Dark Corners (2006) User Reviews

Don't believe the bad rep about this movie.

[proteusphi · 6/10 · 3 July 2007]

At least until you've seen it for yourself. A relatively small number of people have voted on it, so its rating is up in the air. Anyway, I found this movie to be very interesting. Here's what I have to say about it. My summary is at the top and the longer explanation is at the bottom.

SHORT: Genuinely frightening and dark, as well as psychologically complex and chilling. If you can look past the non-linear plot and confusing pace of the film, then you will enjoy this addition to the horror movie genre. 6 out of 10.

LONG: This movie can be somewhat confusing and its direction takes a very schizophrenic approach to showing events in the movie. That can understandably be a turn off for some people, but the fact of the matter is that the direction is one of the elements that helps make Dark Corners a scary flick. From the get-go you have no idea if what the heroine is experiencing is real or imagined. The story follows the life of a woman who's trying to get pregnant; at night she has nightmares and cycles between her life and that of the woman in her dreams.

In the dark surrealistic world of her dreams, she sees people being violently murdered and is killed herself several times. The multiple cuts from fantasy to reality, as well as the camera angles help to unsettle the viewer and put them on edge, leaving them vulnerable to the movie's numerous scare scenes. And as much as they would cut from one scene to another, I never felt cheated or that it was over-done, because Karen's story with her pregnancy would always advance at an adequate pace. As for story, it cryptic all the way to the end, yet we are given small clues along the way. The ending itself is a little flat, yet creepy and appropriate.

The acting was awesome. I loved Karen's actress and that of her husband; they had great chemistry that made you want to watch their banter scenes. Supporting characters were okay. I felt their character parts were more of a draw than what the actual actors brought to the table.

Scares. This movie is genuinely scary! At times it is disgusting and disturbing, but does not have over-the-top gore. It doesn't rely on cheap jump-out scares too much, but instead relies on atmosphere and horrific situations. The two scenes in the mortuary were really what got me. You have to see them for yourself--classic, grade-A American horror. I was impressed.

So for its great scares, atmosphere, and good characters and acting, I give Dark Corners a 6 out of 10. Though the direction and pace of the film may be confusing and off-putting, the plot and story are there. This film is also more entertaining then a lot of other direct-to-DVD horror flicks that have more linear plots, yet look like they were made for the Sci-fi channel. *cough* Bottom Feeder *cough*

a nice surprise

[trashgang · 6/10 · 18 April 2010]

Never heard of this flick and never red a review of it I was wondering what it could give to me. I found it just for 1 cent, the cover didn't attract me but somehow I thought, yep, I take it. And what a great surprise it was to watch it. I was never bored even that it isn't a real slasher or a gory movie. What it does deliver is some scary and suspense full moments. I was locked on the screen from frame one until the end credits. And you have too, it's about a girl having some weird dreams but when she wake up she is sometimes still in her dreams, sometimes she doesn't. To make it a bid easier for the viewer is that you will have her with blond hair and sometimes with black hair. But still you will be confused when going on the color of her hair. Some moments are really intense, so I guess that if you are a freak on ghost movies or stuff like that that this one is for you, sure, it has some dark corners.

Not that bad.

[Cablebot3000 · 6/10 · 18 August 2008]

This dark thriller isn't bad, its not great, but certainly watchable and suspenseful. The acting is good. Thora Birch gave a pretty nice performance even though she sometimes didn't seem to really understand her character. the atmosphere is great. The dream was good, and the nightmare was dark and disturbing. and it had a morale to the story. Though a lot of people might not like it (which might contribute to the low rating). It will also please gorehounds, as there is plenty of brutality and blood. I think it should have a little higher rating. Its definitely worth the watch if you come across it. I rate it 6/10 Rated R for bloody violence, disturbing images, terror, and brief nudity

Twisted Psychological Horror Film That Fails To Leave An Impression.

[drownsoda90 · 4/10 · 24 June 2007]

"Dark Corners" is a bizarre and twisted psychological horror/thriller that centers around a young woman, Susan Hamilton (Thora Birch), who is happily married to her husband, David (Christien Anholt), and is desperately trying to conceive a child through a special fertilization process, since she is unable to naturally have kids. Things seem to be going alright, except for the strange nightmares that Susan suffers from, in which she is another woman, Karen. But as time goes by, Susan begins to question the lines of what is and isn't real as she finds herself terrorized and stalked by a man who has been committing murders in her community.

