IMDb > The Bunker (2001) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The Bunker
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
The Bunker More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 4 of 9: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]
Index 84 reviews in total 

What horror? It's a very good psychological thriller.

Author: MKA from Milk Way
21 January 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***


I found this movie in a supermarket and it intrigued me. NOTE: reading some other reviews I see that many people blamed the accent, but I watched it dubbed, so I don't know. The movie itself isn't (IMO) a horror (as IMDb classifies it), but more a psychological thriller, where what characters think and do is sometimes more important than what actually happens. The location isn't really relevant, so if someone's thinking not to watch it only cause it's set in WWII, I invite such person to ignore the location at all: it could have been any other war.


What is really interesting is why some things happen: maybe the movie is classified as a horror because some events could be read as "paranormal activities", but I personally read them as some kind of intoxication (maybe caused by some toxic mildew, corpse's decomposition exhalations, or wrong storage of toxic substances/weapons) that caused hallucinations.

Was the above review useful to you?

You recall some films due to an event, phrase or moment. I remember The Bunker only because of the absence of all these things.

Author: oneguyrambling from Australia
8 April 2011

You know when someone breathlessly announces "I've got a joke for ya!", then proceeds to blunder and lurch through two minutes of nonsensical ramblings that end with the teller standing open mouthed, wide eyed, with his palms out – expecting a rapturous response… And you're standing there thinking "Wait. That was IT??" That right there is The Bunker. 90 odd minutes of build up after which the "Twist" is handed to you so lazily and ineffectively that you spend another 90 minutes pondering who you should write to in order to get that cumulative 3 hours tacked back onto your life.

The Bunker has a cast of no-names – with this on their resume I think I can see why – in fact I only recognized one of the actors. They all seem to be Brits playing German soldiers, no problems there Sean Connery was a Russian U Boat captain and Kevin Costner was Robin Hood (stretched too far there, just remember Connery), but they speak with such strong and obviously British accents that aside from the odd shaped helmets it is often impossible to believe for a second that they are German soldiers.

I've seen on message boards arguing that it shouldn't be important but it kinda is, I mean why even make them German? The crappy story and pointless twist would be just as ineffectual if they were British soldiers, then you wouldn't need to add "German soldiers speaking in strong British accents and even using British slang and idioms" to a laundry list of reason why The Bunker blows dog.

Moving on… so a bunch of *cough* "German" soldiers are holed up in a Bunker near the end of 1944 with the German forces in full retreat as the whole "let's take over Europe" plan drafted up on the back of a beer coaster backfires on them.

The first few minutes of the film sees the remnants of a retreating platoon begging and gaining entry to bring the total number of occupants to 7. The Bunker is very sturdy, however it is low on ammunition and supplies, and with advancing US forces the soldiers start to argue over the next course of action and how long remains before they flee or are overrun.

The group includes an elderly vet of WW1 and a young fresh faced soldier who it seems have both been manning the bunker for some time, and the remaining troops from a decimated platoon, some of who seem to resent others for an unexplained reason.

While a storm whips around outside the grizzled vet decides that it might be an opportune time to set the mood and explains that beneath the bunker are a series of tunnels that lead to hidden exits – but – shine torch under face – they harbour dark secrets and are probably haunted.

So finish your tea lads and let's get a good night's sleep! It's more than half way through the film before anything happens and when it does nothing seems clear, in fact until the reveal in the dying seconds it is fair to say that there is no way to know what is going on. This is not always a bad thing, The Sixth Sense showed that a last minute explanation can be effective, but when the truth finally arrives and the director looks at you with a big smile, wide eyes and his palms out saying "Ehhh?… EHHHH??"… you just might feel like punching him.

Or yourself for sitting through the last hour and a half.

There are countless films that I remember only for one notable scene or even one phrase or moment, I think I will remember The Bunker for an absence of all those things.

Final Rating – 4 / 10. This is less a poorly conceived or badly film than an inexplicable event. Who would greenlight such a flimsy plot bereft of action, plausibility and entertainment value in the first place is beyond me.

Read all the above in a Japanese accent if you want – it makes about as much sense as a British one.

