CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Culture & Entertainment › Movies › The Descent

The Descent

Started by Carl Cruz · · 👁 11 views · 203 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Carl CruzJose Chase2cosmictrucker132Lawrence Booth2cosmicraven2Daniel Wells4Rebecca Myers38Ethan Perez97Carl Torres3Olivia Hill3Roger Allen3Daniel Bishop4darkmaker94Drew Wright5boldscout72darkviper7David Price5Abrightstag9rowdybadger41vividorca5wearygardener13Samuel Smith5Chloe Patel36 …
rowdybadger41 rowdybadger41 Active Member
72 messages
joined Jan 2008
#141 ·
Anthony Smith3 said:Great news for everyone who loves this movie... it’s finally getting a DVD release here through Continental film.

New DVD releases hitting [Continental] on February 4th.

HORROR CAVE - 20th Century Studios' Descent

Director:
Neil Marshall

Cast: Shauna Macdonald, Natalie Jackson Mendoza, Alex Reid, Saskia Mulder

Six women head out to some remote part of the Appalachians for their annual extreme outdoor adventure, looking to explore a hidden cave deep in the woods. Everything goes south when a rockslide seals the entrance, leaving them trapped. They push deeper, praying there’s another way out, only to realize they aren't alone—something else is lurking down there. It turns into a brutal fight for survival as these friends become prey, forced to rely on pure instinct to survive an endless onslaught from something truly terrifying.

🙏🙏

When is the sequel coming out?...
Rebecca Bennett2 Rebecca Bennett2 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Feb 2009
#142 ·
I went to see it yesterday without even realizing I’d actually already watched it a few years back🙄😬,honestly, I have no idea how that happens... my memory is just shot😁All in all, it was good. It definitely made me jump a couple of times. Like someone else mentioned, the core of this thing for me was the conflict between Sarah and Juno. That tension felt way more impactful than the actual "monsters," which weren't even that scary to me in the end since they managed to hold their own against them. To me, those creatures felt like a subplot; the heart of the film is really that Sarah-Juno relationship😁The standout scenes for me were 1) that look Sarah gives after attacking Juno—that tight zoom on her eyes, the contrast between the whites of her eyes and the blood on her face🙏🙏🙏, and 2) the moment Sarah is emerging from the cave, with the camera pulling back as she climbs over a pile of bones. That visual contrast between the white bones and the pitch-black background, that trek through the remains toward the exit🙏was just too much. Ugh. In conclusion, it's an excellently crafted film. Some of the imagery is incredible. Sure, the monsters themselves didn't give me the chills, but then again, I've always preferred psychological thrillers over typical slashers and "creatures." 7/10
Anthony Smith3 Anthony Smith3 Regular
511 messages
joined May 2009
#143 ·
rowdybadger41 said:🙏🙏

When is the sequel coming out?...

That's just a copy/paste title...
Morgan Fox53 Morgan Fox53 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Jul 2009
#144 ·
I see the last post here was from two months ago, but I just finished watching the movie and wanted to drop my thoughts.

*SPOILERS*

The film is solid—specifically the lighting, the camerawork, and the acting (if you ask me). Those logical inconsistencies regarding where the monsters actually came from aren't even worth debating. When the girls cross that ledge and spot that old climbing gear—proving someone else had been there before—it only ramps up the tension. It doesn't matter if those former explorers died deep in the cave, found their way out, or turned into something else entirely; what matters is the dread. These girls aren't the first ones down there. Plus, the ending is fantastic.

As for the flaws, I’d say the conflict between Sarah and Juno feels underdeveloped. Once the creatures start showing up, all meaningful dialogue between the characters just evaporates—which essentially narrows the plot down to pure survival horror.

