IMDb > Death Tunnel (2005) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Death Tunnel
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
Death Tunnel More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 9 of 16: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [Next]
Index 156 reviews in total 


Author: MartianOctocretr5 from Redondo Beach, CA
4 October 2009

This dry trashterpiece is so boring it will make you think you've been hit by a tranquilizer dart. It takes an infamous haunting "hot spot," (a sanatorium where many people died of a plague in the '30's) along with stories surrounding the place, and takes this potentially interesting theme nowhere for 90 painful minutes.

Think of a bland shade of gray on a carpet that stretches out to the horizon in all directions: that's how exciting this film is. Five groupies, who look and dress like Madonna on a cheap drunk, are at a party, then we see them moaning inside the sanatorium (shall we rip off Saw, anyone?). Then they start to scream endlessly. The acting is atrocious: but in all fairness, they weren't given anything to work with, either. The plot, if you want to call it that, inches along slower than a dead caterpillar, and cheap "loud noise" moments fail to scare the smallest child in the audience. A dull mono-tonal soundtrack forever drones on in the background, and the sets lack any creativity of design. The same flashing pictures of rotting 8 mm film clips and browned newspaper clippings are used like a machine gun, but it fails to conceal the fact this movie has absolutely nothing going on. Then there's that "distorted voice of evil," also used poorly.

Making "finger puppet" shadows on the wall would be scarier than this turkey.

Was the above review useful to you?

Seen better,but

Author: board-5 from Hungary
7 August 2009

Love or hate this I've seen far worst,also far better,maybe it's entertaining factor is not work as far as the creators wanted,but the message is just shocked me,that is what I will not forget for my life.Interiors of the big scary,abandoned hospital,just take what creators wanted to take from you,attention,but sometimes they need more,and clear story.

Creators wanted use sound editing to be more entertaining,sometimes it's worked for me,but not every time,the whole film becomes boring,and getting better only at the last 30-minutes,but finally the ending is not as satisfying as creators dreamed about it.

This is a low budget film,but it would be better with bigger budget.(Rare situation)


Was the above review useful to you?

it's not bad.....but its not GOOD either

Author: Sophie King from United States
6 September 2008

i've been interested in the stories of Waverly Hills ever since i was little, so when i saw that that's what this movie was about, i wanted to see it instantly. death tunnel is say the least. the subject was interesting and the acting was better than most cheapo movies Sci-Fi plays over and over again. it was filmed in an interesting way and the over done (WAY over done) as they were...were good. lets face it, this movie isn't as horrible as SO many people believe. if your looking for a few scares or if you're into cool abandoned buildings, watch it. waverly hills is a pretty disturbing place in real life and the movie does it justice.

oh, and if you're tired of movies with idiotic scantily clad college students...keep away. that was really the only thing that bugged me a lot about this film.

Was the above review useful to you?

Sad... sad excuse for a movie

Author: Billy K from Canada
23 July 2008

I was actually really interested in watching this movie. The Booth brothers did a pretty good documentary on The Death Tunnel, and I enjoyed that, so when I heard about this I figured why not. The Booth brothers should stick to doing documentaries and their Bret Michaels look a like contests because this movie was horrible. It honestly was a cross between House on Haunted Hill and House of 1,000 Corpses. Both of which were far better movies than this. I've coughed up scarier junk than this. They say that North America is in debt and it's because Movies like this are produced on a daily basis by bad hacks who want to try their hand at making movies. This movie was supposed to be based on true events, but the only thing true about it was the original building, and the events that happened up until the 1980. I could write a better "true events" bad horror flick in my damn sleep.

Was the above review useful to you?

What a waste of opportunity.. :(

Author: arminio from Croatia
28 June 2008

I simply couldn't believe that someone can waste such a great idea and location! I mean - how can you make bad movie in Waverly Hills?!

