Alone in the Dark

Alone in the Dark

Plot:

There’s some kind of evil race of monsters, or something. And there’s a detective who’s part monster or something who’s trying to stop them. And also, there are soldiers, and a mad scientist, and a lady who’s supposed to be a scientist even though she doesn’t do anything smart, and zombies, and some German guy who keeps making movies ‘cause no one will stop him, and my head hurts, and...

Comments:

Ah yes, it’s finally arrived! My review of a film that has received exactly one positive notice on Rotten Tomatoes.

With ‘Alone in the Dark’ Uwe Boll proves that if you give him $20,000,000, he can make a film that looks every bit as good as one of those Sci-fi Channel original pictures they shoot in Czechoslovakia.

The plot, wait, was there a plot? *Flips through Notes* Oh yes, there was apparently something that was supposed to be going on here. As evidence I can only cite the famous five minute exposition crawl at the beginning of the film. As is standing operating procedure for talentless filmmakers, that which could charitably be called plot in this film is shoveled at us in the form of narration, rather than being shown to us. There are very few games that can claim to be as Lovecraftian as the original ‘Alone in the Dark’. Boll’s version bears some passing resemblance to the re-worked plot of ‘AitD: The New Nightmare’, but aside from unconvincing digital beasts, a fictional Indian tribe and the name of the protagonist, this plot is pure Uwe Boll.

Despite the overall stink of incompetence, it’s the odd little touches that make Boll’s work what it truly is. Carnby’s odd Phillip Marlowe-esque thought monologues that keep going over things we already knew and didn’t care about the first time. The unwarranted use of “bullet time”. The exposition twins; a pair of fat, dumpy security guards whose sole purpose is to lay out all the pesky backstory and character development that Boll otherwise would have no idea how to convey. (At least he’s trying!)
It’s almost as if Uwe Boll thinks we’re even dumber than he is. (And where I come from, "Dumb as Uwe Boll" is a killing insult.)

Boll has a way with people; this film boasts not one convincing performance. Tara Reid plays the female scientist, Carnby’s girlfriend. (You know she’s a brilliant scientist, because she wears glasses.) Ms. Reid has an eerie talent for dialog. She can make lines like “What time is it?” and “I’d like a sandwich, please.” seem forced and artificial. Christian Slater gives the kind of performance you’d expect from someone fresh out of rehab. (Again.) During the course of the film, he basically just blinks a lot in lieu of emoting, and tries not to giggle at the asinine dialog he’s expected to spit out. (And I’m still trying to figure out how an ill-respected paranormal investigator affords a spacious, professionally decorated apartment.)

Don’t look to the secondary cast, except perhaps to be moved by pity. While not up to the same level of miscasting as ‘Bram Stoker’s (yeah, right) Dracula’ , Boll has a knack for casting players in roles they couldn’t reach with a stepladder and one of those mechanical arms old people use to put their canned goods away.

The dialogue is incandescently dumb. That which is not stilted is utterly cliché. In fact the whole production is stewed in plagiarism, and steals plot elements as well as entire scenes from such films as ‘The Mummy’ and ‘The Evil Dead’ .

I think it’s pretty easy to foresee that Boll will never, ever, make a good film. Unlike ‘House of the Dead’ however, ‘Alone’ isn’t even giddily stupid enough to keep anyone interested. It’s a sloppy work made by a cynical hack, and even for connoisseurs of crap it is a disappointment.

Quality = 0.0 Cheesy Enjoyability = 5.0