In the tradition of films like "Jacob's Ladder" and others, the premise that this film is grounded in has been done a few times, and it seems like it's a difficult thing to accomplish, because most films with this type of theme tend to be rather poor. I will say that "Dark Corners" does have some good things going for it though. While it didn't necessarily get any real fear out of me, there were some well-written scenes and a couple of clever camera tricks to be found. The sets were appropriately eerie as well, and the contrasts between the Susan and Karen worlds were intense - Susan's being very white and pure, while Karen's was dark and filthy. But the script here was a little bit muddled.

I know, I know, these types of psychological horror thrillers are typically known for being somewhat hard to follow, and this one was no exception. It lost me a couple of times, only for me to catch up eventually, and I was paying attention. Things don't really "mesh" (for lack of a better term) together well, and it felt to me that the script was kind of half baked. The premise of the nightmare world versus reality is intriguing (even though it has been done before), but it just didn't feel fully developed here. As for the acting, Thora Birch leads our cast as the mentally disturbed main character, and is good as usual. The supporting cast is mostly unknowns, and some of the acting was a little choppy. As for the film's conclusion, well, it was interesting, although it still doesn't resolve much. But maybe that was the point of the film, to pose questions and let you make up your own answer? Problem is I had a lot of trouble piecing things together to come up with my own conclusion.

Overall, "Dark Places" is a bit of a half baked psychological horror film that failed to impress me. If you've seen a film with the same basic premise (blurring lines of reality and imagination), this film isn't much different. It has a few nice moments here and there, and Birch was entertaining to watch - but overall I felt this was a rather weak and underdeveloped film. Could have been better, I suppose. You may want to give it a try, but if the odds are against you, you might as well pass on this one. 4/10.

Thora Birch Delivers, But Has Nowhere to Deliver To

[gavin6942 · 4/10 · 28 August 2007]

Please note: I already submitted a review, but I must have forgot to hit a button or something, so this is a rewrite. As such, it will be shorter.

A woman (Thora Birch) is trying to get pregnant but is haunted by mysterious and morbid dreams. At the same time, her dream self is haunted by the dreams of her waking self. Which is the real, and why is her unborn child at the heart of the battle? What role does the hypnotherapist play in all this? My primary motivation for picking up this film was Thora Birch. I loved her in "American Beauty" and even more so in "Ghost World". I am sorry to say she doesn't carry that same beauty here (I like her as the short, pudgy girl) but her acting remains unblemished. Being the main character and the lead supporting character puts a lot of weight on an actor's shoulders, and she carries it.

Unfortunately, she is left to do the work with a team that is unworthy of her. The writer-director is a newcomer, and not particularly skilled. I could give him the benefit of the doubt and say the budget wasn't there or he was strapped for time. But I think this still wouldn't explain the poorly constructed plot and the lack of any real direction. Too many holes remain throughout the film ,and the tone went from serious to humorous in a very disjointed fashion.

I liked some aspects of this film: the dark world was cool, especially if you grew up playing Legend of Zelda. Dark worlds in general are always nice (who doesn't like goth chicks?). The dark humor was also good, like the way the mortician solves the problem of the erect corpse.

Continuity and plot problems run amok, and I have one prime example: the therapist. As the movie goes on, we begin to suspect more and more that he is involved in the darker elements of the film. But we never really get the full story, and worst of all -- her problems begin before we even meet him, making the case for him as a suspect very hard to swallow. Maybe I missed something.

I didn't particularly enjoy this film, and I don't think my friend Hannah did either. You know, if we hadn't just seen "I Know Who Killed Me", this probably would have been the worst horror film we had seen in a long time. Especially after watching a quality film ("Vacancy") the night before. If you can't get enough of Thora Birch, check this one out. But that's the only reason I can think of to deal with this mess, and even that's a risky decision I probably wouldn't make the second time.

Somewhere deep inside Dark Corners, there's a good idea trying to get out. Possibly.

[BA_Harrison · 5/10 · 17 August 2009]

Dark Corners, directed by Ray Gower, is one of those films that is designed to have its audience ponder long and hard about events, and then come to their own conclusion about what they have seen. The problem is, even after much consideration (and on-line research), it's unlikely that a satisfying answer will be forthcoming. There's a point beyond which ambiguity simply becomes frustrating and Dark Corners cruises right past it and keeps on going; in fact, the film is so confusing that it's quite possible the makers didn't really know what the hell was going themselves.

