Alone in the Dark is back! After a 15 year absence — and yes, I’m aware of the terrible co-op shooter from 2015, it doesn’t count – the literal first name in survival horror is back! GameCritics was invited to an online preview event, and I have thoughts!
A delightful throwback to the first-ever survival horror game, Song of Horror wears its status as an Alone In The Dark homage on its sleeve, secure enough in its setting and premise to understand that extreme horror can come from creeping dread, rather than a constant struggle for life.
I'm not sure why anyone would feel the urge to make a sequel to one of the worst films in recent history (Uwe Boll's Alone in the Dark), but that's exactly what's happening and I've got the trailer to prove it (Thanks to the mighty Dread Central).
What's even more puzzling is why you'd make a sequel to a terrible film that is essentially universally despised, change the actors and story, and yet keep the title. Christian Slater and Tara Reid are gone and the only real tie to the original movie (which was based on a video game series) is that Edward Carnby is still the main character. If that's your only real tie to the original series, you'd probably be better off just doing a brand new standalone film. I guess this proves that even bad publicity is better than no publicity at all. I can see no other reason to tie yourself to anything directed by Uwe Boll.
Anyway, I'm probably gonna wind up watching this thing (and hating myself as soon as it starts) because it's got Bill Moseley, Danny Trejo, and Lance Henriksen in it. Those three guys are cool enough to get me to watch just about anything and I don't see that changing any time soon. Donald Pleasence had the same affect on me—and while I was burned by many a bad flick with Dr. Loomis skulking around in it, I kept going back for more.
We'll all find out how bad Alone in the Dark II is when it debuts on DVD this January 26th.
According to various online sources, Lionsgate is set to release Alone in the Dark 2 on unsuspecting DVD owners all over America on January 26th. If you needed proof that Lionsgate hates your guts, there it is.
This new sequel will be directed by Michael Roesch (who replaces the maestro, one Uwe Boll) and features an entirely new cast when compared to the first film. Christian Slater and Tara Reid are out, replaced by Rick Yune, Lance Henriksen, Ralf Moeller, PJ Soles, Bill Moseley, Rachel Specter, Michael Paré and Danny Trejo. Truthfully, that's kind of an interesting cast. I'd almost be up for watching this.
Why make a sequel to one of the most reviled and critically drubbed films in recent memory? Your guess is as good as mine. Apparently, this sequel involves Yune taking over Slater's role and also features a witch and a laboratory. Sounds classic.
HIGH Pushes the edges of design further than most in recent memory.
LOW This game might have been a blockbuster if it hadn't bungled its initial release.
WTF As much as I loved it, adding alcohol to bullets really makes no sense.
A couple of days ago I finally located a copy of Alone in the Dark: Inferno for the PlayStation 3. I'm not a huge Alone in the Dark fan in general, but prior to the game's release for the Xbox 360, there had been quite a lot of talk from the developers about different ideas they were trying out, and their approach to making something they saw as fairly revolutionary.
…Of course, it ended up accumulating countless negative reviews and extremely poor word-of-mouth. Last time I checked Metacritic, the 360 had an average score of 58. Basically, pretty much everyone who played it hated it, and it crashed and burned spectacularly.
After this potent feedback, the development team at Eden Studios gave the game a radical makeover and fixed many of the things that sunk the first release. This new and improved version (PS3 only) was subtitled Inferno, and despite addressing the concerns, this release also went nowhere. Currently, a brand-new copy can be had for $20 or less, and last I heard, any hope of a sequel has been utterly destroyed.
When the reviewer wasn't being unfairly disinterested, he was flat-out wrong. So I decided to make my review a little different, and take the reader, point-by-point through why its author was not just wrong, but unprofessional. How unprofessional? I suspect he played very little of the actual game.
Recent Comments