The Descent

[KillerWolf]

Once again, we have a movie that got pretty good critical reviews. And, the trailer made it look like it could be good. Well, I had to tap out after about an hour and 15 minutes. It would have been sooner, but I had company over that wanted to see how much more stupid the movie could get.

This movie was represented (by the critics) to be A: genuinely scary. {It wasnt. It's gory, but not scary.} And B: More or less an intelegent film, especially for a horror movie. {Well, apparently this was based soley on the fact that all of the actors in the film were adults. No teenagers in this movie.} However, the entire premis of the movie is really fucking stupid.

So these six or seven extreme!!!, spreelunking bitches go cave rapelling somewhere in Apalachia, and one of them takes the rest to this "new system where no one's ever been before" There's a cave-in. they become trapped and must keep pressing forward to find a new way out.

There are a lot of cliches in the movie. For example the lead chick tells the black nail polish, spikey haired, pushes the envelope chick that she must follow her lead and follow saftey proceedures. Then two minutes later, the lead chick is doing something stupid and unsafe just for the fun of it. Once they get into trouble, they mention the need to conserve thier flashlights, yet everyone's flashlights remain on, though they're travelling in a tight group.

Then there's the monsters. When I saw the trailer, I thought they were actually demons or something. Turns out they're just some race of humanoid creature that had evolved underground...somehow.

Let me make this point: Do you know why the Blair Witch was scary? Well, because the Blair Witch wasnt in every fucking scene. When you have a few people and a bunch of monsters, and the monsters are always attacking, then either the monsters look inept or you have a 45 minute movie where eveyone dies. This is why From Dusk Til Dawn doesnt work as a scary movie. It's just a fun movie on other levels.

So the first time one of the creatures attacks, one of them bites off the top of a woman's head - that is to say, bites off the top half of her head with about as much ease as biting off the top of a rotten apple. So you would figure that these things are pretty deadly, right? Well from that point, these women are kicking these things' asses by using fisticuffs. Ya know suddenly, these women are all so clever and bad-ass, and they know just how to kill these things and how to exploit all of there genetic-weaknesses. All this moments after one of them while examining the corpse of one that they killed concludes that "they are perfectly evolved for hunting in these underground caves."

Another "scary moment" was earlier in the film when they discovered piles of bones. human and animal. keep in mind, this shit is at least three or four levels down under the ground in this place where no one has been. So how do enough people and animals (deer and cows and shit) end up wandering deep, deep under ground to be enough food to sustain an entire race over the years?

absolutely ridiculous, stupid movie.

[Champion of Europa]

I have no faith in your movie taste whatsoever.

[KillerWolf]

^ Good. I want you to rent this movie.

[Blitz]

I thought it was excellent.

[The Greater Power]

As did I. I bought it on DVD the day it came out. Probably my favorite horror film in the past several years.

[RBM]

Name a better horror movie from 2006.

'Scary' is subjective.

There are a lot of cliches in virtually every movie.

So demons would have been acceptable, but humanoid creatures that exist in caves are too far fetched and lame?

They didn't look inept, they looked like humanoids with the same vulnerabilities as any other humanoid. They can't take a pickaxe to the forehead. I'm sure they could have used one singular, invincible creature that could not die until the last 10 minutes of the movie, but there was no need for that. Hordes of dangerous creatures are just as effective as one virtually unkillable creature.

The bones statment... I think it's fairly implied that these creatures have to leave the caves in search of food.

[UmbrellaCorporation]

Yeah, I think it was mentioned or something that they came out late at night to hunt, if I'm not mistaken.

With that said, I don't think I've seen a horror movie this good since Alien. I mean that too.

[KillerWolf]

Name a better horror movie from 2006.

the only other horror movie from 2006 that i saw was An American Haunting, which also sucked. not as bad as The Descent, but it didnt make much sense by the end. if The Exorcism of Emily Rose came out in '06, then i saw that too. it was good. oh yeah, also the Hills Have Eyes remake was pretty good.



So demons would have been acceptable, but humanoid creatures that exist in caves are too far fetched and lame?

it is pretty far fetched that a race of blind humans could sustain itself living far underground, especially if they lack the physical gifts of most animals, which would allow them to take down six women ...in their own element.