Thora Birch stars as a young, blonde wife named Susan who suffers from terrifying nightmares prior to having IVF fertility treatment. In these vivid dreams, she sees herself as another person—a brunette named Karen (also Thora Birch)—who inhabits a hellish world where she repeatedly wakes from her sleep covered in blood and bruises.

In order to try and quell her night-time hallucinations, Sarah visits Dr. Woodleigh (Toby Stephens), a psycho-analyst who suggests hypnosis as a way of dealing with the problem. However, her appointment with Woodleigh proves to be the start of even more horror for poor Sarah, as her life gradually becomes more intertwined with that of her imaginary self, and she becomes a target of a knife wielding killer known as The Nightstalker.

There's a lot of conjecture on the Dark Corner message board about what is really supposed to be occurring, with some posters proposing that both Sarah and Karen are manifestations of Dr.Woodleigh (AKA The Nightstalker), who is reliving his sins endlessly in hell. Whilst this is certainly a possibility, quite how one reaches that conclusion based on the evidence offered in the film is beyond me. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe in being spoon-fed the answers, but in this case, a couple of satisfying morsels wouldn't have gone amiss.

Fortunately, although the story is a real head-scratcher, the quality of the acting prevents this film from being a total loss. Birch is great as both versions of her character (and also rather cute to boot, particularly as the brunette), and she is ably supported by Christien Anholt as Sarah's understanding hubby and Joanna Hole as best friend/work colleague Elaine Jordan. These solid performances, plus a fair bit of graphic nastiness, make the film a reasonably engaging and entertaining experience; just don't expect to understand all that you are seeing.

4.5 out of 10, rounded up to 5 for IMDb.

Dark corners. My review.

[jeffreyc-32567 · 7/10 · 30 October 2019]

Quite liked dark corners 📼 for a horror movie 🎦, some good camera shots. The actors played their parts very well and, i found the characters fitted in perfectly. The horror was nt that much but for two pounds 💷 it certainly me. At 1and a half hours long it was just enough, so my score 7 was well earned, cheers jacey out.

Dark Corners should stay there

[vwhite-4 · 1/10 · 13 November 2006]

I saw this film at the AFI film fest in Los Angeles on Friday night. I wanted to walk out partway, but didn't want to damage the director who was going to lead a Q & A afterward. The film was uneven, sometimes hackneyed and incomprehensible by the end. It didn't make any sense despite the symbolism and clues throughout both the dark and light worlds. Thora Birch was brave and worked hard to be real in both roles, but the separation between dark and light was too emphatic. THe resolution made no sense whatsoever and I advise people to save their money and time unless they have to analyze a film for a psychology class. My time would have been better spent standing in line for Pan's Labryth again.

In every man, a monster...

[mansour8687 · 7/10 · 6 January 2008]

This was a "promising" good movie with some dialogue and a lack of plot or character development that prevented it from being a great movie. If you can overcome some of the poor lines spoken by the leading couple, particularly such memorable lines as: "Give me a shout if you'd like me to come over there and wipe you". "You'd like that, wouldn't you, you perv"; then you might find a fairly engaging thriller worth the hour and a half to see it. As I said, some of the lines were hideous and the numerous "toilet" scenes were filled with an inane dialogue that does nothing to advance the plot, deepen character understanding, or shed light on the film's overall themes.

The second greatest problem is the poor plot development. Of what relevance is the night stalker to Susan's revelation that she is linked psychologically and spiritually to Karen? I could be misinterpreting the movie, but the link between Karen's nightmares and Susan's nightmares suggests they are two parts of the same psyche, at odds with the apparently "beautiful" life Susan leads and the hideous life Karen leads. Susan lives a life of comfort but not exactly "love", Karen one where men are purely bestial and live only to rape and repress women. You can argue that Susan feels like she is a victim--she dreams of women raped and murdered at the hands of the night stalker. In her waking world, her husband dominates her life and literally takes her for a ride but she has no sense of independence. Her body is not her own; the fertility treatments are destroying her own babies, possibly her sanity, and one wonders if she wants pregnancy only to please her man without taking her own safety into account. This is most striking when she gets up for a bathroom break and her husband nearly orders her back to bed. Though her dreams and miscarriage are taking a toll on her, her husband's motives and treatment of her feels slimy and completely insincere and he never really take his eyes of his solitaire game.

