Somewhere there must be a director's cut of this, or an alternate version, or an extended version that must make more sense that the disjointed, chopped up, quite tame version of a book that seduces, ensnares, and repels you sometimes simultaneously. It's truly disappointing because the casting was pretty impressive, in particular Malone. There is some very impressive camera work, and a couple of moments where the audience is bound to jump, but the soul of the book is lost because the monster of the film is as scary as a plate full of cilantro.
The beginning of the film is quite promising, and knowing the author adapted his own book, one keeps hoping it will retain its spirit, but when the first character is dismissed, in a very shocking manner, one wonders why the rest of the cast wasn't dispatched pretty much in the next two minutes, saving us some listless sequences.
When reading the book, the scenes in the tunnel are some of the most horrifying and claustrophobic in memory, as we witness tragedy after tragedy, and some very horrifying moments. We've seen how scary scenes in these setting can be. For example, "The Cave" plunges you into hell, as darkness is as scary as anything can be, when well timed suggestive flashes can be. In "The Ruins", it looks like Christmas Trees were used to attack the girls, and let's not even go to the flowers' looks and sound special effects.
I was wondering where this film was made since the humidity of the Yucatan peninsula seemed to have dissipated along with any signals of common sense. Is Hollywood capable of doing something right, even with original material? Or is it easier just to pillage what worked in the cinema before and do a half-hearted remake? On the other hand, if this works, maybe someone will make a sequel and fix everything that didn't work here. Now that sounds like some original thinking.
The beginning of the film is quite promising, and knowing the author adapted his own book, one keeps hoping it will retain its spirit, but when the first character is dismissed, in a very shocking manner, one wonders why the rest of the cast wasn't dispatched pretty much in the next two minutes, saving us some listless sequences.
When reading the book, the scenes in the tunnel are some of the most horrifying and claustrophobic in memory, as we witness tragedy after tragedy, and some very horrifying moments. We've seen how scary scenes in these setting can be. For example, "The Cave" plunges you into hell, as darkness is as scary as anything can be, when well timed suggestive flashes can be. In "The Ruins", it looks like Christmas Trees were used to attack the girls, and let's not even go to the flowers' looks and sound special effects.
I was wondering where this film was made since the humidity of the Yucatan peninsula seemed to have dissipated along with any signals of common sense. Is Hollywood capable of doing something right, even with original material? Or is it easier just to pillage what worked in the cinema before and do a half-hearted remake? On the other hand, if this works, maybe someone will make a sequel and fix everything that didn't work here. Now that sounds like some original thinking.