Archons

I'm actually kind of annoyed. At the beginning of the film I said "wow even if nothing happens I could look at the scenery the whole time and still be pleased." That is until I started really desiring to know the whole mystery and honestly there was no actual ending. There was no question answered. The movie made no sense, the characters were terrible actors and their interactions more frustrating than not knowing what was happening in the storyline. I'm pretty lenient with movies but this was just a very pretty turd. Gorgeous scenery, the characters seemingly looked their parts, it should've been fairly easy but no. The effects were terrible too, from the monsters to the headless wooden dummy sitting in the shower. Yeah I saw that wooden hand, we all did.... Disappointing considering the director previously made a movie alot of people really likes. I expected better. And you should too. Very slow burn, very frustrating to watch.

Nick Szostakiwskyj's previous film, "Black Mountain Side" remains one of my favorite horror movies of the past decade, it is atmospheric, scary and interesting, so I was really excited to watch "Archons" and it was a big disappointment. Compared to the previous film, it is a huge falling. I don't know what happened but the writing is bad, the script is terrible and in the end, it doesn't make any sense. Every aspect of the film looks amateurish, and this is not to blame on the low budget, because Black Mountain Side is also low budget and is professional and serious. The look of the "creatures" is laughable, but the fact that they did not use CGI is something to praise. Other than that, there are no good points to talk about, just a big disappointment.

If your into isolated location/horror strange creature films and accept these types of films for what they are, then this is defiantly worth a watch, i quite enjoyed it.

If you expect oscar winning acting from every film and are the sort of person to pick at small things, probaly not for you.

The ending makes this movie somewhat clear, "Where are your friends?" "I'm waiting for them to catch up.", in the sense of what the writer/director was going for, but the script itself does not work, or is not as clear as they thought or think it is. It's tough for writers to imagine what they see as symbolic or metaphorical is actually perceived by their audience. Sometimes they are "too close" to the work to evaluate it properly. That is why authors let friends/family/editors read or view their works before they publish/release them. If these reviewers are sychophants, then we end up with this kind of work because no one tells the author the truth, that the symbols/ideas need some retooling. There are good ideas here, and I wish the creators had taken more time to get good feedback. It won a best movie award. Why? Because all too often when people don't understand something, they think it must be great because the creator is intelligent. There are serious problems with this film that could be fixed. Maybe those clarifying elements are lying on the cutting room floor. They certainly are not in the final product.

If you standard of quality for monster movies worth watching is nothing less than that of Aliens, then Archons will disappoint. If you are more laid back about such matters, this movie is fine entertainment. The four principle characters are interesting, each in a unique way, and chemistry between them is quickly established. All this helps a viewer care what happens to them, which is important for maintaining interest during the first 40 minutes, when the story is developing a bit slow as they canoe down a Canadian river.

Special mention should also be made of Cameron Tremblay's work with lighting and colors. His efforts really helped establish an ominous ambience right from the start.