So this is a relatively modest budget production with an interesting history behind the reason why it got made.
Essentially, the makers are practical effects guys, and their work on the 2011 reboot/prequel of John Carpenter's The Thing was replaced post-production with CGI effects. See my review of that movie for my thoughts on how that replacement worked out! Anyhow, the effects guys were, understandably a bit miffed at the perception that everything has to be CGI these days and so decided to crowd-fund a project to show how they can still hold up in our current era of "show all and leave nothing to the imagination" film-making. Hence the existence of Harbinger Down.
So how did they do? Is it a hit, or a miss?
In truth, it is a bit of both, though the misses are mostly to do with the script and the editing. The effects do hold up surprisingly well. These folks clearly know their stuff with prosthetics and animatronic effects, along with all the other tools of their trade. If you did a "Thing" here and replaced the practical effects with CGI ones, I don't think it would improve things. The practical effects work just fine. Where the effects are weak, low-lighting and quick cuts do an admirable job of hiding the fact. Nicely done, for the most part!
Less laudable is the script. I know, it is an homage to the Thing, so the same basic premise is not what I'm talking about here. More it's just some of the dialogue and characterisations really. That said, like most horror movies that were from the 80's, you have no real doubt who is good, who is bad and who is going to die, right from the first few scenes. There are few surprises here.
On the plus side, the film wastes no time in getting to the plot. They have the chunk of ice in which something is frozen within the first ten minutes of the movie! Likewise, the film is not overlong. They didn't pad it out unnecessarily with pointless scenes - except the starting credits - but I appreciate the need for something to get those out of the way and give the viewer something to watch. Better than a black background and wall of scrolling names, for sure.
On the negative side, the lack of padding also means there are some awkward editing moments. Nothing hugely jarring, but just cuts from one scene to the next that leave you, the viewer, having to fill in a few minor moments and gaps. Nothing awful, but slightly distracting.
Beyond the pro's and con's I've mentioned, the film does indeed remind me of the good old 80's monster movies I watched with friends and a crate of beer, when we couldn't afford to go out, and hit the video stores instead. So a definite nostalgia feeling there.
Is it a movie that demands theatrical release? Well, no, not really. This is the modern equivalent of those VHS only films I saw with my mates. I can't help but think it would do better sticking to such a release format (DVD/Bluray/download etc.) rather than a cinema release. I think the latter would hurt, rather than help the film.
It is, however, worth a watch whilst keeping in mind there are lots of practical, rather than CGI, effects. Story and editing aside, it is entertaining, if predictable, and is, unlike many movies these days, mercifully short.
SUMMARY: Worth giving a shot, but don't expect something like Carpenter's Thing as far as quality goes. Script and Editing let it down a notch, but you could do far worse on a rainy afternoon.
Tampilkan lebih banyak 