This reminded me of Brešan's novel "Astaroth," which also takes place in a cave setting. If The Descent had featured the level of characterization found in that Brešan novel, it would truly be one of the greatest horror films ever made. Regardless, it's definitely worth a watch.
Jamie Myers3 Jamie Myers3 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Apr 2009
#145 ·
I honestly wasn't feeling this movie at all 👎 I went in expecting a total masterpiece, thinking it was going to be the next big horror hit, but after getting my hair done and settling in, it just fell flat. I've definitely seen much better stuff lately. Those creatures? Total zero for me. 👎☕
steelmarlin75 steelmarlin75 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Apr 2009
#146 ·
I felt much the same way, honestly; there are certainly far better horror films out there with much stronger atmospheres and more gripping plots. I suppose I might just be setting my expectations too high for the genre, but this one didn't really manage to spook me.
Sandra Campbell2 Sandra Campbell2 Member
13 messages
joined Mar 2009
#147 ·
Not me. Honestly, the movie just left me... I wouldn't say I was indifferent, but it wasn't exactly far from it either. It felt way too one-note for my taste...
but hey, at least the girl lost her crap 😁
Morgan Fox53 Morgan Fox53 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Jul 2009
#148 ·
Morgan Fox53 said:I see the last post here was from two months ago, but I just finished watching the movie and wanted to drop my thoughts.

*SPOILERS*

The film is solid—specifically the lighting, the camerawork, and the acting (if you ask me). Those logical inconsistencies regarding where the monsters actually came from aren't even worth debating. When the girls cross that ledge and spot that old climbing gear—proving someone else had been there before—it only ramps up the tension. It doesn't matter if those former explorers died deep in the cave, found their way out, or turned into something else entirely; what matters is the dread. These girls aren't the first ones down there. Plus, the ending is fantastic.

As for the flaws, I’d say the conflict between Sarah and Juno feels underdeveloped. Once the creatures start showing up, all meaningful dialogue between the characters just evaporates—which essentially narrows the plot down to pure survival horror.

This reminded me of Brešan's novel "Astaroth," which also takes place in a cave setting. If The Descent had featured the level of characterization found in that Brešan novel, it would truly be one of the greatest horror films ever made. Regardless, it's definitely worth a watch.


sry, I messed up and can't edit the post anymore... I meant Brešan's novel "Devil's womb," not Astaroth...
Melissa Evans Melissa Evans Member
23 messages
joined Sep 2009
#149 ·
To film didn't particularly move the needle for me. The sequences set outside the cave feature a somewhat pre-modern production quality. While the scenes inside the cavern are shot quite effectively, that isn't really the core issue. The female characters are underwhelming; none of them leave a lasting impression due to completely lackluster characterization—with the possible exception of the girl in the Japanese denim. I was anticipating some clever, beautifully choreographed kills, but instead, everything felt incredibly basic. There was all this talk about how the women would turn against one another, but even that seemed limited to just two individuals, making the conflict feel simplistic and hollow. 👎 Ultimately, the movie failed to leave any meaningful impact on me, and I found it to be rather mediocre.
Jamie Myers3 Jamie Myers3 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Apr 2009
#150 ·
Melissa Evans said:To film didn't particularly move the needle for me. The sequences set outside the cave feature a somewhat pre-modern production quality. While the scenes inside the cavern are shot quite effectively, that isn't really the core issue. The female characters are underwhelming; none of them leave a lasting impression due to completely lackluster characterization—with the possible exception of the girl in the Japanese denim. I was anticipating some clever, beautifully choreographed kills, but instead, everything felt incredibly basic. There was all this talk about how the women would turn against one another, but even that seemed limited to just two individuals, making the conflict feel simplistic and hollow. 👎 Ultimately, the movie failed to leave any meaningful impact on me, and I found it to be rather mediocre.

I'm with you on this 👍 from: man, you really love using the word "mediocre," don't you? 🤣
Nicholas Sanchez62 Nicholas Sanchez62 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Aug 2009
#151 ·
Christian Hernandez92 said:I honestly just don't get how anyone can call this movie a masterpiece?!
It’s actually wild how so many people, even hardcore horror fans, hype this mediocre flick up and act like it belongs in the same league as the all-time greats...
The whole thing is just riddled with flaws, half-baked ideas, and total nonsense; the scenario biti pun rupa and full of logical gaps that basically insult the intelligence of any average viewer, and at times it gets so predictable and forced it’s almost impossible to sit through; all of that just creates this grating sense of disbelief that, for me, is pretty much the defining trait of this movie...
I’ll only mention a few things since it’s been a while since I watched it (and I had to watch it twice—once because I couldn't believe such a massive flop was getting so much praise)...

