Unnatural (2015) Reviews

• Tension, good kills, grizzly violence n nudity r all lacking in this film.

  Fella_shibby2018-01-21

  Saw this on a rented dvd. The poster was very convincing n so was the Alaska set up but the movie wasnt good. Period. The creature was pathetic but i will still forgive that coz of the budget. The poster had a menacing bear though. A low budget creature film without any good kills, nudity n tension zero. Two female models r doing a bikini photo shoot in the snowy Alaska n we dont even get to see good tits. There is a lousy sex scene that too without any nudity. Most of the kills r offscreen n the grizzly violence is pathetic. In fact some of the old bear movies has better kills. Grizzly made in the 70s, n among the new ones, Backcountry n Grizzly park were decent too. I hav yet to see Into the grizzly maze. Since imdb has allowed shorter reviews, so from now on i will make a shorter review for bad horror films. Yeehaw!

• Unwatchable

  dcarsonhagy2015-11-14

  Have you ever watched a movie and after it was finished you said to yourself (or maybe outloud) "This should have never been made"? Such is the case for After Dark's installment of "Unnatural." The general message of this movie was supposed to be a statement on global warming, climate crisis, melting of the polar icecaps, glacier loss--take your pick. However, somewhere along the way, all that got lost and what you got stuck with was a poor attempt at schlock. It seems that a photographer, his lackey, and two bimbos are off somewhere close to the Arctic Circle for a photo shoot involving fur. Once they arrive at Black Wolf Lodge, you get lots of giggling, posing, jerking about, faux sex (no nudity), and are introduced to characters you really will never care about. The viewer sees the killer bear almost immediately, so there's no tension introduced there. You then get a lot of grunts, huffing, and crackling branches to let you know he's in the vicinity. Supposedly, the particular polar bear is a freak of nature because scientists have (once again) decided to mess with mother nature. Yawn. The makeup for the beast was high-schoolish, as was most of the acting. This truly was much ado about nothing. Rated "R" and it should have been rated PG-13. Not recommended.

• Great actors in a not so great film

  BlahX102015-11-30

  Maybe if I'd never seen a movie before, this one would be worthy of more stars, but alas, I have. Having said that, now I will say even more! The bear! OMG...that sad sad sad bear! It would have been better if was made out of paper mache. Maybe I just gave some good advice for this film producer for future projects involving fake bears. I am a fan of James Remar, Gregory Cruz, Sherilyn Fenn, Graham Greene, and Ray Wise. They all gave great performances, but that didn't help this movie. They could have easily named this movie Polarbear!!!!!! Maybe with a few more or less exclamation marks. I'm not an expert on these sorts of things.

• 90's feel horror

  s32761692015-11-26

  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.

• 2015 - The Year of The Bear!

  Krackoon2015-10-22

  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.