Demons on the other hand, dont require any particular logic. and all i said was that i thought they were gonna be demons - i never said that if they were demons it would have been a better movie.


They didn't look inept, they looked like humanoids with the same vulnerabilities as any other humanoid. They can't take a pickaxe to the forehead. I'm sure they could have used one singular, invincible creature that could not die until the last 10 minutes of the movie, but there was no need for that. Hordes of dangerous creatures are just as effective as one virtually unkillable creature.

no. they looked fucking inept. they were getting their asses handed to them by a bunch of chicks. they often appeared akward and uncoordinated while scrapping with these women. these so called "perfectly evolved creatures" were being outsmarted and outfought at every turn. they were just fodder. i dont know how you can not see that.

i'm telling you right now that the movie could have been a classic if A: it had more talented actors, and B: it would have shown alot less of the monsters. a lot less. being stuck in a cave is creepy enough, and that can be compounded by the question of there being something frightning lurking.

what they did with this movie was go for the low-brow audience instead of try to make a classic. that or the director didnt have confidence in the story so they showed a slimey creature or some other gore in every other scene.


The bones statment... I think it's fairly implied that these creatures have to leave the caves in search of food.

okay. again, my question is: if they can barely take down some women trapped in a cave, then how are they gonna take down some deer out in the wild? other than the ability to climb up cave walls... somehow... they apparently lacked any physical prowess above and beyond any human - which doesn't cut it in the wild. do you see what i'm sayin'?

[Downunder]

I dunno about barely take down some women, those shelias got pwned.

BTW did you see the real version with the proper ending?

[Impact!]

Proper ending?

[Champion of Europa]

^ Good. I want you to rent this movie.

I saw it in theaters three times. I loved it each time. It's a proper horror film.

[KillerWolf]

^ okay. good. we have a difference of opinion. and you're right. it is a proper horror film. most horror films are pretty terrible. the movie stays true to the genre for sure.

proper horror film - yes.

my point is that i would not have seen it had it not been represented as something more.

[Shaggy]

I didnt see it but I did pick up the Unrated version the other day for only $3 from Gamestop

[Blitz]

no. they looked fucking inept. they were getting their asses handed to them by a bunch of chicks.
So you would have found it more believable if the monsters "got their asses handed to them" by a group of men?
they often appeared akward and uncoordinated while scrapping with these women.
What, are they supposed to have teamwork workshops down there or something?
these so called "perfectly evolved creatures" were being outsmarted and outfought at every turn. they were just fodder. i dont know how you can not see that.
Fairly sure they meant perfectly evolved to exist deep underground, not just a generall "pefectly evolved".

[Downunder]

Proper ending?

There are 2 endings, the Yanks cut the last few minutes off the movie so it had a "happy ending" - completely destroying the movie in the process.

[RBM]

I'm sure cavedwelling humanoids aren't exactly used to having to really fight at all. They're probably mostly scavengers/pack hunters that aren't used to having to defend their homes. Particularly against humans who are clearly superior to them in intelligence and also happen to be wielding pickaxes. Granted, it's 'their element' but they're still mortal creatures.

As someone else pointed out, they aren't perfectly evolved in general, just merely evolved for cave dwelling. Surely a group of spelunker chicks can make that assumption based on how their eyes react from the light of their flashlights and the way they move and whatnot.

You could probably break down a lot of movies based on the antagonist of the movie clearly being able to decimate the protagonists with relative ease, but they don't for reasons of uh... wanting the movie to be longer than 20 minutes?

The actresses in the movie were irrelevent. This was a horror/thriller movie that revolved completely around human/cave humanoid interaction. This was not a drama based on the lives of these women. The women they had were fine.

Hell, I'm sure they could have done the whole movie without any monsters at all. They could have simply had the bones, the cave drawings, screeching sounds, the pools of blood, etc. and had the women pick themselves off through paranoia, and that might have made a pretty good movie. They didn't go that route and they didn't really have to.

Again, they could have been scavengers for the most part. Speed, reflexes and pack hunting will net you enough food to eat in the wilderness. Or maybe they had some humanistic tricks. Once upon a time we as humans were able to get by just fine in the wilderness without guns and traps and whatnot.

