Unholy (2007) User Reviews

Maybe if you can figure it out, you'll enjoy it...but probably not even then.

[trancejeremy · 2/10 · 20 September 2007]

This sounded like a really interesting movie from the blurb. Nazis, occult , government conspiracies. I was expecting a low budget Nazi version of the DaVinci code or the Boys from Brazil or even Shockwaves. Instead you get something quite different, more psychological, more something like from David Lynch. That was actually a plus. But the way the story is told is just awful.

Part of the trouble is the casting. Andrienne Barbeau's character starts off the moving being somewhat timid and afraid. She just doesn't do that well, even at her age, though she certainly tried. The actor cast as the son apparently thought this was a comedy. Most of the other actors also seemed to have thought this was a campy movie, or at least acted like it, rather than simply being quirky. The only one that I thought did really well was the daughter, Siri Baruc.

Another big part is the pacing. It starts off very slowly. So slowly you might be tempted to turn it off. But then it gets compelling for a while when you get to the daughter's suicide and the aftermath. But shortly afterward, it all becomes a jumbled mess. Some of this was on purpose, but much of it was just needlessly confusing, monotonous, and poorly focused.

The real problem, is it's simply not a pleasant movie to watch. It's slow, dull, none of the characters are likable. Overuse of imagery and sets. Some movies you see characters get tortured. In this, it's the viewer that does. It does have a few creepy moments, most notably the creepy Nazi paintings and the credits, but the rest of the movie is mostly just tiresome.

So...very...slow

[MBunge · 4/10 · 26 May 2011]

Unholy does have a halfway decent double-twist ending. One is pretty much a standard time travel cliché and the other is both a rip off of Total Recall and doesn't actually make any sense, but combined they're not all bad. To get to that barely passable conclusion, however, you've got to sit through 85+ minutes of very slow and rather stupid storytelling. It starts with a premise that far outstrips this film's less than meager budget, continues by never establishing even the slightest bit of normality, inserts a couple of moments that look like unintentional parody and winds down with disappointment over not seeing Adrienne Barbeau's well-aged rack.

Martha (Adrienne Barbeau) is a woman far past middle aged whose seemingly disturbed daughter kills herself in their cellar. Martha thinks her girl's last rants about an experiment meant something, so with the rather useless aid of her loser son Lucas (Nicholas Brendon), she sets out to investigate. Through some incredible convenient coincidences, Martha finds indications of a government conspiracy involving a Nazi necromancer and the so-called "unholy trinity" of mad scientist experiments - time travel, invisibility and mind control. It's all just a chore to sit through until that double-twist ending brings blessed relief.

The primary problem with Unholy isn't that it had such a small budget the cast probably got paid in Spam, nor that it's written on such a shallow level that an important plot point is a cellar door that's built like a venetian blind. No, what's fundamentally wrong with this thing is that it...is…damn…slow. It has absolutely no sense of pace, with scenes that crawl along like a snail and sputter off into oblivion. And since this isn't all that wordy of a script, that means Unholy is dragged down by silent nothingness. By the time anything happens in this movie, you've already been beaten down into apathy and can't care. Not that anything which happens in Unholy is worth caring about in the first place. A lesson for all low budget, inexperienced or plain ol' crappy filmmakers is that speed is your friend and sloth is your enemy. The longer anything takes on screen, from a plot thread to a scene to lines of dialog, the more people pay attention to it and the better it must be. The quicker something goes by, the less the audience will notice or be bothered by how much it sucks.

The second big flaw here is common to far too many horror flicks. Unholy starts out weird and never creates a sense of the ordinary for the viewer to grab onto. It is the contrast between the normal and abnormal that give these kind of films their emotional resonance. Without that contrast, horror movies are just noise that might be loud enough to bother some people, but that's all. I know that setting the stage of people living ordinary lives in an ordinary world before taking a sharp turn into the terrifying can feel awfully cliché when you're writing a script, but you do it that way because it works. Trying to get around that step in the process, again requires you to be really good. If you're an inexperienced or unsuccessful filmmaker with virtually no money to spend, don't let your ego get in the way.