S P O I L E R !
The biggest issue, which the entire concept relies on, is the evolution part. Basically, you're supposed to buy that these "monsters" are actually humans who’ve been trapped in the dark, isolated in caves for years and evolved into a new kind of predator...
The movie claims they lost their sight, their hearing, and even their sense of touch. But somehow, none of that stops them from popping up on the surface every now and then to hunt animals that are way faster and more agile, creatures that have all their senses intact and are perfectly adapted to life on the surface and fighting off other predators. And despite all those trips to the surface, they always manage to stay totally undetected. You have to wonder how a creature that’s supposedly COMPLETELY incapable of living above ground would even handle it... Seeing all the animal bones the main characters find deep in the cave really makes you think these things are killing stuff on the surface quite successfully—the contrast is just insane...
Then there are moments in the movie that represent the absolute peak of zero logic: like how the "monsters" don't feel fire just inches away from them, meaning they can't see it or feel the heat, yet the fight scenes with the girls and the way they stalk and kill them suggest something COMPLETELY different about what these creatures are capable of; or when a monster holds its hand right on one of the girls' heads and doesn't notice her presence—not the body heat, the breathing, the torch burning right next to her—it's obvious... Despite everything mentioned, these "monsters" still act like perfect predators, jumping out of the shadows, walking on the ceiling (!!!!!!!), and hunting the girls with a level of skill that would require them to have fully developed senses, high intellect, and perfect motor skills... Just look at the scenes where they emerge from the darkness to hunt their "prey"—the main characters—and then compare that to the huge holes in the logic, and it's easy to see how inconsistent the whole idea is...
The absurdity, inconsistency, and, frankly, stupidity just keeps going: a girl travels from the UK to the US and, through no fault of her own, stumbles upon a brand-new cave system right next to a famous, well-mapped one that experts and researchers had already thoroughly explored; and that rockslide that blocks their ONLY exit is such a cliché, forced moment (which, weirdly enough, is CRUCIAL for the plot) that it actually made me want to gag... And regarding the theory of evolution—that process takes thousands of years. Given when America was discovered, we can only conclude these "monsters" are an exception to evolution, like some kind of crazy, super-fast evolutionary jump happened in those caves (which is actually my favorite little detail ;)).
I should also mention that this movie isn't just suffering from these kinds of errors and absurdities—I could go on FOREVER about the terrible character development, how it focuses on useless, trivial details instead of the actual plot, the shallow relationships between characters, the poorly defined motives, and so much more... but I won't. I think I've said enough about why this movie doesn't deserve its rating, highlighting just a fraction of its failures, and how it fails to scare or even make anyone think if they've ever seen more than three GOOD, coherent horror movies in their life...
P.S. And okay, here’s my hot take on the stuff most people get wrong—the idea that those "monsters" aren't even real, but are just some hallucination cooked up by > because her past, all those regrets, frustrations, and old wounds, is crashing head-first into this nightmare reality of constant darkness, claustrophobia, and being trapped with people who have their own dark histories and messy motives... to me, that’s honestly the only way to truly make sense of the movie, and it totally lines up with how I see it. Even if you look at it that way, you still run into plenty of plot holes and inconsistencies (not to mention how unoriginal it feels, since there are so many better movies out there doing the exact same thing), but I really feel like the film only holds any actual value if you view it through that psychological lens, because if you try to watch it as straight realism, it honestly just becomes kind of ridiculous...

Oh, and... S P O I L E R > :-)


Ah, I had to respond:
First, don't try to lecture me here with your precious terminology; it's painfully obvious you're just flaunting your supposed eloquence.
Second, you're looking for logic in every single, literal little detail of a HORROR genre film? My dear, if you went looking for logic in other horror films—like the ones you've already recommended, which apparently seem more logical and realistic to you than a random mutation occurring in nature, lol—then it wouldn't be horror in the first place. If you understand what the writer was trying to achieve.
Third, the film is absolute perfection. I saw it for the first time a year ago, stumbling upon it by chance on my brother's satellite TV, having no idea that everybody raves about this movie. So, I didn't watch it thinking about how famous critics praise it to the skies; I watched it without any prior knowledge, unaware such a film even existed and not being one of those people who succumb to collective euphoria—yet it thrilled me so much I still haven't recovered. The film kept me completely tense throughout, creating a sense of discomfort and claustrophobia, which RARELY happens to me. Also, the appearance of the mutant came when I least expected it; there wasn't even a hint that mutants existed until the moment they appeared.
See, almost everyone reacts to the film, whether positively or negatively, and that's the trick—hardly anyone is left indifferent, and that is exactly what gives it greatness and makes it popular and special.
That's all on that. Though I have plenty more to add, I won't... it's not worth it.