[Crimson]

lol at this guy breaking down this movie's flaws. Anybody could do this to ANY movie . This movie kicked ass .

[KillerWolf]

So you would have found it more believable if the monsters "got their asses handed to them" by a group of men?

a little bit. yeah.

look, dude... in one scene, one of these things bites the fucking skull of a human being in half. in the next scenes they're being slaughtered two and three at a time by a woman with a little pick axe. are we supposed to believe that they have extremely powerful jaw muscles, but the rest of there body doesnt match up with a woman? please dont go there.

[KillerWolf]

I'm sure cavedwelling humanoids aren't exactly used to having to really fight at all. They're probably mostly scavengers/pack hunters that aren't used to having to defend their homes. Particularly against humans who are clearly superior to them in intelligence and also happen to be wielding pickaxes. Granted, it's 'their element' but they're still mortal creatures.

the thing is that based on their lack of intelegence and apparent lack of physical gifts, they would have died out a long time ago.

As someone else pointed out, they aren't perfectly evolved in general, just merely evolved for cave dwelling. Surely a group of spelunker chicks can make that assumption based on how their eyes react from the light of their flashlights and the way they move and whatnot.

perfectly evolved for cave dwelling is one thing, but it takes more than the ability to live in a cave for a species as big as a human to survive over time.

You could probably break down a lot of movies based on the antagonist of the movie clearly being able to decimate the protagonists with relative ease, but they don't for reasons of uh... wanting the movie to be longer than 20 minutes?

The actresses in the movie were irrelevent. This was a horror/thriller movie that revolved completely around human/cave humanoid interaction. This was not a drama based on the lives of these women. The women they had were fine.

Hell, I'm sure they could have done the whole movie without any monsters at all. They could have simply had the bones, the cave drawings, screeching sounds, the pools of blood, etc. and had the women pick themselves off through paranoia, and that might have made a pretty good movie. They didn't go that route and they didn't really have to.

yes. excellent point. my point exactly. this is a typical horror movie. the reason i'm flaming this movie is because it was represented to be something more than a typical dumb horror movie, which it wasn't.

Again, they could have been scavengers for the most part. Speed, reflexes and pack hunting will net you enough food to eat in the wilderness. Or maybe they had some humanistic tricks. Once upon a time we as humans were able to get by just fine in the wilderness without guns and traps and whatnot.

yeah, except these things are blind and live in caves. and without our inventive brains, we humans would have died out a long time ago too.

[KillerWolf]

lol at this guy breaking down this movie's flaws. Anybody could do this to ANY movie . This movie kicked ass .

LOL ? Are ya ?

but, yeah, you're right. it's not hard to pick apart plot devices in almost any film. and this movie has a lot of really stupid ones. and that is not my bag, necessarilly, going around picking apart movies based on there plot holes. i only have a problem with it when a movie is represented to be an intellegent story, or in this case, truly scary and a good movie overall, of which it was neither.

[Fryza]

Meh, I don't do gore.

Oh, and the 2006 horror films were Pulse, An American Haunting, Hills Have Eyes, and Wicker Man. Not really a good selection anyway.

[Champion of Europa]

KillerWolf, I'm curious, what movies do you LIKE?

[Crimson]

I agree with the part where the chicks all of a sudden started killing these things like they were pro's. But I just went with the flow and took it as these girls being extreme with their lives and they took kickboxing/karate classes.

[Rammsteinmad]

It was ok. Nothing great though.

Seeing it once was enough.

[bigdaddysuperfreak]

This movie was horrible. Between the shitty acting, non sensical story line and golum rip off creatures, I was sick of the movie a lil over a half hour in. The only reason I watched the whole thing was that I was over my friends house and they were watching it.

[KillerWolf]

KillerWolf, I'm curious, what movies do you LIKE?

seriously?

it's too many to list. i have a collection of about 150 DVDs and 100 or so VHS. almost all movies that i like; except a few that are ones that my wife likes and i dont. ( i always rent before i buy movies.) There are a couple of abortions in there, like Spawn and Children of the Corn.

i'm not some pretentious fag who acts like everything made after the 1940s is crap. i actually think that the '90s were a great time for movies.

i dont have a lot of comedies or horror movies. now, i enjoy a good comedy, but the fact is that most comedies are good for a couple of laughs and then fall into predictability (and a lot of smut). same thing goes for horror movies - 95 percent crap. the ones that i have, i consider to be almost too good to be lumped into those categories , like The Big Lebowski, for example.