But Booth brothers manage that! This movie is completely bad! There is no atmosphere, it is "overedited", it is full with annoying "boo" scares that are totally nonscary and become boring because you easily can predict when it will come next one because they put them in every single creepy situation ruining entire atmosphere. And you need to know a lot about Waverly Hills hospital before watching this movie because lot of situations looks like pretty senseless "plot points" and looks stupid instead scary if you are not familiar with real mystery about the place. And above all, there is no any decent story (although near the end they try to make some sense out of all and blow everything even more in stupidity) - just a sequence of poor "boo" scares, running or walking thru the spooky corridors shot in pretty unspooky way and very annoyingly edited with completely missed score and irritating sound effects that constantly try to keep you "on the edge" which leads to boredom instead scary feeling. Bad, bad, bad... I really couldn't believe it can be so bad - but it is. Completely vaste of time, idea and location.

I hope somebody will make a true horror movie on Waverly Hills. For now, Session 9 is closest to perfection (and shot in Danver Mental hospital) - let's somebody make something that spooky in Waverly Hills...

2/10 just for some nice location shots

Was the above review useful to you?

boring, not scary, complete waste of time

Author: ICPhannah from United Kingdom
23 June 2008

Well when i browse through movies, titles with 'death' in the name usually appeal to me so i looked up death tunnel on IMDb. I watched the trailer and it seemed adequate so i watched it. Oh how naive i was.

The concept of the film itself is pretty good: A haunted building where 5 slutty girls have to spend 5 hours in. The actual acting, directing, camera shots and effects were extremely poor. They over used the splicing scary image effect excessively and they seemed to use the soundtrack too much to be creepy. The acting drains any hope of there being a decent scene and the way they went for the stereotypical hoe bags just seemed to kill the movie even more.

I can surely say that this film was a waste of effort and made with amateur skills of movie making.

give it a miss.

Was the above review useful to you?

Not so good...

Author: traktorn from Finland
12 May 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Personally, I did not like this movie. Neither did my girlfriend who gets scared easily, we watched it together. The only things that's cool about this movie are hot chicks and that Waverly Hills Sanitorium exists for real (the main place in Death Tunnel). The story in Death Tunnel makes no sense (to me). There's a party somewhere, 5 girls gets randomly picked out to go to a haunted hospital and spend five hours there. There's like a tunnel there where the hospital workers used to put bodies in. And then the chicks suddenly start dying, one by one... Scary! Not. Well sure, once or twice you could jump out of your seat but thats only because there's like a pop-up of a ghost or something like that. And some of the girls are bad actors too, but they're hot so why would you be good at acting when you can look good instead? I give this movie 3/10, only because the hospital exists for real and is one of America's most haunted places, which I think is cool. I recommend this movie to young teenagers who think ghost horror movies are cool and like hot chicks.

Was the above review useful to you?

Pretty much what I expected

Author: papa_mcphat from United States
24 February 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Normally I am more brutal when reviewing a movie this bad, but let's face it… I knew what I was getting into before I watched it. I reserve my most brutal reviews for movies that had potential or a budget. My guess is that everyone else that watched this expected a bad movie too. However, I noticed a lot of people are calling this "disappointing" and saying they want their 90 minutes back like they actually didn't know what they were getting into. Therefore, if you read the back of the box and have an IQ of 50 (or whatever the lowest IQ is of someone still capable of reading and going on-line) and thought Death Tunnel sounded worth watching, this review is for you.

Death Tunnel is a movie about 5 college girls trapped in an abandoned hospital where lots of atrocities happened many years earlier (all explained in the intro). Why the girls were in the hospital with cameras on them was never really explained very well, but it seemed to have something to do with a college initiation and a really bad plot twist near the end of the movie. Fortunately, this initiation required the ladies to wear bedtime clothes so all the women were scantily clad. And unlike most other horror movies of this caliber, the college girls didn't look like 40-year-old washed up porn stars with pig tails (which is why I rated this movie 3 stars instead of 2). Don't get your hopes up though… you only get to see one of them naked and it was the least attractive of them. Not only that, but her nude scene was about as stupid/pointless as they get.

At the time of this writing the IMDb rating is 2.7. I would have to agree with that. This movie didn't look too low budget and I guess I can see how this plot might have looked good on paper (hell, it's been done many times successfully by other directors in the past), but that's about all it had going for it. The acting/writing/directing/editing were all sub-par. I would provide examples, but there was nothing really memorable or special in this movie worth noting. I really wouldn't recommend it unless you, like me, are a fan of really bad/cheesy horror movies.