Btw, hi everyone, especially the Descent fans😁 and sry for jumping in headlong like this to react to a month-old post {I just had to}.🙂
Nicholas Sanchez62 Nicholas Sanchez62 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Aug 2009
#152 ·
Christian Hernandez92 said:I'm not about forcing my opinions or my negativity on anyone, that should have been obvious by now... A movie is just what it is, you've got your reasons for loving it and I've got mine for hating it. And yeah, sure, people can debate the movie all day, but the actual experience of watching it is totally different... Even the biggest fans of The Descent will tell you the sequel is going to be something else entirely, but what can I even say at this point...🤷

opaaaa, look at Nostradamus over here... and I actually thought you were Jacob 🤣 😛
Laura Palmer25 Laura Palmer25 Active Member
102 messages
joined Aug 2007
#153 ·
What a coincidence that someone started this thread right after I finally sat down to watch this movie the other night. I have to admit, my expectations were sky-high because people have been hyping it up like crazy lately—honestly, more than almost any recent horror release. What can I say... it didn't disappoint, but it wasn't exactly mind-blowing either. If I have to give credit where it's due, it masterfully nails that sense of claustrophobia and pure, hopeless disorientation, but everything else is up for debate.

The whole conflict between Sarah and Juno felt totally forced to me, like they just threw it in to give the plot some fake psychological depth; it could have worked perfectly fine without it. And honestly, I felt bad for Juno. She was fighting like Rambo the entire time, clearing the path for everyone else and taking on the brunt of the attacks, only to be taken out by some jealous, betrayed woman in the end. That’s just messed up.

The crawlers are alright, though I've seen much scarier things (both visible and unseen) before. For instance, I immediately think of Valek from Carpenter's "Vampires" or the "lovely" Samara from "The Ring." If I had to choose who I'd rather have breathing down my neck—the crawlers or one of those two—I'd pick the crawlers without a second thought.
David Price5 David Price5 Regular
435 messages
joined Jul 2012
#154 ·
Laura Palmer25 said:What a coincidence that someone started this thread right after I finally sat down to watch this movie the other night. I have to admit, my expectations were sky-high because people have been hyping it up like crazy lately—honestly, more than almost any recent horror release. What can I say... it didn't disappoint, but it wasn't exactly mind-blowing either. If I have to give credit where it's due, it masterfully nails that sense of claustrophobia and pure, hopeless disorientation, but everything else is up for debate.

The whole conflict between Sarah and Juno felt totally forced to me, like they just threw it in to give the plot some fake psychological depth; it could have worked perfectly fine without it. And honestly, I felt bad for Juno. She was fighting like Rambo the entire time, clearing the path for everyone else and taking on the brunt of the attacks, only to be taken out by some jealous, betrayed woman in the end. That’s just messed up.

The crawlers are alright, though I've seen much scarier things (both visible and unseen) before. For instance, I immediately think of Valek from Carpenter's "Vampires" or the "lovely" Samara from "The Ring." If I had to choose who I'd rather have breathing down my neck—the crawlers or one of those two—I'd pick the crawlers without a second thought.

The core of this film really boils down to that central conflict. Without it, we’d just be watching a standard survival horror flick. It all starts with a tiny seed of doubt in those first three minutes, which eventually builds through the sheer terror they endure, finally culminating in that climactic action at the end. At its heart, revenge was simply the priority.

Laura Palmer25 said:What a coincidence that someone started this thread right after I finally sat down to watch this movie the other night. I have to admit, my expectations were sky-high because people have been hyping it up like crazy lately—honestly, more than almost any recent horror release. What can I say... it didn't disappoint, but it wasn't exactly mind-blowing either. If I have to give credit where it's due, it masterfully nails that sense of claustrophobia and pure, hopeless disorientation, but everything else is up for debate.

