#296 -- Hunger (2009)

Director: Steven Hentges
Rating: 3 / 5

This is one of those times where, after surfing through Netflix for a while, I just got tired of looking. I settled on Hunger because the plot seemed interesting, and I had sort of an idea of how it would go, and I liked what I had playing out in my head. It was pretty predictable, but it didn't turn out the way I was hoping that it would. However, it wasn't a complete disappointment.

It started off with five people waking up in a dark room, oblivious to how they got there or why. The characters were fairly bland, but they did have enough personality to become at least a little bit likable. Jordan was the main character, and clearly the most intelligent and rational of the bunch. Grant, who became Jordan's biggest ally, was also pretty rational and competent. Luke was unstable from the get-go and it was completely obvious that he would be the first to unravel. Anna seemed extremely weak to begin with, but she ended up surprising everyone by turning into a psychotic bitch. There was a little distrust between them at first, but they soon realized that they'd have to work together if they wanted to get out alive. They searched for an exit for a while, until they found a little bricked-in doorway. The man who imprisoned them gave them two gifts: a carving knife and four giant barrels full of water. They also had a little make-shift toilet, which I'm sure they were very thankful for after a while. They also got a not that said something along the lines of "the human body can only survive for thirty days without food." So, now we've got our motive -- sort of. His very basic motive is to see how long they can survive without food, but there's actually more to it than that. I'm sure you  could tell where it was going from the beginning, and if you couldn't, the carving knife should have surely given it away. He wants to see just how long it will take them to resort to cannibalism, and which of them will unravel to the point of resorting to such measures.

The man's real motive was a little more complex than all of that, though it really wasn't all that interesting. We're shown at the beginning that he was in a terrible car accident when he was a child. It left his mother dead beside him, and he was trapped in the car for several weeks. He had to eat parts of his own mother. So I guess he wanted to see if other people would do the same, so he didn't feel so guilty. It never really expanded on that, as he was left unnamed and completely vague. The flashback was the only little bit of back story we got on him. All the time, we see him sitting in a cozy office watching these people on cameras. He had what I believe was a microphone sitting in front of him, so I really hoped that he was going to start talking to them eventually, but he never said a word throughout the entire movie. I think this would have made things even more frightening for the captives, as they'd have a voice to put to the person behind their imprisonment. They'd have something solid to place the blame on. Also, I feel like it would have made things a whole hell of a lot more interesting. They were pawns in his twisted game, and I feel like he should have played with them a little more, rather than leaving them alone to play with each other. Their interactions with one another were interesting, and watching each of their inevitable mental breakdowns was definitely engaging. But I wanted more.

Though I had a couple of problems with it, I felt that the story was fully developed, and that it made the point it was trying to make. Visually, the movie was good. There wasn't a lot of gore, as you'd expect from something like this. It wasn't purely about the cannibalism; it was mostly about the disintegration of the captives' mental states, and it focused more so on that than the blood and guts. The couple of scenes that showed some gore did look good, as well. Overall, it's actually very good movie, though it's more of a psychological thriller than a horror. There's nothing scary about it for viewers; but it looks into the human psyche, and just how far people will go to ensure their own survival. Though it didn't play out the way that I hoped, that's purely a personal opinion. It didn't really hurt the value of the movie, and I still found it interesting. It's not a mind-blowing feat in film-making; it's not a 100% incredible horror movie. But it's an interesting and disturbing movie that doesn't fail to entertain.

#228 -- Kill Theory (2009)

Rating: 4 / 5
Director: Chris Moore

Okay, let's get something straight. This movie is not scary. There are no jump scares, there's nothing that will make you have nightmares, and it is far from shit-your-pants terrifying. Being scary isn't what makes this movie good. It's what happens to your brain when you watch it that makes it worth it. It will make you think hard about yourself and your own primal instincts, and it will make you question your humanity.

It started off with a man who killed his friends. He didn't stab them, shoot or maim them. A rock climbing accident left them all suspended from a rope, he chose his own life over theirs, and he cut them loose. This landed him in a metal facility for three years. He was released, because the doctor thought he finally began to realize that what he did was wrong. His theory--the kill theory--was that everyone would do the same in that situation. When he was released, he set out to prove that theory.