You're also not going to find stuff like UltraViolet, Aeon Flux, that vampire vs. werewolf pile of shit with the heroine sheek loooking chick, anything with Jessica Simpson, or any of those movies where walking bad stereotypes have to have a dancing competition to save their.....school or some shit.

point being that a lot of people on these threads like those movies (except the dance-off movies). i dont. i think they're crap.

and i'll tell something else. stupid movies are fine as long as they aren't made to be taken seriously. for example: i like the movie The Big Hit. It's stupid as hell, but in a good way, so it works. Now that i think about it, if The Descent would have been more of a horror-comedy, a parody of itself, if you will, i probably would have liked it.

[Downunder]

The Big Lebowski has got to be the most overrated movie on tpww - absolute garbage.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I haven't seen The Descent, but I must say that I respect your opinion. I fucking hate Napoleon Dynamite. Part of the reason is that I believe movies often get over-hyped.

I actually saw someone give Little Miss Sunshine a bad review. Little Miss fucking Sunshine. They were apparently too "hyped" for the movie, and it let them down.

Perhaps this movie was over-hyped to you, and whilst watching it you saw it's flaws, rather than its successes? I personally believe some great movies need to be discovered for yourself. Perhaps this film is one of them?

Anyway, I am none too big on the horror genre. All they're good for is helping guys get chicks into bed. One day I want to see a movie about smart people being killed. Not just smart people, but relatable people. Call me a pussy, but I do not do weed. I cannot relate to people who do. I see a character doing weed in a horror film, I distance myself from them, and when they get hacked up, I don't feel a thing.

There are two ways to make people relatable. One is to create the illusion of a blank canvas, where the viewer writers their own story for the character, and can project themselves onto them. The other is to create a character so detailed, that you feel their life presence, and when they are killed, you kind of feel sorry for them.

Most horror films just have 2D characters go into basements and get slashed up. Oh, the terror. :|

Oh, and gore does not equate to horror, mmmkay, Eli Roth?

[KillerWolf]

The Big Lebowski has got to be the most overrated movie on tpww - absolute garbage.

that is an outrageous statement, sir.

bare with me just for a moment here. is it possible that you have only seen the movie once, and it just didnt capture your imagination at the time that you saw it ?

other than that, I don't see how anyone could call The Big Lebowski "absolute garbage"

[Downunder]

No I've actually seen it twice, after everone on here wanked about it I got it out on DVD and watched it again, thinking I missed something.

I hadn't.

[KillerWolf]

Perhaps this movie was over-hyped to you, and whilst watching it you saw it's flaws, rather than its successes?

over-hyped is a little too strong of a word, but i definitely went into it expecting more than an average dumb horror flick.

One day I want to see a movie about smart people being killed. Not just smart people, but relatable people.

definitely. horror movies miss the mark when the characters in them fail to act the way a person would act in their situation. The Descent failed to capture the horror of six women trapped in the dark, deep underground, being preyed upon by monsters.

also, if you have only seen Napolean Dynamite once, i would give it at least another chance. i though it was okay the first time i saw it - hillarious the second time.

[Champion of Europa]

seriously?

it's too many to list. i have a collection of about 150 DVDs and 100 or so VHS. almost all movies that i like; except a few that are ones that my wife likes and i dont. ( i always rent before i buy movies.) There are a couple of abortions in there, like Spawn and Children of the Corn.

i'm not some pretentious fag who acts like everything made after the 1940s is crap. i actually think that the '90s were a great time for movies.

i dont have a lot of comedies or horror movies. now, i enjoy a good comedy, but the fact is that most comedies are good for a couple of laughs and then fall into predictability (and a lot of smut). same thing goes for horror movies - 95 percent crap. the ones that i have, i consider to be almost too good to be lumped into those categories , like The Big Lebowski, for example.

