User reviews

A plane carrying employees of a large biotech firm--including the CEO's daughter--goes down in thick forest in the Pacific Northwest. When the search and rescue mission is called off, the CEO, Harlan Knowles (Lance Henriksen), puts together a small ragtag group to execute their own search and rescue mission. But just what is Knowles searching for and trying to rescue, and just what is following and watching them in the woods?

Oy, what a mess this film was! It was a shame, because for one, it stars Lance Henriksen, who is one of my favorite modern genre actors, and two, it could have easily been a decent film. It suffers from two major flaws, and they're probably both writer/director Jonas Quastel's fault--this film (which I'll be calling by its aka of Sasquatch) has just about the worst editing I've ever seen next to Alone in the Dark (2005), and Quastel's constant advice for the cast appears to have been, "Okay, let's try that again, but this time I want everyone to talk on top of each other, improvise non-sequiturs and generally try to be as annoying as possible".

The potential was there. Despite the rip-off aspects (any material related to the plane crash was obviously trying to crib The Blair Witch Project (1999) and any material related to the titular monster was cribbing Predator (1987)), Ed Wood-like exposition and ridiculous dialogue, the plot had promise and potential for subtler and far less saccharine subtexts. The monster costume, once we actually get to see it, was more than sufficient for my tastes. The mixture of character types trudging through the woods could have been great if Quastel and fellow writer Chris Lanning would have turned down the stereotype notch from 11 to at least 5 and spent more time exploring their relationships. The monster's "lair" had some nice production design, specifically the corpse decorations ala a more primitive Jeepers Creepers (2001). If it had been edited well, there were some scenes with decent dialogue that could have easily been effective.

But the most frightening thing about Sasquatch is the number of missteps made: For some reason, Quastel thinks it's a good idea to chop up dialogue scenes that occur within minutes of each other in real time so that instead we see a few lines of scene A, then a few lines of scene B, then back to A, back to B, and so on.

For some reason, he thinks it's a good idea to use frequently use black screens in between snippets of dialogue, whether we need the idea of an unspecified amount of time passing between irrelevant comments or whether the irrelevant comments seem to be occurring one after the other in time anyway.

For some reason, he doesn't care whether scenes were shot during the morning, afternoon, middle of the night, etc. He just cuts to them at random. For that matter, the scenes we're shown appear to be selected at random. Important events either never or barely appear, and we're stuck with far too many pointless scenes.

For some reason, he left a scene about cave art in the film when it either needs more exposition to justify getting there, or it needs to just be cut out, because it's not that important (the monster's intelligence and "humanity" could have easily been shown in another way).

For some reason, there is a whole character--Mary Mancini--left in the script even though she's superfluous.

For some reason we suddenly go to a extremely soft-core porno scene, even though the motif is never repeated again.

For some reason, characters keep calling Harlan Knowles "Mr. H", like they're stereotypes of Asian domestics.

For some reason, Quastel insists on using the "Blurry Cam" and "Distorto-Cam" for the monster attack scenes, even though the costume doesn't look that bad, and it would have been much more effective to put in some fog, a subtle filter, or anything else other than bad cinematography.

I could go on, but you get the idea.

I really wanted to like this film better than I did—I'm a Henriksen fan, I'm intrigued by the subject, I loved the setting, I love hiking and this is basically a hiking film on one level--but I just couldn't. Every time I thought it was "going to be better from this point until the end", Quastel made some other awful move. In the end, my score was a 3 out of 10.

Hey all, I just wanted to give you all a few crazy facts about this movie. I was actually one of the Make-up FX artists that help create the "beast" for this movie and I have to tell you the original creature looked absolutely amazing. I remember when we got the first photos back from the set we were all talking about how much of a shame it was that this creature was in a movie that would probably be pretty poor.

What actually happened though was that Jason Palmer did the original make-up for the Sasquatch, but for some reason they had to go back and re-shoot much of the creature. The sad part was that Jason passed away a few weeks before that and so the re-done creature was no where near as awesome as the original one.

