Grief-striken over the death of their young daughter, Nate and his wife Adrian jet off with Adrian's brother Jay to immerse themselves in urban exploration - the investigation of areas not designed for public use. But as their journey plunges them deep into underground Moscow, through Ivan the Terrible's torture chambers and Stalin's mythical Metro-2 Subway system, it becomes clear their descent may not be just a physical one. As the stress begins to take its toll and the lines between fantasy and reality become dangerously blurred, Nate is forced to confront head on the grief he is trying so desperately to escape...

After starts off with the following onscreen text: "Urban Explorers are extreme sports' answer to computer hackers: a growing breed of thrill-seekers who thrive on infiltrating the planet's most dangerous man-made structures... Just because they can."

What starts as a promising spin on the dangers of urban exploration soon descends into a bit of a mess. There was an opportunity here to really build some excitement as the three characters infiltrate areas they're not supposed to and face danger along the way, but this is not the focus of the movie. Instead we get some rather odd story about guilt and a dead child.

Cutting backwards and forwards from the past and present seems to have been orchestrated to disorientate the viewer to the point that some pretty large holes in the plot are ignored. The biggest problem, for me, with this movie is that if you go back and sort out what's reality and fantasy from the narrative it doesn't really add up. Adrian explains to Nate about how (without spoiling anything) humans have an ability to sort through their memories and, in some instances, rewrite them so that they believe they've followed a different path then they actually have. However, this is told to Nate in a time (which we later discover) that is fantasy. So why is it brought up? And if Adrian's speech is actually true, then why does Nate not remember the past differently - instead creating an alternative future which is anything but how he'd actually want to have his life turn out?

The clues are clearly signposted and this movie follows in the footsteps of other similar films where the surprise ending ends up being anything but. It's pretty much rule of thumb that if a movie starts off in our reality (i.e. no real monsters) that once odd things start happening that take you out of our reality the twist is likely to be the same. Like Jacob's Ladder and Dead End, the ending is clearly signposted and should come as no real shock.

There's also no real acting talent required by the three main cast members. But I was shocked to discover that when Daniel Caltagirone did have more than a line of dialogue (shouting at a Russian woman on the tube) that it felt awkward and unbelievable. You could argue, once you know what is going on, that there is a reason for that - but I don't think that's an excuse.

On the plus side, stylistically the film looks impressive. I loved the bleached out segments that represented the past, and the close up, quick cutting techniques used during the urban exploration scenes did offer a feeling of claustrophobia and disorientation. But the music score by The Crystal Method, while very fitting, will I fear age this film a little too quickly.

The only extra included is the original trailer.

While visually this movie is interesting, a lack of character development and a lost opportunity to focus on the excitement of urban exploration means that this movie is a lot less promising than it could have been.

4

Nick Smithson