TheLittleSongbird '20 Ft Below: The Darkness Descending' was another film seen with not high expectations. Was worried as to whether it would be silly and do nothing new with a tired concept. It was though another film seen out of curiosity for primarily Danny Trejo, who can save bad projects and is one of those watchable enough actors too often poorly used.It was a good thing that expectations were not high because '20 Ft Below: The Darkness Descending' fails to deliver in many, make that most or even almost every, ways. It is not one of the worst films seen, of its genre and overall. It's not even among the worst of my recent film viewings which has seen a lot of above average to gem standard stuff and just as much wastes of potential. That Trejo is the best thing about it, being the actor who tries most without over-compensating and there are signs of his bad-ass persona, but criminally underused in a caricature role with a far too short screen time says a lot about the film's quality. Generally the actors try too hard and come over as cartoonish. Didn't find anything intriguing, investable or rootable about any of the characters and the dialogue is both stilted and over-heated. The direction is flat.Furthermore, the story just doesn't grab the attention, gets pretty silly to the wrong side of camp and hammy and is not easy to follow at times due to being an under-explored kitchen sink of different tones and ideas. It looks poor, very murky and drab in lighting and filmed with next to no care or coherence. In summary, fails to deliver and even Trejo can't save it. 2/10 Bethany Cox

Michael Ledo Angel (Danny Trejo) is a tough intellectual anarchist who rules the deep underground of NYC. In the opening scene he kidnaps and kills the wealthy Jason Wells (Peter Dobson) which leads to an unsuccessful police sweep. Jake (Frank Krueger) is an ex-cop who lost his wife, rules the area between the streets and Angel's world. Chelsea (Kinga Philipps) is a reporter who successfully gets an interview with Angel and then takes her time leaving the tunnels.Jake's speeches on his lost love were as badly written and delivered as Angel's anarchy fluff. In fact the whole film had a nausea that reminded me of "Billy Jack."The film is supposed to be a metaphor about living in the dark and alone with Jake representing the microcosm and the underworld the macrocosm. It was done rather sloppily with unrealistic characters.For Trejo fans it is far better than "Voodoo Possession" but not as good as "Bullet." Can't wait for "Volcano Zombies."No sex or nudity. I don't recall any F-bombs.

shawnblackman When I seen this sitting in the DVD bin I thought scores of people would be scrambling to get the only copy but that wasn't the case. After I watched it I learned why nobody wanted it.A lady decides to do a documentary on the homeless people living under the subway system who look more like Survivor contestants. Danny Trejo has more screen time than usual playing a gang leader who is always battling the other homeless people. The whole thing is just atrocious giving you some time to catch up on your sleep.I'll try and get in store credit for this DVD telling them something is wrong with it. I won't be lying.

suite92 Naive documentary film maker Chelsea goes into the underground of NYC to investigate the homeless people living in abandoned subway tunnels. She encounters senile former military, a strange artist, teen run aways, crazed former drug addicts, a disgraced ex-cop (Jake), and a self- righteous gang (the Chosen) of violent cretins led by Angel.Chelsea interviews a few of the cops (whose leaders want some action against the Chosen), Angel himself, the artist, two teen runaways, and Jake. The Chosen have it out for Jake and the teens.So, what happens in the inevitable show down?-----Scores-----Cinematography: 7/10 Usually clear enough.Sound: 3/10 Bad leveling. The music played during intervals often seemed irrelevant.Acting: 3/10 Danny Trejo showed his usual screen presence. Louis Mandylor was competent with the few lines he was given. The rest, not so good.Screenplay: 1/10 Were there any points to this film? Not that I saw. Also, the clothes worn were too clean, the people looked way too clean and too healthy. How is it that Jake has a new, spotless bottle of expensive looking booze? How does he have brand new candles in perfectly clean holders? One of the women in the tunnels has a new looking guitar; what are the chances that would not be stolen? The preaching (from Angel and from the group who hang with the artist) seemed out of place, as did the spouting of statistics.