Am not one to watch horror films, but after recording it a few days before decided to watch in daytime in my home office. Was not 100% present to watching it, but if I thought I missed something, I rewound & watched again. Kind of bloody, kind of silly, kind of scary, but passed the time enough for me to want to look up all the info on this film on IMDb. Director seems to have his niche and good actors seem to have nice careers. So...bottom line.....I wonder if there will be a D in D 2 ? I doubt it, but would I watch it? Yes!

If one finds no way to while away time by ANY means one can watch this movie. The "isolates" look disgusting, not frightening. What is the reason of them staying in underground crypts? And no one, in the whole world, can do anything about them? Even the village, where the protagonist comes for peace of mind is not shown in all greatness.-complete lack of any logic in storyline. Even if it is taken that it is a horror movie in which no scientific logic is needed, the narration, too, is very poor and I almost changed channel, not withstanding. No unexpected twists. No surprise horrors. And the ending - Oops!!!! Cinematography involving the isolates is not clear. BGM average. Better film next time.

Moving can be tough, meeting new people in new environment and wondering whether they are mentally sound or downright brainwashed drones. Deep in the Darkness plays with the sense of seclusion and lack of familiarity to its advantage, up until halfway point. There lies a few good thrills in store, however the plot falls apart as the so called creature looks lees authentic as the movie progresses and some of the decisions the characters make are so ridiculously bad it feels like a parody.Dr. Michael Cayle (Sean Patrick Thomas) moves with his family to the small town of Ashborough. He works as the town's doctor and it seems like the people are nice enough, but strange occurrences begin to haunt him and his family. Sean Patrick Thomas performs his best, his character may be the most logically sound as he displays seemingly genius reactions. The confusion and anger he feels are just, they are almost expected from a man who is now confined against his will.Most of the actors also do their part well, the setting of the quiet and secretive town is eerie in moderation. Unfortunately, as the secrets are revealed, the plot stumbles significantly. The movie provides a few suspenseful scenes at early act, yet it ventures to the realm of comically bad decisions. Characters would do the least beneficial things for their survival.Not to mention there are plenty of scenes which are near supernatural just because the plot deems it. This creates a repetitive theme and considerably slows down the pace. The more the movie displays the threat, the less effective they become. At latter half it loses momentum as silly plot devices and character interactions erase any mirage of the thrill.Deep in the Darkness slowly weaves questions and threats, they play out decently with contrasting quaint back drop of the small town. Sadly, neither the revelation nor the conclusion has any touch of appropriate horror to be taken seriously.

i loved it until the first sighting of the creatures in the window.I think it was a creature anyways.I shut it off since i wsasnt scared and there was zero suspense left.Too many otherwise good movies get ruined by the "monster(s)" being silly.I always say-less is more..and the more left to the imagination the better.I wish film makers would work on suspense and mystery and atmosphere and stop ruining their movies by revealing the creature or monster or whatever it is too soon.Worse yet is they kill spookiness with lame obvious plot devices and scenarios.Oh well.Too bad.If you're interested in a movie but OK with little to no suspense or mystery or spookiness,then give it a try.