On the other hand, Karen has no man whom she loves. The scary retinue of people on the bus are there only to mock her and attack her. Hers is a far more dangerous world, where women are not kept in gilded cages but are victimized and attacked, eroticized in ways that are vile and reprehensible. Yet why does Karen choose to live in an abandoned industrial district? I know that in nightmares the dreamer doesn't consciously choose her surroundings, but this fact in itself suggests a woman who does not care for her own safety; it could also be a clue to her true identity,complete with a "Saw" movie washroom with fluorescent lights, a Hollywood cliché for typical serial killer furnishings. We all know the cliché--the abandoned warehouse is where Hollywood movie serial killers always keep the victim strapped and bound to a table. Could we try some originality please? Not that violence should be condoned, but serial killer movies are a dime a dozen. Karen has no one else to confide in. She is merely there to dream that she is really Susan Hamilton, but there is no deepening of the connection between the two women other than that each one dreams the other girl is her true alter-ego.

And what role does the hypnotist have to play in the plot? He is finally revealed to be the night stalker, but what are his motives for attacking the two women? Karen and Susan keep referring to the secret hidden sins they have no wish to reveal. The hypnotist is stalking both of them, but to what end? And why? Both women are pregnant and then have miscarriages, all of this being revealed to both of them as one women sleeps to awaken as the other woman living a similar yet different life. What are Karen's sins that she finds herself staring down at the murdered body of Susan only to find that she sees her face in the mirror transforming into that of the mad hypnotist? A little theory: I think that aside from Multiple personality disorder, Karen and Susan are two sisters somehow separated and kept estranged from each other. Karen, lovely as she is, is beaten up and injured in her dreams only because she is somehow the night stalker. Sometimes Karen sees herself as the victim because she cannot subconsciously realize until the end of the film that she is the murderer of each of the young women. Her facial injuries are all inflicted by the women she has slain.

Why? Karen cannot accept that she has been denied the kind of life that Susan has lived. We always think the grass is greener, the roses smell sweeter on the other side. This is my theory, however incorrect it may be.

Dark Corners

[Scarecrow-88 · 5/10 · 3 June 2007]

"I think that's what hell is..It's having your sins pulled out from the dark corners of your soul and served up to you in this endless loop of torture."

This is a dialogue scene which answers the huge question you might be asking yourselves as the film continues..what the hell is going on with the dame(s). You have two Thora Birchs..one in a shiny green suburban happy setting(despite the background noise of news speaking of a Night Stalker killing local women)and the other is a garbage metallic nightmarish world quite relative(or and extension)to David Lynch's Eraserhead where the colors bleed steel and grime. The shiny beautiful Birch is Karen, trying desperately to have children with her wonderful husband David(Christien Anholt)whose kooky, witty pal Elaine(Joanna Hole)refers her to a "hypnotherapist" Dr. Woodleigh(Toby Stephens, the bond villain from "Die Another Day")who might can assist her in ridding herself of the nightmares she keeps continuously having. Those nightmares consist of a black-headed Birch named Susan who keeps getting attacked by someone dressed in a hood with a demonic face. Susan's world is full of unsavory, creepy characters who look like scary hobos with devious intent always staring and jeering her. For a while, it seems that Susan's world is just a nightmare of Karen's but as the film progresses it begins seeping into reality with both worlds slowly merging. But, as in the case of many of these psychological twisty thrillers, everything is not what it seems. In both planes, the supposed reality of Karen and nightmare fantasy of Susan, their female pals die at the hand of a hooded serial killer. It begins to seem as if she has some primary link with the murderer and murders themselves. Certain items in the nightmarish realm of Susan may open up answers to the curious riddles in the plot..who is doing the killing and what is exactly real and fantasy?

In the vein(or a direct rip-off of)of the fright fest looping nightmarish film "Salvage", DARK CORNERS follows the same premise and has the same basic finish. The killer of the film is reliving his/her sins and we watch it unfold with Karen as the protagonist. Is what we are watching ever real to begin with or just events unfolding for someone else to relive endlessly for infinity as punishment? This kind of demented head-scratcher will have quite a few viewers gunning for the eject button because it's a tale of mind-toying where we are part of this long unorthodox nightmare where nothing is what it seems. I felt it resembles "Salvage" a bit too much so that feeling of deja vu was quite apparent throughout, especially in the film's denouement revealing explanation as to why everything is so warped and oddball.

