alex wolfman After watching many horror films over the years, the idea of bats being the central feature of a film never really crossed my mind. Bats sometimes are in the background but not the stars of the show. These little mammals are obviously small and maybe a little creepy but unless you get very close, I just don't find them very scary.That said in 1999 came the movie Bats which received negative reviews and has been long forgotten. Bats was only for die hard horror fans. Then close to ten years later in 2007 and really out of nowhere, came this sequel on the SyFy channel, Bats: Human Harvest.The setting is supposed to be Afghanistan but unfortunately it looks nothing like Afghanistan. Here there is a Delta Force groups of soldiers trying to track down a terrorist who is a rogue American weapons researcher but along the way, they are attacked by genetically-altered killer bats. Looking at this, the main reason this film fails is because of the bats. There are no close ups of the bats and they are very generic and boring. They just don't work as a villain or a source of danger. Being a SyFy film, there are many unknown actors who are shallow and really struggle at times. All in all, the horror aspects as well as the CGI here is just of very low quality.One thing I was wondering is just what does this film want to be? It has horror aspects to it but it also contains a war story that is itself pretty shallow and wouldn't work on it's own as a war film. Frankly, I do not think war stories mesh well with horror ideas so this puzzle doesn't really fit even though it is original no doubt.Bats: Human Harvest is frankly very low quality junk horror that is very hard to sit through and I couldn't wait until it was over. Frankly this series is useless and unnecessary.

TheLittleSongbird Bats: Human Harvest is not a good or great movie, but I can think of far worse ways to waste my time. I did like the setting, not quite exotic but atmospheric enough, the photography is not too slipshod and the editing and music were decent. The effects and acting were uneven but by no means across-the-board-distractingly-bad. Some of the effects do look artificial, but the bats are ferocious enough. In terms of acting, there are some who do put effort into their roles, but also others who look as though they are just reading lines. The real problems though were with the characters, story and especially the script. The characters are stereotypical with not much development going on. The story is not exactly dull, but it is never exactly exciting either, and holds few surprises too. The script is the worst offender, often cheesy and stilted than not. All in all, one of the movies that falls into the some good/some bad category. 5/10 Bethany Cox

rlange-3 An elite American military team which of course happens to include two good looking women and a guy who can't quite grasp teamwork, lots of bats, some terrorists, and a Spetznaz team that acts like the gang that can't shoot straight -- all thrown together in a jumbled plot with mediocre acting. This one has nothing much going for it. The characters are not compelling. Even the setting, which has great possibilities, looks like something out of the middle of rural Pennsylvania, not an exotic Boreal forest in Eastern Europe.The bats are certainly ferocious looking. They can even pick up a man and fly with him for a few feet (harpies?) or chop off an arm. You see Delta force surrounded by hundreds of bats with a guys shooting assault rifles and pistols at them and bat flopping to the ground. It would be like trying to shoot skeet with a rifle from a distance of 3 feet. Utterly clueless. The dialogue is rancidly unrealistic, with boy/girl jokes and flirts in the middle of tense parts of the mission. One of the team is blown up by a mine and the first one on the scene just stares sadly at his body, stunned, not even bothering to take cover or secure the area. In fact AFTER the rest of the group shows up he talks about how the area is laid out like a minefield -- thanks for the heads up bub.If you want a contrast in how a horror movie involving a small military group can be done well on a low budget check out Outpost. Harvest is not the movie you want to see. In fact I think I'm going to give it a two instead of a three if I can make it through the second half. Seems unlikely at this point.

etg1701 Dull one-note characters with next to no development, unimpressive performances by people who sound like they're simply reading lines, and ludicrous special effects combine to make this a genuine stinker. The story begins with eminently bland commando Russo and his fellow soldiers attacking an Al-Qaeda training base. The scene tells us that Al-Qaeda has recently come to seek an ultimate weapon, and also serves to illustrate Russo's only character trait, a tendency to eschew teamwork. With the help of a collection of blank slates and walking stereotypes, including a Russian spy, Russo travels to Chechnyan territory to catch a mad scientist working for the terrorists. Along the way, they encounter vast hordes of flesh-eating bats that fly in broad daylight for some reason. From there, the movie becomes nothing more than a dragging morass of ridiculous action, including a scene in which a swarm of bats slices a soldier's arm off!