Nightbeasts – Review (Spoiler Free)

Nightbeasts PosterWhen the acting is scarier than the Sasquatches you know you’re in for a bad time.

This film does try, it really does. It comes very close to having a fun atmosphere that doesn’t take itself too seriously and which calls back to classic monster movies, but unfortunately it just falls a little short of achieving that goal. A fair amount of the humour here isn’t funny, there are too many jump-scares that annoy rather than actually scare, and the editing on display here feels abrasive rather than polished. But all of these complaints wouldn’t be crippling if it wasn’t for the fact that the acting across the board is unconvincing and lets the whole thing slip.

Nightbeasts‘ plot of a guy taking his young son off into the woods for a holiday filled with hunting and bonding is pretty standard, but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The scene is set for an exploration of isolation and confined horror, and even though the film somewhat deviates from that setup early on, it still appears to have potential behind it. Alarm bells start ringing when alcoholism is introduced as a character trait and is dealt with in such simplistic and meaningless terms. This film takes several decent ideas and barely fleshes them out. In fact sometimes it even contradicts itself, with the monsters’ weakness for example. The resulting script feels very much like a rough first draft that is never returned to or looked over before filming began.

It’s a shame to have to write such a negative review for a film which clearly was constructed with love, and which features one of the key actors from my childhood (Zach Galligan – Gremlins), but there is so little to redeem the film here. A poorly constructed script is followed by bad performances and then topped off with laughable monsters. I would give this one a miss unless you’re a dedicated fan of the genre.

Summary:

What is the film’s greatest strength? Its desire to be a fun call back to a certain classic horror formula.

Its greatest weakness? I’m going to go with the acting here, often the performances are laughably bad.

Would I see it again? No, nothing here would draw me into considering a rewatch.

Let me know your thoughts by tapping them out in the comment box below!

18 comments

    1. Sounds sensible!

  1. This sure doesn’t even look or sound like something you would watch….

    1. You’ve called it… I was sent this one to review!

  2. Good review. I will continue skipping this. šŸ™‚

    1. Cheers buddy – sounds like a solid plan!

  3. Sonny Skyhawk is one of my favorite actors.

    1. He’s an interesting chap, seems to be quite the activist!

  4. I have to admit it doesn’t sound that interesting. But it almost sounds like it would be funny to watch. Fun review.

    1. Hey Keith!
      Thanks man, I would avoid this one – any unintentional humour is outweighed by the rest of the film!

  5. I dunno. It sounds like something I’d watch, lol.

    1. Haha fair enough! Whatever floats your boat!

  6. mrheslop · · Reply

    Thanks for the great review, Mr Rumsey. You make it sound a bit like one of Woody Allen’s recent, less-popular comedies: an old, dusty script rushed into production. Gremlins is one of my favourite films, so it’s a shame to see Galligan, who’s a bit like my Bruce Campbell, starring in Nightbeasts.

    1. Thank you!
      Have you seen Blue Jasmine though?

      1. mrheslop · · Reply

        I hadn’t heard of Blue Jasmine until now… I’m shocked, as I’m a huge fan of Allan’s films!

        1. Oh man, you have to check it out then! Blanchett is really excellent in it.

  7. Victor De Leon · · Reply

    Nice review. I’m a glutton for punishment. If it’s bad then I’m in!

    1. Thanks, haha well enjoy it then!

Leave a reply to jjames36 Cancel reply