You're also not going to find stuff like UltraViolet, Aeon Flux, that vampire vs. werewolf pile of shit with the heroine sheek loooking chick, anything with Jessica Simpson, or any of those movies where walking bad stereotypes have to have a dancing competition to save their.....school or some shit.

point being that a lot of people on these threads like those movies (except the dance-off movies). i dont. i think they're crap.

and i'll tell something else. stupid movies are fine as long as they aren't made to be taken seriously. for example: i like the movie The Big Hit. It's stupid as hell, but in a good way, so it works. Now that i think about it, if The Descent would have been more of a horror-comedy, a parody of itself, if you will, i probably would have liked it.

You're still a pretentious fag, just one who hates most everything horror.

[KillerWolf]

You're still a pretentious fag, just one who hates most everything horror.

pretentious???

as in not genuine??

okay. pretentious about what?

how have i struck you as being not genuine?

[Champion of Europa]

pretentious???

as in not genuine??

okay. pretentious about what?

how have i struck you as being not genuine?

It seems like you only try to bash movies that are genuinely well liked by critics so you can appear edgy and rebellious.

[KillerWolf]

It seems like you only try to bash movies that are genuinely well liked by critics so you can appear edgy and rebellious.

when a movie that would not normally be my cup of tea gets good reviews and is represented to be more than what i might have expected, i may go ahead and rent it. then i get a little pissed when it turns out to be exactly the kind of garbage that i expected before reading the good reviews.

i'll bash any movie that i see and dont like. im not gonna bash Employee of the Month because i havnt seen it. i never will see it because i know that it's a peice of shit just from watching the trailer. There is no critical acclaim that would make me think that maybe my initial feeling is wrong.

btw, you asked me what movies i LIKE, and i answered your question as best i could. and what i get from you is ..."well, your still a fag." which i thought was pretty weak.

am i overly-critical of movies. most people would say yes. it's not like its fun being this way, but to me it seems like they just keep coming out with the same shit over and over.

so overly critical: maybe, but i am also quick to point out movies that exceed my expectations.

pretentious: never.

and speaking of not being pretentious, i havn't written anything here or anywhere else that i wouldnt say to you if we were sitting in the same room.

[Champion of Europa]

when a movie that would not normally be my cup of tea gets good reviews and is represented to be more than what i might have expected, i may go ahead and rent it. then i get a little pissed when it turns out to be exactly the kind of garbage that i expected before reading the good reviews.

i'll bash any movie that i see and dont like. im not gonna bash Employee of the Month because i havnt seen it. i never will see it because i know that it's a peice of shit just from watching the trailer. There is no critical acclaim that would make me think that maybe my initial feeling is wrong.

btw, you asked me what movies i LIKE, and i answered your question as best i could. and what i get from you is ..."well, your still a fag." which i thought was pretty weak.

am i overly-critical of movies. most people would say yes. it's not like its fun being this way, but to me it seems like they just keep coming out with the same shit over and over.

so overly critical: maybe, but i am also quick to point out movies that exceed my expectations.

pretentious: never.

and speaking of not being pretentious, i havn't written anything here or anywhere else that i wouldnt say to you if we were sitting in the same room.

None of that changes the fact that I think you're pretentious.

Also, when I asked you what movies you do like, you went into more detail about what you don't like than what you do. This seems to say something about you as a person.

[KillerWolf]

None of that changes the fact that I think you're pretentious.

okay. well screw it, then. i'm not gonna pretend to care if you wanna pretend to know something about me.

Also, when I asked you what movies you do like, you went into more detail about what you don't like than what you do. This seems to say something about you as a person.

did I ???

does it ???

[Champion of Europa]

okay. well screw it, then. i'm not gonna pretend to care if you wanna pretend to know something about me.



did I ???

does it ???

Yeah, you said you liked Big Lebowski and Big Hit, then went into big explanations of shit you don't like. Remember? It's on this page.

And a brief aside, do you only like movies with the word Big in the title? If so, I'd like to recommend:

Big
Big Trouble in Little China

and that's all the movies I can think of with the word Big in the title.

[Blitz]

Big Trouble in Little China is phenomenal

[Impact!]

There are 2 endings, the Yanks cut the last few minutes off the movie so it had a "happy ending" - completely destroying the movie in the process.
So what's the true ending?

[Blitz]

The original (british one) where she never gets out of the cave

[Downunder]

Blitz is correct