There is one other thing I would like to say in the 0.01 % chance a future horror movie director reads this looking for suggestions… Horror movies should never have a techno/metal soundtrack. There's this thing called "atmosphere" and the soundtrack is vital to establishing this.

Was the above review useful to you?

Death Tunnel

Author: stevesky from United Kingdom
5 November 2007

iarepacman's observations are spot on.. this is a real chore to get through once you realise that there's no well thought out plot or story progression.. just a bunch of random scenes thrown together with a loose link. Why bother writing about it then? Well because it is a real shame.. the locations, filming, editing and production design are absolutely top notch.. this could have been a truly terrifying and entertaining film but it's let down severely by the script... what could have been a classic ends up being a good looking mess and waste of 2hrs of your life... if they do make Death Tunnel 2... let someone else write the screenplay and PLEASE give it some progressive structure that makes sense...

Was the above review useful to you?

Another Rip-Off Movie

Author: John Crane from United States
11 July 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Death Tunnel, for me, was an atrocity of a film manly for three reasons: the acting was painful, the plot was a rip off and it had some scenes that were irrelevant to the story and plot outline. Essentially its about a group of young people that who are dared to stay overnight in a creepy, old abandoned hospital, there are 8 people and there is one person per floor. They must make it though all floors to win. Apparently, if I remember correctly, this hospital was filled with really sick people that were killed by Dr. Vangard during electroshock theory and later disposed of in an underground sewer line called the "death tunnel." This movie was an obvious rip off of 1999's House on Haunted Hill, which had the same principle. Consider: in Death Tunnel Dr. Vangard tortures his patients via electroshock and disposed the bodies, in Haunted Hill Dr. Vannicutt tortures his patients via electroshock and surgery and disposes the bodies in a secret room. Coincidence? I think not.

To start off, the acting was hard to watch and at some points it seemed like a Lifetime movie or a WGN afternoon soap opera. However, I don't think it's the actors and actresses fault, entirely, I think part of the reason was the director was not pushing them to their full potential and I'm beginning to question whether or not he can recognize good acting and bad acting through the camera lens. There are some good emotional acting as well as screams by the five girls who play in this film, there are some good crying scenes but there are points were the acting seemed a bit too staged and corny for me. Granted, they did what they could for a generally bad movie.

The plot was very worn out and has been used in multiple movies. As I said before, we have seen this plot in Haunted Hill but what I failed to mention before was that the reason to why the ghosts are killing these girls is another subplot that involves heirs and past generations, yet another plot point that '99's Haunted Hill had. Can we see that this film, despite some minor differences seems more like a B+-movie remake or sequel? The one thing that this movie had that Haunted Hill did not have, which I was sad it didn't' was the theme and metaphor of Death. Unlike previous movies of the same plot that revolved around crazy psychotic ghosts or maniacal doctors, this one had Death incarnate. However, there are some completely unnecessary filler shots that did not make any sense and were inappropriately random. It had the feel of "Behind the Wall of Sleep." (i.e. the shower room scene the had orange goo). There were just too much non sequitur scenes in this one.

The only thing that could have saved this film was the camera angles and the lighting. The movie had a feel that fits with its confusing and deranged plot and acting. The camera angles reflected greatly upon complexity and the director did a great job balancing intense angular shots and establishing shots. The lighting had a cold and dark feel. There were some great poetic shots that reflected the corridors as well as the scenery shots outside of the hospital and there were some excellent lighting that rotated around the hospital as well as the Death Tunnel.

All in all, this movie was a fairly decent atrocity of a film, with poor acting, poor plot and it incorporated scenes that made no sense whatsoever. Despite the great cinematography an excellent lighting, this film is still a bad film to watch and I would not recommend this one to any horror fan who has a good palate. Perhaps those who love B-movies with a special twist would love this film but as for someone like me, I did not find it remotely amusing.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 9 of 16: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

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