The difference between this and "Salvage" is the caliber of actress in Thora Birch and the production values. But, "Salvage" is a nightmare that loops far more than DARK CORNERS which tackles one event over the film's duration using the nightmare as a means of describing the perplexity of the one who is behind the murders.

A low-budget "what's the twist" movie that's worth a watch

[yukichigai · 8/10 · 17 February 2008]

I caught this movie several months ago, and it was only after happening to come across it in my collection recently that I realized it was really worth commenting on here. So here goes.

Firstly, my brief take on the plot: Karen Clarke lives in a city where dark and horrifying things exist just beyond the edge of her vision. Susan Hamilton is a happily married woman suffering from recurring nightmares. Each considers the other to be the person they become in their dreams. So who is real? Now, this is not one of those "are you sure this is low-budget?" productions. There are numerous qualities about this film which make it very clear to the viewer that we are, in fact, in the land of independent financing, ranging from certain scenes shot like they're using 1950s camera equipment to the typical "small roles filled by people with all the emotions of a cardboard box" syndrome. This even extends to one of the more significant minor roles, an older blond woman whose acting ability alternates between competent and "Plan 9 From Outer Space" depending on the scene.

With that said, there's still something to this film. It takes a bit to get going, with the first 30-40 minutes leaving the viewer with a lot of puzzle pieces and very few ways to connect them, but the pieces themselves are reasonably interesting. Once we hit the halfway mark, however, things begin to connect a bit more. Most of it is executed well, leaving the viewer feeling neither confused nor as though they've been led by the nose. A few times, however, clues are all but identified with bright neon signs, particularly a seemingly pointless conversation which suddenly draws attention to itself with a rather unorthodox camera pan. The presentation otherwise is excellent, with many of the scenes set in the "dark" city just about oozing a sense of corruption and decay. Much of the content is surprisingly robust as well, with a lot of allegory and outright symbolism present throughout. (Though the significance of it all isn't truly clear until the end of the film) While the smaller roles are filled with the typical low-budget riff-raff, the principals all do an excellent job in this film. Thora Birch is entertaining to watch and, as always, you can sympathize with her character(s) almost instantly. Toby Stephens gives a short, interesting, and dark performance which is perfect for the film, and in a pleasant surprise Alan Perrin makes a highly intriguing detective in both "sides" of the narrative.

However, the real winning part of this film is the final reveal, the "twist" if you will. While it isn't what I would call exactly genius, it's still pretty clever; even the most observant of viewers will at best be able to determine part of the twist, but not all. More importantly, the reveal is both creepy and satisfying, albeit in a Schadenfreude-y kind of way. It's a worthy payoff for 90 minutes of invested time.

BOTTOM LINE: It's not really award worthy and it's certainly not perfect, but it's entertaining and has a wonderfully satisfying-yet-creepy ending. If you're a fan of "twist" movies like Memento and Sixth Sense but prefer a "darker" feel this may be right up your alley.

A flawed and disturbing vision that have its "charm"

[dr_praetorius35 · 6/10 · 20 September 2007]

This is a strange little horror flick that is sure to leave mixed reactions from viewers... The main weakness of this movie is, well, it don't seems to really have a plot or, if you prefer, there seems to have no logic, no signification, to what happen on screen. There is no apparent reason for the existence of a parallel universe neither... and, because of this weakness, it's not easy to get involved by what actually happen to the characters...

And yet, there is a little something in this movie that make it above the complete average... Every scene that happen in the "world of darkness" are well crafted and dense with atmosphere. There is also some well-made shock scenes like the one with the embalmed corpse or when the "dark" side of the main character is watching a videotape of what happen when she's sleeping... It could make some viewers nervous... which it did to me and that's the point of looking at that kind of movies!!!!!!!!! I like to see this movie as the work from a director graced with a disturbing imagination whom may have lacked the focus to make a greater movie... (and well written script). When all is said and done (and I liked the bloody finale of this movie...), Dark Corners is still a more rewarding experience than the average PG-horror movie that plagued the megaplexes these days...

This movie sucks badly!

[stv_httl · 1/10 · 12 July 2007]

This is a stupid movie with a convoluted story and an ending which fails miserably to make any sense of the rest of it and leaves the viewer with a feeling of raw disappointment for having sat through this boring and illogical piece of cinematic garbage! And I am quite a fan of horror movies so I was looking forward to seeing this but after having watched it I now have to say it is undeniably one of the worst movies I have had the displeasure of having sat through in a long time. Thora Birch's performance is only so so at best and the gore scenes, while impressive and shocking are one of the few highlights in what is otherwise a totally disappointing snooze fest!