There was a group of soon to be college graduates partying at a lake house. It started off like any other camp horror movie, but it turned into something more. One of them was murdered, and the killer sent a tape explaining their situation. They were to kill each other, and they had until six o'clock the next morning. When six o'clock came, if more than one person was left alive, they would be killed. If one person walked away alone, they would be spared. It's not that he wanted them dead; he only wanted to prove that deep down, we're all killers. He wanted to prove that everyone has that primal survival instinct, and that everyone would choose their own lives over anyone else's.

Soon, the friends began to turn on each other. Each of them wanted to survive, and they eventually realized that, in order to do that, they would have to kill their friends. There was only one among them that was willing to try and fight the mysterious killer, rather than kill anyone else. In fact, he was willing to kill himself just to save his girlfriend's life. All the rest were concerned only about their own survival.

The killer was good and creepy. He only communicated via video or a walkie talkie, and we didn't see his face until the very end. He was mysterious, and his voice was deep and raspy. There was some pretty impressive gore in there too. But let's talk about what this movie's real purpose is. It's to make us think about what we would do in the same situation.

Would you ride it out, try to fight the killer, or would  you sink to his level and murder all your friends? There were several different types of characters in the movie. There was the asshole who didn't think twice about killing his friends. There was the hysterical one who's fear eventually drove him to kill his friends; the girl who gave up and accepted that she was going to die. And, finally, the girl who relied on her boyfriend to keep her safe, until she finally realized that the only way she'd be safe was by killing him. Who would you be?

I think most people would say that they would never kill their friends. But not me. I know that I would be extremely concerned about my own survival. So, initially, I'd say that I would do it. I would kill them to make sure I stayed alive. But when I really think about it, I feel that I couldn't do it. If I had to look in my boyfriend's face, knowing that I had to kill him or die...I think I'd go insane before I was able to do anything. But, realistically, no one knows how they would react unless they were actually put into the situation. I think that I'd try to ride it out for a while. When it got close to the end, hysterics would set in, and I'd go crazy on someone. So, I think I'd be the girl relying on her boyfriend until she finally kills him.

There were some good movie elements going on here, but I liked this because it asked me a question that is impossible to answer. So I repeat: who would you be?

#148 -- "B" Challenge: Beneath the Dark (2011)

Director: Chad Feehan
Rating: 3/5

This one kind of confused me at first, so bear with me as I try to figure this out. There will be spoilers, because I just can't seem to find my way around them with confusing movies. It started off with a couple, Paul and Adrienne, on their way to a wedding in Los Angeles. Things got a little steamy in the car, and they almost killed themselves when they ran off the road. Being as tired and horny as they were, they decided to stop for the night. They found a little motel called Roy's and checked in. The man who ran the place, Frank, was a little strange but he seemed nice enough. He just couldn't leave Paul alone, though. He kept asking if he needed anything, and following him like a sick puppy trying to help him out. It got creepy quick. Frank was constantly having flashbacks about his rough relationship with his wife, but we weren't sure were it was going until the very end. The first night Paul, after a little failed sexual encounter with Adrienne, went out to the motel's cafe for some coffee and pie. Frank was there, and he gave Paul a little unwanted advice about how he should make sure he never loses Adrienne. He left, and another man came in who wanted to talk about God. Paul told him he didn't believe in that, and the man became angry. Paul returned to his room to find a message for him carved into the bathroom cabinet. It directed him to a certain passage in the bible in the nightstand. In the book, there was a letter for him. We never got to know what the letter said, but it seriously freaked Paul out. When he went to show Adrienne the message in the bathroom, it was gone, as was the letter in the bible. It turned out that the people in the motel knew a little more about Paul than he was comfortable with. After having a shower together, Paul and Adrienne discovered a VHS in the television depicting something horrible that Paul did when he was in college. It truly was a horrible thing, and Adrienne left him after watching it. There was a scuffle between Paul, Frank, and Frank's wife Sandy out in the parking lot, and Paul suddenly woke up in his room with Adrienne still there. Maybe it was a dream? I'm not really sure about that part. But anyways, she disappeared again, and the man from the diner returned. He explained to Paul that he and Adrienne had actually died in that car crash, and that he was giving him the same opportunity that he'd given Frank. If he could guide the next soul into the "truth" then he would be granted an eternity with Adrienne. However, the next soul arrived (the identity of that soul was the best part of the movie, to me), and Paul really didn't do much with him before the guide-man told him that he could leave. He said that he'd made the right decision. This is the part that confused me, really. What decision did he make? Where was he going? Did he get to have Adrienne back? What happened next told me no, he did not get Adrienne back, but I hope I'm wrong.