Adrienne Barbeau and Nichola Brendon are professional actors and look like it in Unholy. The rest of the cast are the sort who hope to be professional actors someday but will end up as professional waiters.

Unholy isn't utterly without merit. There's just too much garbage to wade through and nothing all that good on the other side.

Not good at all

[kaneda-ku · 2/10 · 1 October 2007]

This is a movie of tired, yet weirdly childish, clichés. There's a Nazi witch master performing sf-related experiments in the basement? Oh please!

Aiming for a creeping sense of horror and fear, the general impression of the film is that of a very immature conception of fright. Not having any expectations beforehand, I am left with: an aged Xander from Buffy and a heroine with ape-like face who doesn't seem to know how to act. Said Adrienne Barbeau have I only only encountered before in the much more enjoyable "Cannibal Women in the Avocado Jungle of Death".

Camera and editing adds to the general impression of lame.

Great Concept, Failed Execution

[Times_Squared · 5/10 · 20 November 2008]

An excellent and intriguing concept, detailed and appropriate production design, and very talented acting (except for the store owner, Richard Ziman, whose overacting was practically unbearable) are all marred by dreadful editing and cinematography, writing more terrifying than the story and direction bad enough to make you cry.

Additionally, the depiction of a family who has just lost a daughter to suicide was offensively inaccurate. Granted, not every family's experience is the same. But there is a mourning period - a time of grief. Not once did they seem to wonder why she killed herself without thinking that she must have been forced into it. Not once did they consider that it was some sort of psychological dysfunction or emotional trauma that caused her to commit suicide... and come on, why did they say "suicide" about a billion times?! Do you really think that they would so quickly accept and deal with what she did and be able to call it "suicide" so casually? Many families can barely even utter the word so recently after the death of a love one.

I initially found this movie because of Nicholas Brendon (yeah, Buffy fan, right here), and I wasn't disappointed by his performance in this movie. He was convincing at most moments, and the moments where he wasn't can be attributed to bad writing. I don't care if he's a dude, I don't care if he's a stoner, I don't care about any of that. His little sister died. Let the man cry a minute on camera before you dive head first into the mystery-solving.

And lastly - I won't reveal the conclusion of the story, but I will say that it happened far too hastily and that it was poorly directed. It leaves you understanding generally what happened, but with a sense of "wait, they missed something" in addition to saying "that's IT?" As if they tried to come up with an interesting twist to the ending (which a movie of this sort sort of requires) and just... couldn't.

It breaks my heart to see such a fascinating and well thought-out story come to an end like this, but a film is only as good as it's script, and "Unholy"'s script is... well, just that.

Xander is not the worst thing in this movie

[baldostuart · 1/10 · 6 October 2008]

Can I please say first of all, that I felt so strongly about this movie that I signed up to IMDb specifically to review it. And my review? This is easily the worst movie I have ever seen.

The synopsis of the movie sounded interesting- Nazis, occult, time travel, etc., but the movies plot failed to properly bring all these elements together. Remember the episode of South Park that featured manatees writing Family Guy using 'idea balls'? Did these manatees also write Unholy? Its like the writer wanted to include all these different ideas, but had no idea how to link them all together, and then to make things make even less sense, included a Donnie Darko-esquire time travel theme to the ending, messing up the chronology.

I could tell from early on that this was a bad movie. Special effects were too low budget for anything better than straight to DVD. The acting wasn't great, but in fairness I've seen worse. I will praise the Nazi paintings, they were creepy, but the evil Nazi butcher guy was just comic.

I don't have a vendetta against this movie or anything, but to be honest, I'm not even into the horror genre. But this movie cannot be described as a thriller or a drama. If this story had been well told, this would have been a good movie. But it has been over hyped. Waaaaay over hyped.