Any worse it would have burnt the reel

[idonotexist · 1/10 · 22 May 2007]

Who approves these "movies"? This is worse than a C grade primary school video project directed by a few kids.

It has no characters, there is nothing happening, no effects, everything is so clichéd you can easily just skip to the credits and still know everything that happened (aka nothing). The cast runs about like a bunch of lost fools and the only thing happening is weird grimaces through horrible acting and a few splatters of catchup. They copied SAW in terms of lightning and room design in a few scenes which didn't even help...

-5500/10 seriously, can we give negative rankings? this deserves it so bad!

Extremely disappointed

[s_aucejo · 1/10 · 21 November 2007]

This comment may contain spoilers.

After telling a friend I liked horror movies, he borrowed me this one. I've watched it in the evening, with my husband, not even knowing what kind of movie it was.

The beginning was very interesting despite of the gruesome cues and the very poor dialog. (Extremelly poor dialog! As for instance when the main character and her husband first come on screen and he asks her if she'd still want to make love to him if he were a dog! You figure the motivation of the writer out!)

I was courageous enough to hold fast till the end of the movie and survive to some very graphic scenes, the worse, no doubt about that, being the one where the main character is tortured and loses one of her fetus. I could barely watch it.

The ending makes all the suffering worthless and we can only hate anybody involved in the project. Not only because it is bad, because there are bad stories well told, but because it had some potential of being an interesting story and it was totally thrown by he window by a lack of attention, work and dedication. The attempt to shock the viewer was visibly the strongest motivation here, making the filmmakers forget the quality of the project. A pity since a lot of good ideas were spoiled by a bad motivation and everyone involved is to blame for this horrible movie.

Two hours I'll never have back again.

[bobgreenwade · 2/10 · 25 September 2008]

The acting in this film, particularly that from the always-pleasing Christien Anholt, is above average. The art direction and cinematography, though nowhere near Oscar-worthy, are quite good too. But those are the only things that keep this film from going directly into the toilet.

Odd characters abound in here, along with many strange occurrences, without explanation. The viewer is left guessing as to what's actually going on, which is actually a good thing in the middle of the movie -- but when the film ends that way, not so much.

And this one does. Just as the story is coming to an end, we're thrown a series of curve-balls and then thrown back to the middle with such a vague explanation (if it can even be called that) for the weird events in the body of the movie that we're left wondering if it's actually over. It's a relief to have it done with, but the story doesn't actually end so much as just come to a stop.

What's really horrible about that is that a clear ending was well within reach. We do learn the identity of the Night Stalker serial killer. Who were Karen's fellow bus riders, appearing from nowhere at such unusual moments? What was the deal with the police detective, behaving like Longstreet in one scene and like Columbo in another? Why did the elderly male corpse get up and try to talk to Karen? And who, really, was the main perspective character -- or characters? Was there any real significance to the number 618? Granted, this has all the earmarks of a strongly "theme-oriented" story, so a strong plot, clear-cut setting, and compelling characters would have been just distracting. It's just too bad the theme couldn't have been made a bit clearer.

My recommendation: unless you enjoy watching people being tortured to death with no logical explanation, only to see them suddenly come back to life to start the process all over again, skip this movie.

Two many questions go unanswered in this one.

[zfiany · 7/10 · 21 December 2009]

Any movie that leaves me with unanswered questions at the end is a welcomed piece of art to both my mind and heart. This movie is truly an artful one. The style is so wrapped with mystery and separation of the two worlds is also smartly presented. Both characters are obviously apart in time of 3 to 4 decades almost. The very fact that you reach a point in the movie that you get lost and don't know who is the main character of the two dreamers, makes the movie a rarity. The two lives get intertwined though the time is past and future as you might guess, still both have common people in shape and sometimes in roles if not shapes... and this is another misleading element.

You might think that the end of the movie has provided you with the answer, but I dare telling you that you have to think again because I am pretty sure the end goes case unsolved and I am hundred percent sure that if I had questions at the end of the movie, then nobody can answer them as I am pretty known for my skills of solving plots from a first time.