So, what were these people? They were angels, or ghosts, or something like that. The man who gave Paul his new "job" called himself the son of god, though I don't think he was supposed to be jesus. So I'm really not sure about all that. I'm not sure why he let Paul leave before he really did anything, either. This movie was kind of interesting. It wasn't scary or even creepy at all, but the characters were very well developed so I was able to get into it. The ending wasn't great, and it just left me confused. It was more of a religious drama than a horror movie, and the whole religious thing usually doesn't do much for me. In the end, it was just okay.

#139 -- "A" Challenge: Absentia (2011)

Director: Mike Flanagan
Rating: 4/5

I was mostly interested in the cover of this movie. The synopsis was vague and uninteresting, but the cover intrigued me. So, I checked it out. All we know from the synopsis is that Tricia's husband Daniel went missing seven years ago, and that after finally declaring him dead in absentia, starts to think maybe something supernatural was going on. This isn't true, though. Tricia simply thought that Daniel left her at first. Tricia kept having horrible hallucinations of Daniel, and he was angry at her, because she became pregnant by the detective working his case. That, or he was angry because she was declaring him dead. Her therapist said that it was simply guilt on her part, and that finally admitting that her husband was dead was messing with her mind. Her sister, Callie, showed up to live with her, after having been on the road apparently going to several rehabilitation clinics. She kicked her drug habit (or so everyone thought), and she was hoping to help her sister through the terrible mess. When Tricia finally decided to move on for good, she set up a date with the Detective. They didn't get very far, though, before Daniel showed up again. He was sick: showing signs of malnourishment and dehydration. He also seemed to have lost his mind a little bit. While Tricia was out with the Detective, explaining to him that their relationship could not continue, Daniel confided in Callie about where he'd been. He'd only called it the "Underneath." There was some sort of creature (like a giant insect) that lived in the walls of a nearby tunnel. It kidnapped people and took them to the tunnel with it. Sometimes people were able to escape (like Walter, a man Callie met in the tunnel, who was shocked that she could see him, just as Daniel was when he first returned). Daniel said that the thing was in the walls of his bedroom and that it was going to get him. Callie went to investigate and was knocked unconscious by the creature, and awakened to witness Daniel being drug back into the tunnel. She tried to save him, but it was no good. She notified the detectives but, finding the drugs in her room, brushed it off as an acid trip. Tricia thought that Daniel had found out about her relationship with the detective (he was already upset by her pregnancy), and had left her again. So, it was really Callie that suspected supernatural activity; not Tricia.

Callie did some research and found out that a ton of people disappeared from that neighborhood, all around the area of the tunnel. People had been disappearing there for around a hundred years. She knew there was some kind of connection, that there was some sort of mythical creature in the tunnel that was taking people away. But of course, no one would believe her. Tricia just thought she was drugged out. That was until the creature showed up at their house again, and spirited Tricia away. The police, again, just thought that Callie was on drugs and didn't know what she was talking about. So, she decided to take matters into her own hands. She went into the tunnel and attempted to make a "trade." But, we all know, evil spirits and/or creatures aren't very interested in trades.

This one was pretty interesting. I really liked it because it was different. The relationships between the characters were believable and likable, and the acting was really well done. There wasn't a whole lot of gore or action. It was a little bit slow, but it didn't take away from the entertainment. It had a pretty dark atmosphere throughout, whether from the horror aspects, or the situation that Tricia had been put in. We could tell how upset the disappearance of her husband made her. She went through a dark phase in her life, and that was apparent. There were a couple of jump scares, but it was the unknown that was scary. It didn't really explain anything about the creature: what it was, where it came from, or why it was taking people into the walls of the tunnel. I'm a little bit disappointed in that, but it kind of worked. It was a mystery. It reminded me of local folklore type of things: stories that townsfolk tell, but aren't really sure of all the details. Just a kind of, "This happens, but we don't know why." Callie actually made a reference to this in the movie, so I think that was exactly what they were going for. It was vague, but I kind of liked it that way. Most of the time this really pisses me off, and it doesn't work often; but it worked here. And for an independent movie, that's pretty damn impressive. Overall, Absentia was very well made, with good acting, a great story, and an interesting view.