Was the above review useful to you?

still an enigma for me

Author: trashgang from Midian
21 November 2010

Controversy, that's what the reviewers made of this movie. And for me I had my doubts what to think about it. There is almost no blood in it or gore. Can't really say that it was a horror flick nor a war flick. It takes place in World War II in Belgium, there are some fight scene's, but due low budget you don't see the enemy. searching for a place to hide they see a bunker. The two men in the bunker are telling them about the stories surrounding the bunker and not to go into some places. Each time you think, well, no we are going to see the monster they go into discussion. Still, it kept me watching wanting to know what really is wrong with the bunker. The plot is for me still not an answer to my questions. It did remind me of Sauna, also one i didn't really understood. So it's time for you to dig yourself into the bunker to see if you get it

Was the above review useful to you?

German Brits, less is more...

Author: amesmonde from Novelist of The Final Version
22 April 2010

Seven German soldiers played (mostly by Brits) are enclosed in one bunker during the Second World War. Made a year before the extravagant and bigger budget 1917 supernatural feast Deathwatch (2002), The Bunker is more compelling and ambiguous.

Deathwatch, Outpost and Dead Snow were clearly influenced by the gifted short film director Rob Green in his feature debut. With a stella, strong cast of familiar British actors that include Jack Davenport, Eddie Marsan, Andrew Tiernan and the great Jason Flemyng you know you're in for a treat.

It's a basic premise, soldiers retreat to bunker and while exploring the tunnel-system some strange events begin to drive them mad.

It's odd to see British actors playing Germans who survive an American attack, an unusual and interesting spin by Screenwriter Clive Dawson and the casting director. There's a tension driven, eerie score by Russell Currie. The cast are a excellent, with notable performances from Flemying and Fairbank, who is on great menacing form in this low effectual film. The Bunker set is well constructed there's a tension and ominous atmosphere throughout the film.

While not a horror or really scary, it's an exercise in paranoia and claustrophobia. It's the subtler of the aforementioned, and arguably less is more.

Was the above review useful to you?

Over budget for the quality of production/directing

Author: mcsmc from United States
10 October 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I just finished watching this movie and am still wondering what the conclusion was supposed to be. The actors did a great job at what they were told to do, but it was obvious that the director shouldn't quit his day job. The British accents of Germans was interesting enough, but the flashbacks, dreams, and memories of the supposed characters left much to be desired and would challenge even Sherlock Holmes in figuring out exactly what was going on. I felt as if the only people that screened this film were those intimately involved in making it, as any "outsider", such as myself, was left to be lost. The general ideas presented in it (horror/war combined, hidden motives of soldiers, war stress turning into other things, etc.) are great, but poorly played out. Character development, etc. all seemed to be an inside joke. To sum it up, I was very disappointed in this movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

Wrong accents

Author: eeree3 from Calexico, CA, USA
26 December 2007

I thought THE BUNKER was a decent movie but could have been better as one comment pointed out they were German soldiers but all had English accents. I don't think too many German soldiers regarded the Americans as bloody yanks during WW2.

Still it had some good parts in it so I gave it a 6 it reminded me of another British film called THE DESCENT which had a bunch of friends going caving in the Appalachian mountains but the movie was shot in england but they still tried to make it seem they were in America and some of the girls in the movie being Americans but their accent kinda gave them away.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Watchable but I can't think of any reason why you should watch this movie.

Author: Boba_Fett1138 from Groningen, The Netherlands
23 May 2007

This movie really had the potential in it to become one of my favorite movies; Horror and Nazi's. I always found this combination to be an intriguing one and I in general always enjoy and admire movies that try to combine several different elements such as different genre combinations and time period combinations. Plus I like watching movies with Nazi's in it (OK that sounded just wrong) because they're basically the ultimate movie villains.

The movie is from a period when the WW II genre was hot and popular again. A period that was launched by the success and critical acclaim of Steven Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan". This movie is just like any other genre movie that tried to gain some money after that success.

The movie lacks in basically everything; tension, mystery, character development, plot. On top of that the movie is obviously also made with a low-budget, which really shows on screen.

The concept of the movie sounds good enough for a scary, tense and atmospheric horror movie. The movie is perhaps more atmospheric than anything else but this just isn't enough in this case, since the movie builds up and builds up to basically nothing. Nothing extraordinary, tense or even mysterious ever really occurs in this movie, which is of course a huge miss and rather weird and disappointing to watch.