BACK TO THE FUTURE: Some historical meanderings

[charlytully · 4/10 · 17 November 2008]

I'm not sure this is a spoiler; perhaps it is a public service. If you are one of those people focused on instant gratification who skip end credits, you will miss the final line of the end credits news announcer's voice-over, which states the U.S. has just surrendered to Nazi Germany on May 7, 1945 to end WWII. Here are just a few of the problems with this close:

1)The older viewer must conjure up the equivalent of two or three more UNHOLY movies in their mind's eye to fill in the yawning chasm between movie events and this startling conclusion.

2)The average person will really kick themselves that they did not "watch" one of these UNHOLY fill-in-the-blanks flicks created in their own head for free, instead of shelling out time and money to see this UNHOLY from the video store (or on cable).

3)This end credits sequence of imagined news bulletins may be the first information some younger viewers are exposed to about WWII, leading them to the conclusion that George W. Bush is the latest heir to the Nazi throne.

Let's Scream for Lucas... or create a stupid plot

[xanderlavelle · 2/10 · 31 August 2014]

Well.... I have to admit that I am a huge fan of "Buffy" and because of that I did watch this movie because it's with Nicholas Brendon. I have to say, that I cannot say anything against his acting, because he is doing a great or even the best job of all the actors on this movie.

Adrienne Barbeau, the main actress cannot ban the audience to the screen because her acting is beyond professional. She never gives you the feeling she is doing something for real and it may be the problem with the whole movie. As a main actor you have to carry the plot and if you suck, then the whole movie might do it as well.

I have to admit that the plot also is not so exciting and the special effects lack of persuasion. Even shock effects are not there because e.g. when oh so scary graphics are flipped by the characters there is this sound effect which shall imply you that this should be scary but you are just like "Yeah, I got it... but there is nothing frightening at all...Can you skip to the next part already!"

And there is one point when the actress just screams for Lucas all the time, which will clearly annoy you as much as it did annoy me.

I think a horror movie is hard to create because you easily can stumble into a comedy. In this example it is neither. This movie lacks of excitement, a good plot and the genre specifics. Not worth the watch

What the hell just happened for 1h25mins?

[MissOceanB · 3/10 · 20 September 2015]

Always seeking a great under-rated true horror film, I thought I'd give this one a shot. After all, Skew (a GREAT film) received poor reviews but was extremely good. With Unholy, I have NO idea what was going on, the music was awful, I kept waiting for some horror to happen but was let down. There are (arguably I suppose) no ghosts, there is a strange maternal issue and a daughter who apparently commits suicide (as shown in the trailer, and a cellar that also serves as the "scary place". Throw in some kids, snow, a weird grocery store clerk and a bit of WWII history and...well, that's the film. If anyone can come up with a positive and comprehensive review of this film, I applaud them, really.

Unholy is the most original horror movie since 'Saw'

[mysteriousbhat · 10/10 · 14 September 2007]

I am surprised at IMDb's low rating of this movie. With all due respect, its low rating is representative of the IQ level of those who rated it so poor. They would rather see a movie with cheap thrills, a bigger budget, and more gore.

The first misconception by people is that this is a horror film. It is not, nor does the film mislead you into believing it is one. It is a psychological thriller. It is for people who actually want an intellectual experience when watching a movie. Reel.com's review is the perfect example of how I feel about this movie. All the other negative reviews doesn't make much sense. It's almost as if trying to make an original movie for a change- very rare these days- is something bad and not worth it.

I will reveal some spoilers for the morons who said it was boring and didn't make sense. Martha was brainwashing herself and performing experiments on herself to be a caring mother while she really was an evil Nazi who would kill without warning. The evidence is all in the pudding and the fact that at first viewing, we sympathize with this cold-blooded monster for the duration of the movie is a testament to the film's direction and writing.