Disjoined, predictable rubbish (sick also)

[mark-grove · 1/10 · 11 November 2007]

Do believe the bad hype about this film. I have just wasted an hour and a half of my life on this pathetic attempt at a horror. Disjointed and unwatchable, there is no plot to follow, just random attempts to shock the viewer. The credits at the end were possibly the highlight of the film and were quite surprisingly long - if I had had anything to do with this film, I definitely wouldn't have wanted my name associated with it. This is complete and utter drivel - if you want to waste time, watch it. If you value your time, steer well clear. It's just a shame that 1 is the lowest vote you can give it. The acting was rather wooden, the "special" effects could have been produced by the most amateur of Directorial wannabees and the story was the most far-fetched clap-trap I have ever watched. I am a die-hard fan of horror/suspense/thrillers and would be hard pressed to include this film in any of these categories. The pregnancy scenes were the most disturbing factor and were sick rather than enjoyable horror scenes.

It's all you

[nogodnomasters · 7/10 · 15 July 2018]

When Susan Hamilton (Thora Birch) dreams she is Karen Clarke who lives in a nightmarish surreal noir world. Karen dreams she is Susan Hamilton, although not really stressed. Susan is taking medication and attempting to get pregnant. Meanwhile there are reports of a night stalker serial killer in both realities.

This was indeed a psychological thriller. The ending isn't spelled out for you. The closure is what you assign to it. Reminded me a bit of the film "Sublime."

Guide: F-word. Brief nudity. No sex.

WOW! And not in a good way!

[artpf · 1/10 · 3 March 2012]

Thora Birch, child of Hollywood porn legends, stars in a dual role -- blonde and brunette.

One sees demons or killers or visions. Take your pick.

It doesn't really matter.

The movie rambles and barely tells a story. The music is over the top dramatic and frankly, becomes annoying in 10 minutes.

Thora, like her mother, really can't act, so maybe she should consider the same route as mom.

It's nearly impossible to follow the plot because it is exceedingly poorly directed.

Scenes cut back and forth with no apparent reason.

Endless talking that makes no sense and serves to bore the viewer to death.

Stay away! Stay Away! It really stinks.

Hidden gem.

[athanasiosze · 8/10 · 8 November 2014]

To call this a movie a hidden gem, is not a hyperbole, but it reflects its quality.It is a dive into the darkness, in an unknown place that salvation seems so far away. I haven't seen a lot American horror movies which are more frightening than this. It's a shame that this movie didn't get the recognition it deserved. 5.1 is not a fair rate. I would give it a 7.5. I think that the reviewers should award efforts like that, for encouraging producers/directors/writers who don't have large budget in their movies, to keep their vision up. Finally, i must confess that i wouldn't have understood the meaning of the end if i had not read the interpretation here, in movie's page in IMDb. Maybe that was the only flaw, the end is a little confusing.

The biggest mess of a film I have seen in ages.

[poolandrews · 2/10 · 2 August 2009]

Dark Corners starts as young successful woman Susan Hamilton (Thora Birch) & her husband David (Christien Anholt) are trying to conceive a baby through IVF treatment, however lately Susan has been suffering from very vivid & terrifying nightmares in which she sees an alter ego of herself named Karen Clarke (Thora Birch) have some horrible experiences. Also at this time the area where Susan lives is being terrorised by a serial killer known as the 'Nightstalker'. The nightmares become worse & Susan seeks the help of psychoanalyst Dr. Woodleigh (Toby Stephens) who hypnotises her & 'kills' Karen off in her nightmare which he believes will stop them. Then the Nightstalker strikes close to home & kills one of Susan's friends & the nightmares return, but what do they mean & why are they so lifelike?

This American British co-production was written & directed by Ray Gower & is one of the biggest wastes of 90 odd minutes I can remember seeing, sure there are worse films out there but for sheer frustration & annoyance Dark Corner is hard to beat. I suppose Dark Corners aims to be a dark psychological thriller with horror overtones that is meant to keep you guessing right up to the end & to be fair the first fifteen or twenty minutes were good & I liked what I was seeing. The way when Susan went to sleep in her world Karen would wake up in her & when Karen went to sleep or got knocked out Susan would then re-awake was quite cool & it got to a point I wasn't sure which reality was real & which was the dreamworld or whether both were real or what was going on. Unfortunately Dark Corners carries on in this exact same fashion for 85 minutes, Susan sleeps, Karen wakes, Karen sleeps & Susan wakes. Talk about repetitive & it get really boring as the film just goes round in circles with meaningless imagery, dialogue & a plot that never seems to advance. Then the big so-called twist ending comes & everything that has gone before is thrown out of the window in an ending that makes zero sense to me, there are plenty of long posts on the IMDb about the meaning of this twist but what it comes down to is people just trying to make something out of nothing. For every answer you might have there will be at least another couple of questions that arise, nothing makes sense or has any logic to it & I hated it. Dark Corners is slow & it's an absolute mess that one presumes director Gower wanted to say something profound & meaningful but things got out of control & he couldn't tie it all together. Sure no-one needs to be spoon fed the answers but give us pieces of the puzzle that actually fit together rather than this boring mess of ideas. Still, when all said & done who gives a damn what this crap film is about the main question I want answered though is why did that old woman tell Susan not to sit in that chair in the corner of Woodleigh's waiting room?