For me it was quite sad because this was Jasons final movie, and he sort of got cheated out of his final fame due to the bad re-shoots. Anyway, I thought you guys may find that a tad interesing, and if you would like you can head over to mmmyeah.com and check out some "behind the scenes" photos.

Later, Jeff

One minute into THE UNTOLD and it`s already ripped off techniques from THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT and PREDATOR . Does this mean we`ll be seeing lots of trees ? We sure will . Will we be seeing an Austrian bodybuilder blowing things up ? Well this film has the budget of a TVM so the answer is a resounding no . Does anyone like these soft porn shows like BEDTIME STORIES ? Good because there`s a scene in this that resembles these type of shows . Unfortunately the only thing you see is cellulite . Do you like it when the screen fades to black during a TVM ? Great because this happens between every scene in THE UNTOLD . In fact it happens during every scene too . Did you enjoy MILLIONAIRE - A MAJOR FRAUD ? Fantastic because one of the characters looks like a bearded Major Charles Ingram the contestant who tried to swindle the show out of one million pounds . Seriously one of the characters looks like Major Ingram . I kept expecting him to say " It`s bear. It could be a bear . But it might be a bigfoot < Cough , cough > , yes it`s a bigfoot < Cough > , it`s definately a bigfoot < Cough > Yes I`m going to shoot it . Final answer Chris "

Oh and have I mentioned that all the above are the good bits ?

THE UNTOLD isn`t the worst bigfoot movie I`ve ever seen , that accolade firmly goes to NIGHT OF THE DEMON which I saw over twenty years ago and I think I`ve only seen less than a dozen films that are worse in all of that time . But that said THE UNTOLD is still a very poor film in just about every aspect , especially editing . As some other reviewers have pointed out it feels like whole chunks of the film are missing while there`s other bits where scenes are spliced together in the wrong order . This is a really bad film that deserves far less than its rating of 5.1. I give it 3 out of ten and I`m being very kind

This was the worst creature horror i have ever seen, the story is banal and far from thrilling, the acting apart from henriksen (who looks really p***ed off to be in this movie) is abysmal,

the worst thing about this movie is the directing:

The movie fades to black at almost every single opportunity was really anoying after a while.

The Plastic screen over the camera showing the monster's point of view is irritating rather than innovative.

Henriksen Fans should stick to watching re-runs of 'Millenium' rather than this utter crap.

Rating 0/10

Lance used to get quality support work from James Cameron. Heck, he even had his own tv show (Millenium) for a coupl'a seasons. Why is he doing this? Couldn't he find some better way to pay his bills?

I love a good low-budget movie. Some of them you can laugh at simply due to their ludicrous premise, their textbook stereotyped characters, or often times because the actors are related to the director/producers. But, this movie has no redeeming value. I didn't laugh. I didn't cry. I only had this sick feeling in my stomach. That feeling was quickly identified as pity. At one point, Lance Henriksen was an A-list support actor. He's been in Terminator (he was going to BE terminator before Arnold showed up), Aliens, AliensIII, classic B-movie Pumpkinhead, among so many others! I wanted to send him money after this. Maybe we should start a support Lance fund or something.

Then again, for making this thing...maybe not.

An airplane transporting some scientists and a prototype of a DNA machine, a powerful and revolutionary invent, fall in a jungle in Pacific. The insurance company sponsors a rescue expedition, commanded by Harlan Knowles (Lance Henriksen), the owner of a huge corporation, which owns the prototype, and father of one of the scientist. There, the group finds the rests of the plane five miles far from the expected location and the machine and the remains of the persons. Further, they realize that a Sasquatch, a kind of Big Foot, is chasing them. This movie is so ridiculous that I do not know what I am doing, spending my time again in this garbage. The direction is awful, the actors and the lines are horrible, copying parts of `The Predator' and even `The Blair Witch Project'. To summarize how bad this movie is, its best scene is when Marla Lawson, the character of Andrea Roth, is wounded, and the guide of the expedition says that she needs to have an injection of tetanus vaccine. Andrea undresses her jeans, and the guide says: 'Nice butts, but the shot needs to be in your arm'. Ridiculous! My vote is two.

