Night Underworld

Having been a fan of horror and Supernatural film for 40 years I was estatic to FINALLY watch a movie that recreated the next realm of terror in FILM! From acting to plot this series needs a follow-up sequel! I would certain like to see the hero come back to help guide his loved ones to the light!!!! I was so effected by the last moments of that movie just looking at them through the window that I remembered some of my dearly departed friends who I've lost over the years and thought about myself in the same situation. I recommend this movie not just to the newer fans of the genre but the veterans who have taken interest in the best of our FILM past. This is my first review as an old timer and I'm extremely pleased to back up this FILM! Worth your time and money and I'm happy to put my belief there will be a Nightworld 2, with the same actors.....there needs to be! Enjoy!!!!!!

The film begins with great promise, even with Robert Englund as a main actor. The pacing is good, the ghosts are classic, the nightmare sequences nicely done and very creepy. Then, in the last 15 or so minutes everything falls apart and the thing becomes a zombie flick. That's great if you don't think zombies are the stupidest idea to ever be filmed. But for any thinking student of the Horror genre, this film quickly becomes an utter waste of time. Disgusting. Oh, and the director must have never heard of takes. Otherwise the lead character would have said his line "every single time" instead of the footage in Take One.

source: Night Underworld

While it's not unusual in this day and age to come across a B movie that was filmed in Bulgaria to cut costs, this is one of the few shot in Bulgaria B movies where the action is actually set in Bulgaria. That fact gave the movie some novelty, but the movie does have a few other strengths. Although the movie deals with supernatural stuff, it does so in a way that often feels more believable than in other supernatural horror movies. The characters act in way that is plausible, and their dialogue also comes across as realistic. The direction also for the most part comes across in a moody and atmospheric manner that is effective at times, more so than if a more blood and guts approach been executed. However, there are some significant problems with the movie all the same. While I won't reveal what happens at the end, I will mention that the ending feels unfinished, leaving the viewer hanging on several plot details that were introduced earlier but never properly resolved. The biggest problem with the movie, however, is that it is really slow and drawn out. While I wasn't bored at any moment, all the same I could feel a lot of padding. Although I am giving the movie a marginal recommendation, at the same time potential viewers should know that they aren't missing anything too significant should they be unable to watch it.

'Nightworld' had enough to intrigue me to watch it. It is hard not to enjoy Robert Englund, responsible for creating one of horror's most iconic villains, the concept was great and sounded really interesting and the advertising was cool. Despite it being lowly rated on here most of the reviews were better than average, so it was decided that 'Nightworld' should be given a go as part of my modest/low budget film completest quest (one of many recently). My overall impression was 'Nightworld' was that while it wasn't great and didn't fully live up to its potential, being an example of a film of two halves, it was not a bad film at all. An average effort with a number of good things and definitely one of my better modest/low budget film viewings recently, which mostly has not been fulfilling. Seeing a film that wasn't bad was something of a refreshment even if it was still heavily problematic. Will agree with everybody who has said that 'Nightworld' starts off really well. It had a slick look, an ominous ambience accentuated by a suitably moody score and assured direction and an interesting mystery being set up quite nicely. Acting too was better than average. The best performance of course comes from Robert Englund, who is just magnetic. Jason London is a credible lead also. The secret reveal didn't feel like it was revealed too prematurely and some of the scripting provoked thought. Like everybody else here, for me however the second half, especially the final third, was a let down and felt like a different film entirely. The pacing starts feeling very rushed and jumpy and too many things feel underdeveloped or worse unresolved, a real sense of incompleteness and implausibility here. 'Nightworld works much better as a slow-burner and should have stayed that way and about 10 minutes longer perhaps would have helped clear up at least a few of the loose ends and confusion. Production values lose their slickness and instead become drab and chaotic, especially the photography, and the script gets very cheesy, overly silly and also verbose. There is an exception to the quality of the generally better than average acting, and that's an all over the place Gianni Capaldi and the inconsistent and not buyable for a second accent is only one of the problems. Overall, very promising first half but also a disappointing final third, rounding it out as an average film. 5/10 Bethany Cox