The movie has some good actors in it but none really shine in this movie. The characters remain too flat for that and the movie has too many characters in it and lacks a good- and likable main character. And yes it's definitely a bit weird to see some 'British-as-they-can-get' actors play a couple of Nazi's. As a matter of fact is there any reason that the characters in this movie are Nazi's, rather than British or American soldiers? As the movie progresses it becomes obvious why; they did it because the characters in the movie are far from good guys, as strongly becomes obvious at the end and with the help of some flashbacks. Having Americans, British or any other allied group as the main characters would had been far too sensitive and would had aroused far more criticism and controversy.

It's definitely not an unwatchable movie but I just can't think of any reason why anyone should ever watch this movie.


Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Still Waiting....

Author: Rob H from Cleveland, Ohio
4 November 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Believe me, this is a generous four.

The acting was surprisingly sound for a movie of this caliber. It's probably what kept me from giving this movie an even lower rating. There's no real character development, but I didn't expect much in the first place.

Don't let any of these other reviews fool you. This is NOT a good movie. Is it a horror flick? Nah. Is it a historical war film? No, not really. I'm still having a tough time deciding how to classify it. It certainly isn't scary enough to be considered a horror, and there's not nearly enough fighting to consider it a war movie. So what is it really? In a nutshell, it's a bunch a bunch of German soldiers (who oddly enough, sound very British), trapped in a bunker as the enemy advances upon them. With nowhere to go, it seems as if they will eventually succumb to the advancing allied forces. But alas, the tunnels! Only one problem, there's some kind of "thing" roaming them. Not that it matters, we see it but once the entire movie. In their paranoia, the Germans end up killing themselves, and the movie abruptly ends with two escaping through a hole in the ground. Nothing ever really happens. Ever. I'm sitting here now, still waiting for something to spark my interest. It just never happened.

If you like sitting around for an hour and a half only to feel very disappointed at the end, go ahead and see it. Otherwise, it would be wise to stay away, no matter how tempting it may seem to see this "movie".

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Not bad but lacking several elements

Author: Andrew Jakiel from United States
3 November 2006

The first thing that got my attention when I saw this movie on the shelf was the cover. Being located in the horror section I thought that this movie might provide a different outlet in a genre that is dominated by sequels and knockoffs of what is common right now (I can only imagine the amount of saw knockoffs that will be flooding the market in the next few years).

But I was rather disappointed with the movie and am surprised how it got a decent rating on IMDb (are these people watching the same movie that I am or do they simply have relatives that star in this film?) The action wasn't too bad and the characters and their acting was better than what you would expect from a direct to video movie. But to classify this movie as horror is probably the biggest mistake that the director made. Now I'm not saying that it should be placed in the historical section of your local video store, but I can't honestly say that there was a moment when I was truly scared.

There are some points of suspense but the director I believe fails to capitalize on this moments and get a jump out of the audience. I knew renting this movie that I wasn't going to be seeing a cult-classic or anything that was Oscar worthy but I was let down at the ending. I guess on the plus side I was never bored enough to want to turn the movie off, but that isn't saying that much.

In the end I would say not to rent this movie unless you are truly a WWII buff and want to see a story based on that time period. This movie wasn't even like the typical B horror movies where you are laughing throughout the movie and not in a state of panic or fear as the director had intended with his project. This movie got a 4 from me because it wasn't the worse thing I've seen but I am still being somewhat generous with my rating.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

very interesting, not 'hollywood' style, intense

Author: moonduck from United States
27 August 2006

Judging by the DVD cover (American release) would make one think this is yet another zombie horror gore-fest. Fortunately this movie does not live up to the cover. It is a good directorial debut, not overburdened with special effects, CGI and obligatory 20+ cutes with perfect faces and bodies. It is a story about effect of war and the atrocities committed in the name of 'patriotism' on the average person. It truly brings home that most soldiers, regardless of nationality, are just people; flawed, brave, trying to survive. I don't feel that the British accents detracted from the story at all. When watching a movie we are asked to suspend our disbelief, even when the story is based on a true event. Do not judge this movie by just looking at the surface; go deeper and let the underlying story speak to you. It will make you think.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 4 of 9: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history