Title (Brazil): `Sasquatch, O Abominável' (`Sasquatch, The Abominable')

(r#64)

Unredeemable, merit-less, and above all dreary trash. You know a movie is going to be bad when its sole star power is Lance Henriksen. The French title for this movie says it all: "Inexplicable". How can you possibly make a movie this unbelievably bad in this day and age? Whatever Jonas Quastel's trick is, it worked. This is über-trash, I'm talking 'Manos'-level crap, meaningless, unwatchable, not-even-so-bad-it's-good, cinematic bile of the highest order.

Lance Henriksen IS Harlan Knowles, a character who could have been interesting if he wasn't so utterly devoid of characteristics or personality. He, along with a bunch of morons, goes on a field trip to search for an evil Sasquatch which is believed to have attacked a plane which crashed out in the woods, or something. Not much else happens. There's some soft-core (meaning: Teletubbie level) nudity and some blatant rip-offs of "Predator". After 92 minutes of utter pain and another ripped off scene, this time from "Blair Witch", the movie finally staggers across the finish line and ends. As a bonus, we only see the monster itself for about one or two scenes in the entire movie.

There's really not much to say about this film. All you need to know is, this is a very bad movie and not even worth viewing as a "so-bad-it's-good" flick. "The Untold" is to entertainment value what Orlando Bloom is to character acting. Avoid it like arsenic.

A plane carrying a rich scientist's daughter goes down in thick wilderness. He assembles a group to go and find her and the others, but the rescue party soon suspects that something is stalking them. Then ulterior motives for the expedition are revealed and that only adds to the already existing tension.

The movie is a decent idea and a take on the popular Sasquatch legend was bound to wind up on film sooner or later. However, the film's direction breaks a fundamental rule of horror/thriller directing and that is showing too much too soon. Of course the audience knows there is something stalking the characters, just read the title! But showing what should have been the film's kicker that early just ruins most of the suspense and, as a direct result, much of the fun. The film also lacks a good atmosphere and there are almost no landscape shots that show the expanse of the wilderness, but there are plenty monster point-of-view shots that add nothing to anything. They actually knock off 'Predator' quite shamelessly. The low-budget horror film 'Wendigo' did what this film tries to do much better.

Some of the character tensions and a non-cliché ending manage to make up for this rise above the crap pile, but it is still poor and given the premise and potential, very disappointing. --- 4/10

Rated R for some violence and profanity, but it's pretty tame compared to most R-rated horror.

This movie has everything wrong with it: overdone plot, terrible dialogue (which is full of cliches), poor acting, and ridiculous camerawork. The only thing that was decent was the acting job by the dead daughter, which although tried to copy Blair Witch Project acting, was very good.

Harlan Knowles (Lance Henriksen) brings a group of people to a mountain to help find his missing daughter (Erica Durance). What they don't know is that she was killed by a sasquatch (Taras Kostyuk) and it's still out there... waiting for them.

It was a late night when I poped this into my DVD player. I seriously wish I could go back in time and stop me. Most people will tell you that films like "House of the Dead" or "S.I.C.K: Serial Insain Clown Killers" will be the movies you wish you've never seen. Wrong. This will be.

I've seen a lot of crap, but this is the only crap that's haunted me. How I wish I never watched this! The acting actually isn't so bad. It's just the writing and the directing and the pacing and everything! I am actually a fan of Sasquatch films. But not this one.

Please, listen to my warning. Don't watch this!

This film is a keeper for several reasons as I will try to briefly list below. If you bother to check into this movie you will that the main unit was shot in 12 days, they had to use two bigfoots, two creatures, and sadly their original creature maker died while they were still working on this film.

Through all of this comes a film that is adventurous, gripping and close to reality in several aspects of true bigfoot articles, stories and behavior. The scenery shots are spectacular for all of us not near the Pacific North West and the story makes sense and is said to be true. Sure this isn't a 10 but it sure is better than many movies I have seen and ranks high for something that people of all ages could enjoy.