I definitely feel that this movie should at least be rated in the 6's range on originality alone. I recommend this movie for the people on the other end of the IQ scale- aka smart people- since this movie is obviously being butchered by those who would rather watch Scream or Freddy's Nightmare.

Kudos to the acting as well. For such a low budget film, you are amazed that this movie didn't hit your local cinema with the great direction, writing, and acting. Please don't be fooled by the rating by IMDb. This movie is worth it. I actually recommend buying the film since a first viewing on a rent will not do this justice.

S10 Review's Unholy (2007)

[suspiria10 · 6/10 · 8 September 2007]

Unholy (2007) 3 of 5 Dir: Daryl Goldberg Stars: Adrienne Barbeau, Nicholas Brandon, Siri Baruc

Adrienne Barbeau hasn't had the best of time lately and they get worse when her daughter commits suicide in their cellar. Along with her son (Brandon of TV's Buffy) gather up the pieces and decide to leave that sad home. But Barbeau can't shake the reasoning with the tragic events and decides to return to get to the bottom of the mystery. How does an old legend of some boogeyman used to frighten children, the strange behavior of the residents around her and the strange audio diaries and Nazi inspired paintings that the daughter did have to do with an unholy trinity?

It's always nice to see the lovely Miss Barbeau in genre pics and she does a fine job here. Baruc and Brandon (still doing the 'Xander' thing) are good as the messed-up children. The script, while having an interesting premise doesn't seem to gel together in the end. It comes up with an interesting angle but kind of glances off things that needed a bit more explaining. The final result leaves an ending that is a bit muddled. It may leave some viewers scratching their noggins.

'Unholy' tries hard to come up with an interesting twist and it succeeds for the most part but it kind of falls apart in the end. This spooker with sci-fi underpinnings does look good and has a solid and talented cast though.

Judge it by yourself. Don't trust the poor reviews.

[daxdsnine · 8/10 · 14 October 2018]

Spoilers free comments: 1) That movie is not your typical horror/ gore fest. It is actually more of a psychological thriller. 2) The story is original, intriguing, and very suspensful. 3) It's more suited for viewers who prefer intelligent stories than for those who rate movies by the number of gallons of blood it features. 4) The cast does a very good job. As always, Adrienne Barbeau is superb. Her acting alone makes this movie worth watching. Also, I must say I was surprised by Nicholas Brandon. He gave a very believable performance here, very far from his Buffy days.

Inventive, Bizarre. . .yet efficiently spare

[Rabh17 · 7/10 · 13 April 2008]

This one will get reviews all over the map because it doesn't comfortably fit any mold. It's horror-- but not a splatterfest. It's equal part Suspense as well as Horror-- yet without the usual Hollywood screams and jerky camera.

The feel of the movie is spare and lean with next to no special effects because I think you should listen and watch the faces of the characters.

Forget that Brendan is a graduate of the Buffy universe. That's a red herring. He IS acting here. 'Camp' is a misreading of the tone of this story. Adrienne Barbeau is giving a rock solid performance-- so she must believe the script has something to say. We all know the sorry excuses where the actors plainly don't care anymore and are just waiting for the director to snap "Cut" and get their paychecks. This is Not the case, here.

Forgive the fact that the bodies begin to fall with almost mondo-funny regularity. I don't think the intent was humorous-- but to keep you off balance.

Think of it less of a Horror 'Movie' and more of a Horror 'Play' on a stage-- that decrepit whitewashed house. Then you might see it's really about paranoia, fear, and spiralling madness set in an isolated someplace, USA.

And it is twisty. Time travel, Mind Control, secret experiments and Nazi's who may NOT be dead. . .yet.

I say rent it and give it a try if you're in the mood for something a little cerebral. This would be a good choice for a Saturday Midnight sit down.

Always time for tomatoes

[knifeintheeye · 6/10 · 9 September 2007]

Some movies dream big on a small budget and this is one of them. The small budget allotted to it, doesn't do it's story justice. It's not that the movie was badly made, it's that it could have been so much better.

