**** SPOILER ALERT ****Opens with a 'climate change crisis' Intro. Plot then veers completely off-topic. Storyline: expounds almost same premise as 'The Edge' ie. city folk do photo-shoot on location in the arctic circle. Hopelessly out-of-their- depth they then run foul of a man-eating stuffed trophy animal/live grizzly bear. Foregrounding: enter said stuffed trophy bear. An experimental subject, an actual bear is shown, gets loose in a research station that has no stated research goal. The prop from this point onward is a fluffy, plush stuffed trophy bear with maybe a bear tooth denture plate stuck in its mouth. Development: A bear has been noticed entering the NP-2 corridors on cctv by a brilliant researcher, stroke of brilliance she hails her genius-level colleagues at their galley by intercom to warn. They are not there. The formidable scientists that she aims to warn of danger continue on a path toward their death, she persistently hails the galley intercom in her 'genuine' desperation to save them. She hails it over, and over again; a room, it happens, in which nobody is present anyway. Hollywood did NOT foresee that possibility. Yeh right.Said scientist flees, escapes research station in panic, leaves door open ..bear escapes. Main protagonists story arc now begins... Cliché 1950's b+w horror genre except with color. I mean, the budget is post-Silent Movie Era, pre-Star Trek/Space Family Robinson/Jaws theatre stage-prop production quality. Not much of a serious production effort in the Art department. No amount of performing art in the medium of empty space/stage is going to cover for the captured image. OrCue 'The Edge' with Anthony Hopkins and Alec Baldwin also Elle MacPheersom. It is a way better film production.'Un-Natural' movie is a complete fraud.

This movie is born out of childish imagination, nonsensical stuff put together in a random order, and childish knowledge about science: the scene with the lighter thrown in the car's tank followed by the explosion is nightmarish: are people on Earth who know that little about chemistry?The creature is hilariously conceived, without the slightest drop of realism. Characters' attitudes and reactions are non-realistic as well. You don't really feel their fear, it's more like an appearance of fear. Their actions are random. The creature appears out of nowhere, disappears in the same manner,being kind of omnipresent. Sorry guys, for me is a no- no.

Unnatural has the feel of a 90's horror. There's a straightforward simplicity and almost an innocence about this film that sets it apart from the standard 21st century fare. Lets start by stating the obvious. This is a "B" movie and I'll review it on that basis. Its in no way exceptional but in one sense its refreshing. Its not gratuitously violent and it has a simple premise thats not really all that new but it is moderately entertaining. The cast do a reasonable if not exceptional job and for myself I rather enjoyed this film. I also liked its message about the responsibility of corporations and science to be good governors to the planet and not destroyers. All in all, a nice little horror flick. Don't come to it with exaggerated expectations, its not a horror master class but it is certainly watchable. Six out of ten from me.

Hank Braxtan brings us our third killer bear film of 2015.'Into The Grizzly Maze,' didn't live up to expectations, with it's major cast, and horrible editing, more fit for television than big screen. 'Backcountry,' on the other hand, exceeded expectations, as more of a survival flick, with one gruesome kill scene. So, how does 'Unnatural' hold up? Creature features really depend on the type of director/writer involved. Are they less is more kind of guys, or do they believe in going all out? Believe it or not, bears are rather frightening and dangerous without being genetically modified (Backcountry.) Personally, I would have preferred your normal, ornery, territorial polar bear, but Hank Braxtan wasn't having any of that. He decided to overcompensate for something... So, what could have been a solid experience, ended up being 'Into The Grizzly Maze' set in Alaska. 'Unnatural' just throws in an unnecessary back story about genetics, that no one will care about. We just want to see the bear rip through those typical, annoying characters - played by your typical bad actors/actresses. Oh yes, the cast - Somehow, James Remar continues to get work - and he's as wooden as ever here. Seriously, though, this guy supplies more wood than your local paper mill. Graham Greene pops up for about 3 minutes of screen time (It's nice to see he's still alive.) Sherilyn Fenn may or may not be involved here. I couldn't really tell - She used to be attractive.Random Ramblings of a Madman: If you're going to spend 95% of the film avoiding actual shots of your enormous, genetically modified bear, why not just, you know, use a regular sized Polar bear? I hear those things pack a mean bite. 'Unnatural,' however, does not.