I think the main problem people are facing with this is that they are expecting a thrasher/slasher movie and this is much more, deeper, more creative and designed for adventure and to tell a story. See it for what it is and you will enjoy it.

Lance Henriksen leads this cast in search for his daughter, but ends up finding something that has no documented proof of. I must say the plot is sort of week, but the cast and cinematography makes up for it. Much of the camera movement reminds me of a refined version of The Blair Witch Project. Lots of jostling of the camera and lots of fast movements. Throughout the entire movie you're pretty much watching through the Sasquatch's eyes, which is very interesting because it seems they have heat sensory vision. I enjoyed the movie through this point, and uttered a few shrieks from time to time. I think the cast did a great job at being frightened in the middle of the woods with something stalking them. Plus, you've got Lance Henriksen in the movie. He did a pretty good job surviving in the woods considering his age. Not to mention, this is one of the few movies he has acted in where he isn't killed, so that in itself is something to watch. (I'm a Lance Henriksen fan) Costuming...the Sasquatch in the movie doesn't look like those previous photos you've seen before in documentaries. Although you don't see much of the Sasquatch in full and when you do it's pretty much just a large black figure, with less hair and fur. I'm also very surprised that the video store I bought this from put it in the Horror section as it clearly isn't a horror film. It's much more of a Thrille/Action film with a tad of Science Fiction. There's a surprise conclusion, which sparked a few questions in my mind. I'd give this movie a 7/10.

Look, I'm not one who automatically looks down on low-budget genre movies. In fact, I watch them all the time. But there's little positive I can say about this movie. The cinematography is okay, the locations look nice, and... well, that's all for the positive.

Now the negative. Hoo boy. It mainly boils down to a terrible script and aggressively annoying directing. First, the script. To put it bluntly, almost NOTHING of real consequence happens up until near the end. Most of the movie just consists of the characters wandering around, sensing something is out there, and blurting out various theories. What's surprising is that even though there is a lot of nothing, often when there is some important explanation it it left unfinished (probably more due to the editing, which is unbelievably inept at times). Sometimes whole sequences are missing. In fact, these and other lapses suggest the shoot had problems and the production wasn't able to shoot everything that was planned.

And the directing... well, as others have said, there is the annoying fade-to-black that seems to happen every four minutes, the images being manipulated by unfocusing and other techniques that make you utter confused as to what's happening, badly chosen camera angles, no sense of tension, no feeling of struggle, etc. etc. I could go on, but you get the idea.

A number of people have claimed that no movie involving Sasquatch has been any good. While I can't claim to have seen every such movie, this movie certainly adds considerable fuel to the argument. If you want to see a low budget movie about people stranded in the wilderness who are attacked by hairy creatures, I strongly recommend you instead watch the vastly entertaining "Dog Soldiers".

I can't believe how bad this "film" is. For starters, the movie deals with the legend of Big Foot and a group of people having a close encounter with the creature. The premise is interesting and having Lance Henriksen in the cast (ALIENS)gave "The Untold" a promising outlook. Unfortunately that's as interesting as it gets. This looks like a direct to DVD release...or so I guess. This is basically a production-less affair with probably the worst editing (with a constant "fading to black" in between every scene!!!)I've seen in my life and acting that will sure make you cringe. Why Lance Henriksen picked this is completely fathomless. And the movie takes cues from just about any other genre movie, from "Blair Witch Project" (The video scene) and "Predator", to "Alive". This is supposedly based on true events, but the only truth to be found herein is just how BAD this movie is. I'm usually not a harsh critic and believe me, I DID try to enjoy this trash but eventually did NOT. Do yourselves a favor and steer clear from this DVD.

I'll try to put it mildly: This movie is PURE garbage and it made me want to take my gun and shoot my neighbors... or ask BLOCKBUSTER for a refund!!!