The whole conflict between Sarah and Juno felt totally forced to me, like they just threw it in to give the plot some fake psychological depth; it could have worked perfectly fine without it. And honestly, I felt bad for Juno. She was fighting like Rambo the entire time, clearing the path for everyone else and taking on the brunt of the attacks, only to be taken out by some jealous, betrayed woman in the end. That’s just messed up.

The crawlers are alright, though I've seen much scarier things (both visible and unseen) before. For instance, I immediately think of Valek from Carpenter's "Vampires" or the "lovely" Samara from "The Ring." If I had to choose who I'd rather have breathing down my neck—the crawlers or one of those two—I'd pick the crawlers without a second thought.

But that’s exactly the point. People just don't react logically after situations like that. Once you've cracked the skulls of a few "monsters," something inside a person just snaps. You also have to remember the girls were separated; they had no idea what the others were up to.

Laura Palmer25 said:What a coincidence that someone started this thread right after I finally sat down to watch this movie the other night. I have to admit, my expectations were sky-high because people have been hyping it up like crazy lately—honestly, more than almost any recent horror release. What can I say... it didn't disappoint, but it wasn't exactly mind-blowing either. If I have to give credit where it's due, it masterfully nails that sense of claustrophobia and pure, hopeless disorientation, but everything else is up for debate.

The whole conflict between Sarah and Juno felt totally forced to me, like they just threw it in to give the plot some fake psychological depth; it could have worked perfectly fine without it. And honestly, I felt bad for Juno. She was fighting like Rambo the entire time, clearing the path for everyone else and taking on the brunt of the attacks, only to be taken out by some jealous, betrayed woman in the end. That’s just messed up.

The crawlers are alright, though I've seen much scarier things (both visible and unseen) before. For instance, I immediately think of Valek from Carpenter's "Vampires" or the "lovely" Samara from "The Ring." If I had to choose who I'd rather have breathing down my neck—the crawlers or one of those two—I'd pick the crawlers without a second thought.

Of course you’d pick the Crawlers; they aren't even imbeciles. They don't have any crazy superpowers or anything supernatural going on. They're just as capable as our protagonists. I much prefer characters who are evenly matched rather than watching some inferior underdogs somehow stumble their way into defeating a superior enemy. If I recall correctly, Samara proved to be indestructible in the film, whereas vampires are just way too overpowered.
Laura Palmer25 Laura Palmer25 Active Member
102 messages
joined Aug 2007
#155 ·
David Price5 said:The core of this film really boils down to that central conflict. Without it, we’d just be watching a standard survival horror flick. It all starts with a tiny seed of doubt in those first three minutes, which eventually builds through the sheer terror they endure, finally culminating in that climactic action at the end. At its heart, revenge was simply the priority.

But that’s exactly the point. People just don't react logically after situations like that. Once you've cracked the skulls of a few "monsters," something inside a person just snaps. You also have to remember the girls were separated; they had no idea what the others were up to.

Of course you’d pick the Crawlers; they aren't even imbeciles. They don't have any crazy superpowers or anything supernatural going on. They're just as capable as our protagonists. I much prefer characters who are evenly matched rather than watching some inferior underdogs somehow stumble their way into defeating a superior enemy. If I recall correctly, Samara proved to be indestructible in the film, whereas vampires are just way too overpowered.