The sole reason I am giving Dark Corners two stars out of ten rather than one is because it does actually look quite nice, Susan perfect brightly lit world contrasts well against Karens bleak dark & grungy one. It's easy to know which reality the film is currently in because of the two colour schemes. In the making-of featurette director Gower apparently says this is 'David Lynch meets Cronenberg meets Wes Craven', yeah right. There's all sorts of imagery that really has little to do with anything, a blind detective to killers who wear hoodies to weird kids randomly pointing at Karen. None of it comes across as anything other than pretentious & just strange for no real reason. There's some gore, there's a dead body with it's guts hanging out, there's a slit throat, a ripped out baby fetus & some blood splatter. There are one or two well composed & shot scenes that are almost creepy but not enough.

Although set in the US this was filmed over here in England, the film does look nice with good production values & effects. The acting is pretty poor from most, Thora Birch is hot in both roles but that's the best I can say for her.

Dark Corners is a film that feels like it's supposed to be full of messages, striking images & a knock out twist, unfortunately it's a complete total & utter mess that fails on every count. The first fifteen or twenty minutes are alright but once the repetitiveness & boredom kicks in I can see most losing interest very quickly.

This Movie Sucks

[borgixx · 1/10 · 16 January 2008]

This Movie Really Sucks, and it's a waste of time to watch it, so don't even bother trying to... Even if you really try to understand it, and to understand the meaning of the whole story it's pretty useless. Right after the beginning two characters are very desultory, so you can't even get who is who. When I saw that Thora Bhirch is starring, for a second I thought that it wouldn't be such a waste of time to sit there and watch the movie, but afterwards i realized that I was wrong. And I must admit that I like to watch those kind of movies as I assume this movie was supposed to be horror. Thora Birch's performance is only so so at best and the gore scenes, while impressive and shocking are one of the few highlights in what is otherwise a totally disappointing snooze fest!

Clean the cat box instead, you'll be so bored anyway

[Geshtinana · 1/10 · 15 June 2007]

A huge disappointment and frightfully dull to boot. There was an unwatchable film with Demi Moore living two concurrent lives that came out some years ago (look it up because I can't be bothered) and this reminds me of a very bad horror version of that. There is no point and therefore no grab-you factor. The only claim on one's attention appears to be glimpses of "clean the cat box fast" Hostel or 1000 Corpses moments of human-on-human torture.

As a grumble, I would like to say that anyone who has compared this film to Rosemary's Baby needs a crash refresher course in scary movies of the 1970s when they actually knew how to make them. Those references are what convinced me to be foolish enough to chance renting this.

The ending is beyond awful.

A stupid person's smart movie

[natashabowiepinky · 4/10 · 27 September 2013]

Well, I'll say one thing for this film... with all it's weird gory intermissions and random acts of violence, it certainly disturbed me. That's about all it has going for it though, as the story is all over the map. It's one of those movies which is far less clever than it thinks it is... If you get confused by the goings-on, don't worry... My guess is even the writer couldn't explain this hodge-podge of blood and guts. Perhaps, instead of trying to gross us out every five minutes, he could have glued everything together into a coherent whole. Yeah, that would been good.

Pity poor Thora Birch. One minute you're nominated for an Oscar for your incredible work in American Beauty, then just seven years later you're reduced to playing dual roles in a rubbishy low-budget horror. Your characters are, amongst other indignities, punched, stabbed and raped repeatedly, and you even have undergo a forced abortion while still awake by a maniac slicing open your belly. And believe me, that ain't the half of it.The heroine of I Spit On Your Grave had it easy, compared to this. Time for a new agent, methinks. Get on it, girl. 4/10