The Unbinding

In its favour, the movie is entertaining and presents a "story" pretty well. It relies a lot in the confusing / missing information as to maintain the expectation and mystery.

Viewers are scratching their heads to make sense of it. That was well done. It maintains the focus.

On the negative side, the story is too weird and cringy. The ancient being manipulates things around in a magic way, too magic and too directly.

There are funny/silly parts such as when they carefully wrap the statue and lock the padlock carefully as to not disturb the entity and later they carry the box to the hill hanging it from the back while the box swings side to side... too much for carefully manipulating the statue...haha The "witch" is doing a great role as the "wisdom" talker and at times she says things darn well.

I think it is entertaining although it falls into the typical ghost / mystery enchanted objects movie but without the silly techniques other movies resource to.

This was a documentary that I put on and treated like a podcast at work. The title sounded interesting. This was also listed on Letterboxd as one of the higher rated horror/documentaries that was on a streaming service that I had. This also being from 2023 intrigued me. That information was enough to check this out.

We are following a married couple, Greg and Dana Newkirk. They grew up together where they were doing their own 'ghost hunting' and filming it. What was interesting there is that Greg grew up religious and then married a practicing witch. Something also interesting here is that I saw a handful of reviews online comparing them to Ed and Lorraine Warren. I can see that since they collect haunted items and also help people. To my knowledge, the Newkirks have fleeced people as of yet.

Now that I've introduced them, the major part of this documentary is them coming into possession of a strange statue from the Catskill Mountains. They found the user on Reddit who was seeking them for him and his friend who took the item. They claimed that it was haunting them. The statue was then sent to the Newkirks, who then go about trying to find out what they can about its origins and what could be lingering about it.

What I'll then say is that this is well-made. It kept my interest throughout to figure out what they would come up with. There are a few different methods that do seem to have scientific backing as well as ensuring that they're not influencing the results. Do I believe that this statue was haunted and causing disturbances? No, I do not. I do believe these people could have experienced things that they cannot explain. How this is constructed worked as well as it made me uncomfortable and I enjoyed that. It does feel like a longer and better production value than episodes of Ghost Hunter shows. I did find the couple we follow likeable. It was entertaining. I will say to watch this to make your own determination as to what you think is happening here.

This was on Tubi, so you can watch it for free with ads.

My Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

If it weren't for the fact that it is a blatant attempt to draw susceptible wanna believes to their other content, if it wasn't for the fact that the production value and continuity is so poor, if it wasn't for the fact that the script is so weak, it could have been a good plot for a comedy.

Unfortunately it fails on every level, I did laugh out loud at a couple of the absurd moments in the film but I probably wasn't meant to.

What on earth were you thinking? You should not be making films, you should not be writing scripts and you certainly shouldn't be acting in them.

I have experienced many paranormal events and seen many inexplicable things during my life. This film makes a complete mockery of a rather more serious subject and may actually push people away from wanting to find out the truth.

Dong do it again, it is just a cynical exercise.

By no stretch of the imagination is this a documentary, not journalism, not contemporaneously filmed, no suggestion that it is fact, no evidence to demonstrate or support the idea that it is fact.

It reminds me of the mockumentary style of the drowned man by Markiplier or some other similar efforts.

If it weren't for the fact that it is a blatant attempt to draw susceptible wanna believes to their other content, if it wasn't for the fact that the production value and continuity is so poor, if it wasn't for the fact that the script is so weak, it could have been a good plot for a comedy.

Unfortunately it fails on every level, I did laugh out loud at a couple of the absurd moments in the film but I probably wasn't meant to.

What on earth were you thinking? You should not be making films, you should not be writing scripts and you certainly shouldn't be acting in them.

I have experienced many paranormal events and seen many inexplicable things during my life. This film makes a complete mockery of a rather more serious subject and may actually push people away from wanting to find out the truth.

Dong do it again, it is just a cynical exercise.

Like I said in the title, I knew nothing about this film before watching it. It popped up on some random Amazon Prime list when I was in the mood for a horror movie, I googled the name and saw the RT and IMDB scores were decent, and I watched it.

Looking at the reviews here, I have learned that the cast are actual real-life paranormal investigators, with a sizable fandom and a smattering of detractors (who seem to be duking it out in the reviews).

And I am very confused. I keep trying to write a review, deleting it all, and starting over.

I 100% thought it was a mockumentary. I'm still not sure that it isn't. I mean, I think it's certainly fiction, because I think paranormal stuff isn't real (sincerely sorry, not attempting to bash people's beliefs).

But, I don't know if the cast also think it's not real. I mean, obviously they think paranormal stuff is real. But did these events happen? Or are they just a story they're telling? Or are they dramatizing something that kind of happened, and they're fancying it up with little creepy vignettes?

And is this a deceptive thing? Like, are they positing that this is a 100% true story, and we're supposed to believe it's 100% true?

Or, is it a real story that's been kind of dramatized for the film, and we're supposed to know that it is?

Or, are these ghost hunters who are telling us a creepy fictional story, and we're supposed to know that it's just a fictional story?

What level am I supposed to be watching this on?!

When I thought this was a mockumentary, I thought it was pretty good. Naturalistic dialogue, great restraint with the scary parts, really believable relationships. I even thought some of the bit characters, like the Russian Studies professor, were fantastic actors.

Of course, now that I know it's real, it's really thrown me for a loop. I think that, if I were to watch it again through that lens, I might have an entirely different take on the film. When I thought these people were actors, I thought they were doing a fantastic job. Now that I know they're actual paranormal investigators, I think it's kind of embarrassing, and more than a little self-aggrandizing.

When I was still ignorant to the nature of the film, I thought all the goddess/folklore talk at the end of the movie was kind of smarmy and boring. I'm not a big fan of Horror movies that have a moralistic, happy ending. Basically, if the evil spirit gets put to rest, and the heroes live to fight another day, and we all learned something valuable, I'm not usually a big fan.

But the rest of the film was fine, so I gave it a pass.

But now, knowing that these people aren't actors, isn't that kind of....self-aggrandizing? They really believe they helped an ancient Slavic goddess? It's one thing to have a character say all this saccharine dialogue about beliefs and stuff, it's another thing entirely to just...say it.