First off; the performances. Other then the son, everyone did a pretty good job. The neighbor who had a fascination for tomatoes was pretty cool, and was a nice bit of comic relief.

The story. A bit too far reaching for the budget allotted. Within minutes we find out about the Unholy Trinity conducted by the Nazis during the war: invisibility, mind control and time travel. Without giving anything further away, the movie involves characters finding out about mind control, invisibility and time travel. By the way, stay tuned for the credits, the story continues in radio addresses throughout the end credits.

The SFX. Not bad, but I can see them being done on the directors home PC using everyday over the counter technology--not that it's a bad thing.

Honestly the best part of the movie were the three painting that were shown. I loved the style they were done in.

In closing all I have to say is: Damn Nazis!

Pleasant Surprise

[bobwildhorror · 7/10 · 8 October 2007]

I've read some terrible things about this film, so I was prepared for the worst. "Confusing. Muddled. Horribly structured." While there may be merit to some of these accusations, this film was nowhere near as horrific as your average DVD programmer. In fact, it actually had aspirations. It attempted something beyond the typical monster/slasher nonsense. And by god, there are some interesting things going on.

Ms. Barbeau is a miracle to behold. She carries the film squarely on her shoulders.

This is not to say that it's a masterpiece. UNHOLY ultimately collapses under the weight of its own ambition. There are just too many (unexplained) subplots trying to coexist. And the plot loopholes created by time travel are never really addressed: for example, if Hope knows that her mother is evil and that she will ultimately kill her brother, then why doesn't she just kill Ma in the film's very first sequence? Seems like it would have beat the hell out of traveling into the future to do it.

Still, I give UNHOLY points for trying. A little ambition is not a bad thing.

An Unholy Review

[danny-boy-2 · 7/10 · 21 September 2008]

The main problem I see with this film is its score, which screams with every note, "This is a cheap-ass movie." There's not much more to say here. The score just plain sucked.

The second problem, which I see as quite severe as well as it involves the unwinding of the plot near the end of the film (one of the the money shots, if you will), is the dialogue between Martha (Adrienne Barbeau) and the sunflower man (Richard Ziman), in which Martha is revealed to be the leader of the experiment. At all times during this dialogue, the viewer is very much aware that s/he is listening to a movie dialogue. In other words, suspension of disbelief breaks down here. The integrity of a believable dialogue between two people is sacrificed for a willy-nilly stuffing of information the movie makers wish to impart to the audience.

The third problem was the casting of Adrienne Barbeau. While I honestly believe her to be a fabulous actress within her oeuvre, I feel that this part may have been too much of a stretch. The main point of her performance that didn't seem to mesh was the spectrum across which the character moves through the film from a loving mother of a troubled family to an almost Rambo-like woman on a mission. This aspect of the script would obviously have been a stretch for any actress, and one cannot place too much blame, therefore, upon Barbeau. To the degree that she fairly competently acted her part, however, I would only call this a moderately severe problem to the film as a whole.

Finally, the film did a wonderful job in the first half building a creep factor, most notably during its horror flashes. I feel that the film would have benefited by more of a commitment to these flashes as a mechanism for preventing a fizzling of the creep factor in the second half of the movie.

So what's my holistic grading of this piece? I'd give it a solid C+ to B-, depending upon how much credit you're inclined to give the makers for producing this film on a limited budget. Even with two severe and two moderately severe problems, the film is premised on the solid plot of the Jungian side of Nazi mysticism. I see no problems with plot development or coherence; the dialogue, with the noted exception above, is downright brilliant in places, especially the all important keystone scene between mother and daughter at the beginning of the movie; as mentioned, the creep factor was well crafted, if a bit fizzly in the second half; and Nicholas Brendan, who also associated produced, delivered a wonderful performance.

All in all, this film is definitely worth the view---see it with a Nazi you love. :)