This film tells the story of an ex-cop widower (his wife committed suicide) who gets a job in a strange house. His job is a sort of security guard. Every morning he has to check the CCTV of a pitch black mystery room that is kept locked. The film is quite a slow burn mystery-horror. However you don't get to the real horror part until about 10mins from the end. Then it seems quite rushed and the film is over. Nothing is really explained or resolved. The acting was good and the atmosphere was well created. However the ex-cop widower seems quite blaise about it all. He doesn't seem bothered that they have multiple cameras in a room that is in pitch black. He doesn't seem bothered about the fact the man that is sent to him when he does see something on the camera is blind. I mean wouldn't you stop and think that maybe it was a bit stupid sending someone blind when you spotted something on CCTV. Also why did the guy bother coming out to him?? He could have described it down the phone. Also at the end when he has his new girlfriend who is bleeding to death and his wife who has come back from the dead either side of him. He doesn't seem to comprehend the situation that he finds himself in. In fact the whole film he seems un-bothered by everything going on. The only time he seems to come alive and horrified is when he wakes up late. The main thing I thought about while watching this is that the lead actor looks like he should be Tom Hanks brother. If they ever do a sequel to this then you might want to watch this. However I would really not bother. The end of the film just makes you feel like you have lost 90mins. Or just watch the last 15mins, you won't miss much.

Wow this movie was a big pile of nothing. Which is a shame because it seemed like it was going to be quality from the first 10 minutes. Then later on it gets silly, and cheesy, like something on syfy. The dark tone of the movie quickly changes when Robert Englund shows up, and it starts to become a parody of itself. Was the movie afraid of taking itself too seriously?

Starring Jason London and Robert Englund, "Nightworld" is directed by Patricio Valladares. London plays a retired LAPD officer who lives in Bulgaira. He's haunted by nightmares of his ex-wife killing herself, and to try and get him back in the swing of things he's convinced to take mundane job in Sofia as a night watch security guard. He finds the job easy enough but soon suspects that a lot more is occurring that he isn't aware of. Soon enough he's standing up against the ghosts of the dead, with the former head of security (played by Englund) to stop them entering the realm of the living. While the film is based on a decent concept, its delivery is poor. I think it's the pace of the film which is really the biggest negative - it feels like nothing happens until the last 20 mins, and anything that does happen is really dis-jointed and pointless. Things happen for little reasoning, there isn't much motivation on display, and character development isn't really achieved. It also feels like it's been done before too; it feels like a few of the Hammer House of Horror TV mini-series episodes and I can't quite put my finger on which one. London looks like he's sleepwalked through this; he doesn't come across as convincing, or even bothered. Englund is average at best - I suspect this was pay check rather than the draw of a decent character to portray. As well as having a ever changing bad accent, he's portraying a blind man who can't see TV screens but needs to assess issues while sitting next to it, he can't recognise the direction voices are coming from, but he knows how to hit things with his cane alright. The best acting came from Lorina Kamburova as far as authenticity is concerned. However she also suffers from the pace of the film - one minute she's watching London from a far, the next she's jumping him and tearing her clothes off. I expected a little more depth from her character based on her area of expertise - like maybe she'd be able to translate the symbols on the door!!! Her downfall was being mortally wounded at the end, the delivery of that was actually quite comical. Some of the other acting performances were downright bad, there's one character (watch it and it'll be obvious) who's accent changes from East End London cockney, to Scottish, the American, the Eastern European - all within the same monologue. The film wasn't terrible, but it's definitely not brilliant either. I pride myself on watching bad movies and B-Movies and I have to be honest, the first 20-30 mins was hard work and boring. I was tempted to switch it off. I stuck with it all the same, and can confirm that the ending was as bad as the start. I don't think I'd watch this again given the choice, and if I were recommending cheesy films to friends, this one wouldn't be on the list of ones to watch. This gets a 3 out of 10 from me - could have been so much better, definitely not much of a horror/thriller film, but not offensive to my senses.

Brett Anderson (Jason London) suffers from nightmares and Robert Englund is not in them. He dreams about his wife killing herself by cutting her own throat in front of him. Yes he was the boring. On the advice of his friend, he takes a job as security for an apartment building not in Brooklyn Heights, but Bulgaria where he is living as an ex-pat. He has specific instructions to guard a huge door by watching cameras of the hanger inside. He has questions, but gets no answers. He makes friends with a local girl. The film is similar to a 1977 classic and could be connected to it. However this film is rather boring until it is almost over. Maybe if they had done something more with the door markings, which I thought he was going to do with his art history major as a friend. But they just had sex. Guide: F-word.Sex. No nudity.

I found this very slow, it never really kicks in. Robert Englund can't even save this one.