And Lance, shame on you! 1* out of 10*

Hmm, How could I best describe 2003's "Sasquatch" (originally titled "The Untold")? If you can imagine a low budget version of both "The Edge" and "Predator," substituting a Bigfoot for the bear and alien, with some elements of "The Blair Witch Project" thrown in, you'd pretty much have "Sasquatch." The story involves a plane crash in Bigfoot territory and the group of people who search for the wreckage. As a matter of fact, the ENTIRE FILM takes place in the forest except for flashbacks, shot in British Columbia near Vancouver.

I'm kind of a sucker for these types of crisis-in-the-woods stories, so I have to admit that I marginally liked "Sasquatch," especially since the tone is totally serious. The film is marred a bit by some strange directorial techniques; particularly the irritating overuse of the 'fade-to-black' technique. Moreover, some of the characters and dialogue come off unbelievable.

On the plus side, the tone is serious and the filmmakers throw in a literal 'babe in the woods'; and, yes, she does have a nude hotspring scene (not that you see much, so don't get too excited), but the character's too much of a biyatch to be appealing and the actress, Andrea Roth, isn't THAT attractive anyway, at least not to me (the older woman who plays Nikki is actually more of a babe). Lance Henriksen is always good, of course; and some of the BC locations are quite scenic. I also liked the ending as it was more profound and moving than anticipated, but there's too much marking time; the film could've easily been cut by 15 minutes.

But, you ask, what about the appearance of the creature? In other words, is the 'payoff' any good? I kinda liked what they came up with, although it appears as if one of the beast's ancestors mated with Ben Franklin. Just joking; it's not the conventional look of the creature, but it's pretty cool.

This is not a great bigfoot flick; it's not even very good. In fact, it's one of the lesser recent SyFy films on Sassy (discounting the abysmal "Yeti: Curse of the Snow Demon" and that one with 'Greg' from The Brady Bunch and that other guy from The Partridge Family). But if you're a fan of the creature or a sucker for these types of stories, "Sasquatch" is mandatory.

The film runs 86 minutes.

Here's how I rate the various bigfoot flicks since the new millennium (see my reviews of each for details):

"Sasquatch Mountain" (2006): A-

"Sasquatch Hunters" (2005): B+

"Abominable" (2006): B

"Snowbeast" (2011): B-

"Clawed" (2005): C+

"Sasquatch" (2003): C

"Yeti: Curse of the Snow Demon" (2008): F

A big waste of time is all you'll get out of this bag. I rented this hoping for a suspenseful movie with maybe a few believable scenes, but boy was I ever dissapointed. I think the title should've been "Camping 101", or something to that effect. Well, anyway, stay the hell away from this film. It numbs you to death. Don't be afraid of big foot, be afraid of this crap!!

This looks decidedly like "the amateur" hour. How this piece of trash was ever released is beyond me: the acting, the story, the characters, the supposedly special effects, etc...it's ALL wrong. Why Lance Henriksen accepted this will remain one of the great mysteries of cinema. Maybe he was in dire need for money or maybe be was under the influence of some illegal drug.

It is pointless trying to explain you what this movie's about. It deals with the big foot legend but done in the worst possible manner. In fact, this stinker smells like a direct-to-video release.

Avoid at ALL costs! 0* out of 10*

Based on actual accounts, "The Untold" is the story of Harlan Knowles (Lance Henriksen), billionaire and President of Bio-Comp Industries who heads up a team of experts in a quest to locate a company plane that disappeared over the remote forests of the Pacific Northwest.

This film is another example of Lance Henriksen giving credibility to a movie that did not deserve it. That is not to knock him. He is a great actor, and has made consistently good movies and television since before I was born. But the sad thing is his willingness to appear in low-budget films means people will rent or buy a film to see him, even though the rest of the movie (plot, direction) is just awful.

I do not even feel the need to review this film because it was so bad. There was a clever gimmick of having a DNA analysis machine. I liked that, except when it said that someone had a heart condition in their youth. I highly doubt that would be in the DNA code.