Why do you think that’s the main point of the movie? Personally, I think it could have worked perfectly fine without that whole backstory. To be honest, the plot about her husband and kid dying was barely even fleshed out; it just served as psychological window dressing for the lead. It’s introduced at the start, stays dormant for the entire runtime, and then we get that vision of the little girl with the cake at the end just to signal Samara's death. There wasn't any actual development of that theme beyond that one moment where the circle around Juno's leg leaves the toughest fighter completely at the mercy of those slugs. To make my point clearer, look at another film by the same director, "Dog Soldiers"—I assume most people here have seen it. Without all the psychological nuance or pseudo-philosophy, it just delivers an effective story about monsters attacking people. In "The Descent," they clearly tried to add extra layers, but it all felt limp and unfinished. They would have been better off just sticking to raw survival horror.
David Price5 David Price5 Regular
435 messages
joined Jul 2012
#156 ·
Laura Palmer25 said:Why do you think that’s the main point of the movie? Personally, I think it could have worked perfectly fine without that whole backstory. To be honest, the plot about her husband and kid dying was barely even fleshed out; it just served as psychological window dressing for the lead. It’s introduced at the start, stays dormant for the entire runtime, and then we get that vision of the little girl with the cake at the end just to signal Samara's death. There wasn't any actual development of that theme beyond that one moment where the circle around Juno's leg leaves the toughest fighter completely at the mercy of those slugs. To make my point clearer, look at another film by the same director, "Dog Soldiers"—I assume most people here have seen it. Without all the psychological nuance or pseudo-philosophy, it just delivers an effective story about monsters attacking people. In "The Descent," they clearly tried to add extra layers, but it all felt limp and unfinished. They would have been better off just sticking to raw survival horror.

Exactly. Without that element, it wouldn't even pass for a decent American or European film.

Laura Palmer25 said:Why do you think that’s the main point of the movie? Personally, I think it could have worked perfectly fine without that whole backstory. To be honest, the plot about her husband and kid dying was barely even fleshed out; it just served as psychological window dressing for the lead. It’s introduced at the start, stays dormant for the entire runtime, and then we get that vision of the little girl with the cake at the end just to signal Samara's death. There wasn't any actual development of that theme beyond that one moment where the circle around Juno's leg leaves the toughest fighter completely at the mercy of those slugs. To make my point clearer, look at another film by the same director, "Dog Soldiers"—I assume most people here have seen it. Without all the psychological nuance or pseudo-philosophy, it just delivers an effective story about monsters attacking people. In "The Descent," they clearly tried to add extra layers, but it all felt limp and unfinished. They would have been better off just sticking to raw survival horror.

And that was enough. With so many enemies already, adding visions of her daughter would have been unnecessary.

Laura Palmer25 said:Why do you think that’s the main point of the movie? Personally, I think it could have worked perfectly fine without that whole backstory. To be honest, the plot about her husband and kid dying was barely even fleshed out; it just served as psychological window dressing for the lead. It’s introduced at the start, stays dormant for the entire runtime, and then we get that vision of the little girl with the cake at the end just to signal Samara's death. There wasn't any actual development of that theme beyond that one moment where the circle around Juno's leg leaves the toughest fighter completely at the mercy of those slugs. To make my point clearer, look at another film by the same director, "Dog Soldiers"—I assume most people here have seen it. Without all the psychological nuance or pseudo-philosophy, it just delivers an effective story about monsters attacking people. In "The Descent," they clearly tried to add extra layers, but it all felt limp and unfinished. They would have been better off just sticking to raw survival horror.

Actually, Dog Soldiers differs from The Descent because it includes quite a bit of comedy and features a happy ending, even though the enemies in Soldiers are superior (bullets don't do much to them).

Between the sacrifice of a friend and the protagonist losing her mind—if we count that final vision—can it really get any rawer than that?
Nicholas Sanchez62 Nicholas Sanchez62 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Aug 2009
#157 ·
I suspect most people missed the entire point of why this movie is actually superior. It doesn't hand you a perfectly polished situation on a silver platter. For me, the most striking part was seeing how easily one person can turn into a predator when trapped in such a hopeless corner.😁 Honestly, it gets even darker than that.
David Price5 David Price5 Regular
435 messages
joined Jul 2012
#158 ·
Nicholas Sanchez62 said:I suspect most people missed the entire point of why this movie is actually superior. It doesn't hand you a perfectly polished situation on a silver platter. For me, the most striking part was seeing how easily one person can turn into a predator when trapped in such a hopeless corner.😁 Honestly, it gets even darker than that.

And the worst part is, sometimes the situation doesn't even have to be that extreme.
Nicholas Sanchez62 Nicholas Sanchez62 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Aug 2009
#159 ·
David Price5;22002711 said:Sometimes the worst part isn't even when things get heavy...

Sad, but true. ☕
fadedseal8 fadedseal8 Active Member
72 messages
joined Dec 2009
#160 ·
Updates on The Descent duo + poster

HERE

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads