IMDb > The Tunnel (2011/I) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The 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
The Tunnel More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 8 of 12: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 112 reviews in total 

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Why to watch? Why not to watch? That is the question

Author: T-Horror from Australia
25 September 2011

This movie is Blair witch meets the Descent plus one in their respective categories.

Blair's plot had a lot more twists to a chilling ending (depending on who you talk to to) but the camera footage was very unstable. The Tunnel rectifies this problem, although in a running scene the camera does stare at feet, in talking shots the movement is little if not on a tripod. A feature that made this movie much easier to watch.

As for the tunnel's plot, I wouldn't say it was the most en-genius or original idea, but it was all put together very well. The depth of the characters allows a viewer to believe these are real people. Whether they be conceited or fun.

Naturally they move along the lines of 'this actually happened', but that's because it's the genre. They know that nobody actually believes that it really has. Unless a giant alien attacked America a few years ago...did it? No of course not Clover believers. So its OK to credit the actors to whom I think played their parts well.

My recommendation is that you watch it. Don't expect anything like Blair witch. And lastly don't expect to be too scared (Unless you like the 'it's dark....wait for it....aaaand....scare' style horror.) Watch it for the value of cinema, it's a job well done.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Awful, badly edited, not enough script revisions.

Author: zephyrus_boreas from Australia
10 October 2012

The most galling thing about this movie is the amount of good reviews it has here (obviously written by those with some vested interest in this poor excuse for a student film).

The faux documentary style does not work at all for a horror movie as the talking head inserts make it apparent who lives and who does not. This eliminates any and all surprise that a disappearance may have and turns a potentially interesting horror into a copy of Australian Story or Today Tonight!

Additionally, the exposition takes far too much time (over 30 minutes before the characters enter the eponymous tunnel) and ultimately makes you not care one jot about the characters that you already know are doomed.

I normally like found footage style films (though this, as I said, falls more into the faux doco genre), but this was truly dull. The saddest thing is that I can see a lot of potential here had they revised the script, changed it into a purely found footage and just accepted that copying Blair Witch and putting it in a tunnel would have been a better style.


Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Several persons involved in these events declined to be interviewed because they were dead

Author: siderite from Romania
26 January 2014

A hand-held camera movie, it details the experiences of a professional reporting crew going into the underground tunnels of Sydney to look for whatever made the government stop wanting to go there. They find it. They don't like it. The feeling is mutual.

Now, for a found footage film it was not a bad one. It had a good reason for people to be filming and for the quality of the film to be good. Unfortunately the crew also carried handhelds with night vision, thus prompting every monster shot to be a blurry sepia mess. The interview and footage montage scheme was also useful, because it makes the viewer relate to the characters more, even if it didn't make me empathize with them at all. They were all self absorbed assholes, despite attempts to make them seem bonded as a group.

Unfortunately, the rest of the movie was not really that good. It's 40 minutes of interviews, set up and moving around tunnels until something actually happens. Then they run around like headless chickens until they manage to get out. And that's all. The tension is pretty strong, but it leads to nothing but blind terror. There is no closure, no explanation, no real story other than "it happened". And in the end, the interviews just made it all feel more distant. You know who is going to survive and it kind of spoils the mood when people are hiding in a dark room waiting to see if something is going to kill them and you get an interview bit right then.

So I can't say that the film was a failure, but with top movies like The Descent and Cloverfield in mind, this one is pretty lame. Also, considering the budget, which was probably very small, I feel they could have done more.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Deserves its better reviews

Author: Terry Peck from Australia
23 December 2012

It's a movie that will irritate a lot of people who like their horror perfectly executed with exacting camera work, dolly shots zooming in on severed heads to accompanying musical crescendos etc. This ain't that. Hand-held camera haters better stay away.

Other reviewers have already written of the provenance of this work, so I needn't go there except to say that the Blair Witch Project has proved a much more important film to the horror genre than I ever expected.

So why do so many critics here give this flick the thumbs down? It's not as if the movie expects much of you. You know who survives but are still asked to go along for the ride, and what's wrong with that? Isn't that the basis of all horror films, even books? You're there too, but *you* survive, right? No, I don't buy that criticism. And some say it is just plain boring. OK, it's no Exorcist but it doesn't try to be.

The main fault of this otherwise quite well-delivered yarn is a single woeful casting error - as anybody who knows anything about acting and line delivery will readily tell you. It's a pity because unless every actor/actress is utterly believable in a found footage film it just can't work. But if you can overlook that, and I admit it's a stretch, The Tunnel is an acceptable way to while away an hour or so. A better tunnel film, though, is Absentia.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:


Author: Matt Iccarus ( from Huizen
22 November 2012

Let me start of with saying I like the way they made this movie possible. AWESOME!

It's low budget like a good horror should be and has the potential of becoming one of the movies you enjoy in an indie bar movie night trowing popcorn and whiskey with every scare you get.

the style of this movie can best be described as a Mockumentary like Blair witch and district 9 (not a horror) and the slenderman stories.

Next to that all, the people down below make good movies (lotR?)and series (the tribe, heartbreak high) and apparently good horror as well

Great opening, good actors, neat story 7/10.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

I'd Recommend The Tunnel 2011

Author: brinkthegamer
12 September 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

My review is not a professional one as I do not know the proper way to do this but I'd like to learn. For that reason, there might be things considered to be spoilers in it although I think that I left it vague enough. Please be cautioned that you might consider some of this spoiler (although I don't). Warning SPOILER

This movie is very similar to Blair Witch, nearly identical even as much as the getting lost and going around in circles part. This movie is better although because you do indeed see the problem source and you do have a better idea about the ending because some of the people are being shown as being interviewed while the movie plays. The interview is clearly conducted after the incident. Therefore, those being interviewed survive the incident.

The movie is set as a documentary concerning the reason why the government in Australia wanted to use the underground train station for a water reservoir at one time, but then change their mind and back out of the deal.

The negatives about this movie is the fact that it took more than an half hour before some action. Cloverfield took only 17 minutes before the first action and yet seemed like an eternity, so in this case, a half hour of building up the characters, the movie started killing itself before it had a chance to launch. Another negative about this movie is that the problem source was able to subdue a large healthy man without a problem but when the very tired female that had been running and exhausted was captured, the problem source struggled to subdue her. The last negative that ruined it for me since I like to see details is the cracked camera lens, which should not appear as sharp as it did in the footage since it should be out of focus, therefore that looked unrealistic.

The positives about this movie is the acting for the movie's budget. I found it extremely good for the budget comparitively. Another positive is the problem source, you never fully see it in its all because it cannot be near light.

I would say that this movie is good enough to recommend on a one time rental, but watching it once is enough.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Made superfluous in a bid to be original

Author: amesmonde from Novelist of The Final Version
5 July 2012

An investigation into a government cover-up leads a Sydney journalist and her crew into a network of abandoned tunnels and it quickly becomes clear the story is hunting them.

Whereas the likes of Grave Encounters played out a like an episode of Ghost Hunters, Ghost Adventures or Most Haunted gone awry, The Tunnel takes the Documentary approach with footage and interviews. Director Carlo Ledesma delivers a well made P.O.V and static film. The contrasting interviewee segments are particularly crisp and come across as authentic.

The actors are solid, Andy Rodoreda, Steve Davis as Steve Miller are note worthy, however, as they explore the dark tunnels there are few chills and sadly an atmosphere killer is the jarring inserted interviews (with the people who were there).

The Mocumentary idea dates back to This Is Spinal Tap (1984), A Hard Day's Night (1964) and before. The Tunnel while reminiscent of The Fourth Kind (2009) in structure to its credit does try to be slightly different - removing itself from the Paranormal Activities and REC films to name a few.

By comparison The Tunnel is light-years ahead of Tape 407 (2012) or The Amityville Haunting (2011) and is genuinely eerie at times. Although well made with a standout creepy neck breaking sequence the shock element of who lives or dies is taken away due to the viewer knowing that the interviewees are going to survive. This hampers the film and causes The Tunnel to become redundant. Still it's worth watching if only for camera operator Steve Davis' truthful performance.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A Found Footage horror film from Australia. A film crew making a documentary about tunnels below Sydney get more than they ever bargained for.

Author: Michael 'Hallows Eve' Smillie from New Zealand
28 June 2012

This film is done like a Documentary and uses the 'found footage' style movie making techniques to it's full potential. It's quite stylish and keeps you involved up to the end. I'd put this in the same category as 'Grave Encounters' (which I liked a lot). I liked how the film takes you on a journey with the film crew as they delve deep in to the tunnels below Sydney to find out why the Government has scrapped a water recycling program. It gets you interested in what actually went on down there to the point that you have to remember it's actually a movie and not a real documentary. If you haven't seen it yet, put it on your 'to-see' list. An entertaining watch and I give it a solid 8 out of 10.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Loved the antagonist to pieces.

Author: ScrawlingChaos from United States
7 June 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Honestly, I thought this was a very well made horror film- far better than most I've seen recently ( insidious, the shrine, etc) . Even though this was an Indy film they did an excellent job with their effects- particularly their monster. When I say this I don't mean the rendering was in super sharp detail, or the effects were so over the top and flashy that it was it's own light spectacle of terror.

No, this is not that kind of movie monster. The monster in this film is never clearly defined, giving your imagination free reign to fill in all the frightening details. What you do see reminds me far too much of something you would find in paranormal forums or the like. The way it moves, the way it's limbs look just a bit too long, how it's eyes shine in the night-vision camera footage. All of it gives you this creeping sensation of " That is not human, and it never was human." That's another thing I loved about this movie, even after watching it I'm sitting here thinking about the monster, I wanted to know more about it, how it got there in the sewers, and how long it was even down there. If it wasn't human, then how did it know what a camera was, and why did it speak? (Yes the creature speaks at one point, but for the life of me I can't understand him... ) They do not tell you anything that the characters would not know in this film , which means there are a lot of questions left hanging for you at the end. So basically, if your the type of person who likes their horror with suspense and likes to be left guessing, then I highly recommend watching this film

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Average content with brilliant camera work

Author: versandeep from India
29 May 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie has nothing to offer except for the way it has been shot. It does not have a defined ending, unexplained and unsolved mystery. The killing creatures are left for the viewers to imagine. ( Whether are they aliens, zombies, cannibals !! ) I was dying to search on the internet about whether such incidents occurred in Sydney but the ending credits clearly shows that this is a fictional story. That added to the frustration. This reminded me of a similar movie - Fourth Kind, which is far better than this one. It leaves the viewer curious enough to investigate further on internet about the Alaska UFO sighting. It was also far more chilling than The Tunnel.

However, the camera work and sound effects in this movie are excellent. Cinematography - 9/10, Content - 5/10

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 8 of 12: [Prev][3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

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