I'm not sure what it is but there seems to be some curse when it comes to films about the elusive Bigfoot. There has yet to be a film that intelligently approaches the subject, nor one that creates any real suspense. Both "Legend of Boggy Creek" (1972) and the first film entitled "Sasquatch" (1978) have become minor cult classics, but neither were very memorable. Both films were targeted at family friendly audiences, thus inhibiting themselves from actually trying to scare anyone. "Harry & The Hendersons" (1987) was the first big budgeted film to use Bigfoot, with a terrific creature design by Rick Baker. However, they too chose to aim for younger audiences, but this time as a comedy (as did "Bigfoot" in 1995). I've long awaited for someone to tackle the subject as a thriller, perhaps in the vein of "Jaws" or "Predator". When I saw this at my local video store I thought my dream had come true. Boy, was I wrong! Lance Henriksen plays a billionaire who leads an expedition into the pacific northwest in hopes of finding his daughter as she was on board a small plane when it crashed in the mountains. The premise is interesting and sounded promising. The truth is it never builds any real suspense. I never found myself at all interested in any of the characters as each of them were very two dimensional and rather bland. Even the always dependable Henriksen seems to be phoning in his performance. Every time he appears on screen he looks plain bored. He should be as there is no action to speak of for the first hour of the film. As for the creature, where do I start? I figured at the very least we would get a cool looking monster running around in the woods, but instead we get this bald (yes, I said "bald!") man with pitch black skin and patches of fur here and there. Picture a cross between "Swamp Thing" and Chaka from "Land of the Lost" and you'll get the idea. Nothing like the artwork on the cover box I assure you. Sloppy editing and careless direction also adds to the confusion as half the time everything seemed out of sequence, while the other half of the film was constantly used up with these long, slow fade outs (which made no sense or served any purpose). They even stole the whole infra-red vision P.O.V from the creature in "Predator", which just looked too silly and out of place to be effective. Maybe all this proves is that Hollywood should just forget about trying to make anymore Bigfoot films, as they have yet to make one that works. So far each one has been as scary as an episode of "In Search Of" 3/10

The acting although not a huge name cast is most convincing, Lance Henriksen is terrific. The movie delivers the audience excitement and intrigue as the story of the Sasquatch is portrayed and relayed in a most eye-opening manner. Coupling the fact this has a plot, it keeps you on the edge of your seat and has direction - I feel for the genre and the independant nature of this film, it gives the audience real BANG for the BUCK. Probably the most intriguing of smaller films I have seen in sometime. Cinematography/special effects and the backdrops are stunning. This is a don't miss movie for all ages of audience.

I`ve just seen this movie, and i looked forward to seing it, cause i`m a big Lance Henriksen fan. The plot in this movie is simple, and offcourse we have all seen it before, but i feel this is a good movie for what it is. Much better than the same like movie "Dog Soldiers"

Good to see some easy,cheap thriller movie.

The only bad thing is the cheap camera effects with the zoom and dingling up and down. But it`s not to bad. See it!

It's better than your average Bigfoot movie, but of course that's not saying much. It was relatively well-written most of the way through, though there were some glaring bad spots. One of the bad spots were a few of the characters: some were just too cliched. There was the drunken, arrogant, over-the-hill big-game hunter Winston Burg, who is mainly there to be an ass -- you know he's going to die. Then there was gold-digging insurance investigator, Marla, who doesn't pass up a chance to try to seduce the CEO of the company, Harlan, to try to get the secrets of his company -- you know she's going to die too.

They couldn't keep up the suspense in this movie too long either. They tried, lots of blurry shots, unexplained noises, etc. But it didn't work too well. Eventually they just brought the guy in the ape-suit out -- not much else they could do with it.

This movie was made around 2002, at around the same time as the deathbed revelation of the original Bigfoot "discoverer" Ray Wallace, that Bigfoot was indeed a hoax, made up to get publicity. That coincidence couldn't have pleased the producers of this movie too much. So we are likely now at the end of the Bigfoot media mania. So this is likely the last Bigfoot movie that will ever be made anymore.