can feel and continue to detest the rest of the ride. Where "Alone in the Dark" stands, as cinema, is all in the title.

• Juan C

  
  if i were to name the worst video game movie and one of the worst movie ever made, it would obviously alone in the dark, no movie has ever been stupified and dull, and crap, until this is made! no wonder this made me nearly insane! uwe boll was called the next ed wood, meaning one of… More
  if i were to name the worst video game movie and one of the worst movie ever made, it would obviously alone in the dark, no movie has ever been stupified and dull, and crap, until this is made! no wonder this made me nearly insane! uwe boll was called the next ed wood, meaning one of the worst directors ever, but i think that's wrong, there sould be a new category called 'the next uwe boll'! now that is every director's nightmare to be the next uwe boll, meaning that they'll have to make a crappy movie like alone in the dark! F

• Curt C

  
  More boring than bad, really. All the cool stuff happens in the first half of the movie (there is some pretty cool stuff, mind you). The rest is so dull that Christian Slater feels the need to narrate the things we've already seen in case we fell asleep. How can a suspense… More
  More boring than bad, really. All the cool stuff happens in the first half of the movie (there is some pretty cool stuff, mind you). The rest is so dull that Christian Slater feels the need to narrate the things we've already seen in case we fell asleep. How can a suspense movie be this devoid of suspense?

Read all 20 featured audience ratings