Out Of Darkness Review: Caveman Horror Movie Has Night Scenes You Can Actually See

Horror fans are a generous audience, and as much as everyone wants to see great movies, there are really two key questions that need answering: Is the premise interesting, and is it creatively executed? Even one yes can be enough to make the experience worthwhile. In that framework, Out of Darkness is certainly worth a look. It takes a simple, familiar survival setup and winds back the clock 45,000 years, dropping us with a rag-tag group of cavepeople. Having left their tribe to explore unknown territory and found it barren and unforgiving, we meet them already in dire straits.

Then, they are beset by something. After seeing no life, they find evidence of death, in the form of a mammoth carcass picked to the bone. At night, huddled around the fire, they hear prowling in the dark. Suddenly, Heron (Luna Mwezi), son of the group’s leader Adem (Chuku Modu), is taken, but they must wait for daylight to pursue. Not knowing if Heron is alive or dead, they track the creature to the woods. To enter would sacrifice the visibility of the open landscape, and put them all at risk.

Out Of Darkness’ Immersive Style Is Its Greatest Strength

Haven’t you missed well-filmed night scenes?

If I were aiming to pique the interest of the film’s intended audience, I could stop there, but the execution of this idea is worth unpacking. Director Andrew Cumming’s debut feature is impressive; the first word that comes to mind is “immersive.” The film is committed to grounding us in a strong sense of time and place. The dialogue is in a fictional language created for the movie, and the natural landscape is shot in a way that emphasizes open, empty spaces. It’s easy to believe we’re glimpsing an era before we filled the world with evidence of our existence.

Out of Darkness is a horror thriller by director Andrew Cumming, and centers on a group of six survivors living in the distant past – 45,000 years ago. Escaping from their homeland, a group of survivors reaches the shore of a new tundra, hoping to find a new home in the caves of mountains in the distance – but nightfall yields a new dangerous set of challenges – some of them involving those who were there first.

Pros

• The filmmaking is atmospheric and immersive
• Crisply filmed night scenes give darkness a real texture
• The movie builds great tension from the unknown assailant

Cons

• Half-commitment to character development proves frustrating
• The movie’s less-interesting themes win out
• A third-act decision dissipates some of the quality horror atmosphere

It’s just as easy to feel that we’ve slipped out of time entirely. This film very cleverly opens with the six characters encircling a fire, the surrounding night total blackness, telling the story of their arrival as if it’s already passed into legend. More than exposition, it establishes the tone that will keep us in suspense once they’re attacked, as we are left to wonder along with them whether their tormentor is natural or supernatural. Out of Darkness primes us to experience a primordial fear; this is how campfire stories were born.

The feeling of being unsafe powers the film for a while, but it’s inconsistently sustained. The cinematography is a real asset — at a time when we’ve been plagued with underlit night scenes, here we actually see what we’re meant to. Fearful faces are clear against the void, and campfire blindness becomes a well-deployed cinematic tool. Pair that with the way settings and actors are framed, and Cumming’s visual style is usually the reason for any creeping sense of danger.

Related

10 Horror Movies Where You Never Actually See The Villain

The some of the best horror movie villains are kept entirely out of sight, allowing audiences to project their own fear.

Out Of Darkness Is Two Different, Incompatible Movies

And it all comes out in the third act

The approach to characterization, however, pulled me out of that. The six are introduced to us, through the opening story, as archetypes, and there is indeed a flatness to them. But as the “stray,” Beyah (Safia Oakley-Green), emerges as a pseudo-protagonist, the movie shows more interest in the specificity of the group’s dynamics. These aren’t developed enough to make more than a couple of characters feel fleshed-out, but even that level of development detracts from the overall feeling of universality. Instead of seeming intentionally archetypal, open vessels occupying familiar shapes, they become half-sketched individuals.

There is also something lost, atmospherically, when the group’s assailant is finally revealed. This isn’t the filmmakers dropping the ball, but shifting their priorities, letting story and theme take precedence. Narratively, I think this section is handled quite well, though the ending tries to sum up its message too neatly. But it made me aware of how much my investment was based on the mystery.

The filmmakers cite as inspirations Alien, The Thing, and The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, and a critical component of these horror movie classics is the fundamental unknowability of their antagonists. They aren’t kept from us — we even get lectures on the two extraterrestrials. But there’s a sense that the more we see of them, the less we understand. Where Out of Darkness wants to take us, by contrast, hinges on understanding.

It’s almost like Cumming has made two films, one through aesthetics and atmosphere and one through story and theme, that ultimately can’t coexist. Neither is a bad film, but the former makes a much greater impression, and I wish it had been seen through to the end. Still, Out of Darkness offers enough in its current form to be worth your time, and suggests a promising future for its director. If his next movie can fully synthesize story and style, it could prove one of the horror standouts of its year.