It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

If you're into low budget, independent, amateur productions and want to see something that sort of tries to be the Blair Witch in dark tunnels instead of the forest, you *might* like this.The acting is okay, the score is okay, the sound is terrible, the lighting is almost non-existent and the cam is often shaky and blurry.I kept watching hoping the pace would pick up and that the payoff would be worth it. I was disappointed. I kept asking myself, "Why am I watching this?" with no good reason. I walked away from it a couple times and came back to the same scene still playing. This might actually be a decent short film with some competent editing.The "twist" ending left me disappointed as well. My reaction was, "That's it? That's the big twist ending?" Groan.If you like B-movies, as I do, I wouldn't call this one. There is nothing in here that makes even bad B-movies enjoyable.I think the talent in this production shows and they could potentially do something really good. This just wasn't it.

First, I decided to look this film up after someone said "the tunnel" took a lot from this film... I now believe whoever said that either had this movie confused with something like chud or just wanted people to watch this movie (spam). Susan's (sam tsao) behavior seemed good and natural in the beginning, but once they were attacked and chased, her acting seemed to drop a few levels and her behavior was way off what you'd expect someone to be. Nick's (John-Luke Montias)acting and behavior was decent to good. Tom's (james cox) was fine.For a movie that's suppose to be more realistic, the characters should act more realistic. example, scared, geeky guy with a gun, whom is injured and talking about how they're all going to die, hears a noise, sees something in the dark, and chases after it, leaving behind the only other person there. Also, susan is stocked by the monster, beats up the monster with a pipe, sees it is a man and wants to record it, but she uses her hands to brush his air aside? and keeps walking back and forth from the same angle while rearranging him slightly? And what happned to "there's more than one of them," while she was recording? this is one of those moments where the entire world stops so the main character can do something in peace.Also, susan's apologies and actions after being chased seem so fake and inconsistent. At this point, I actually became disappointed because I knew the level of the entire film dropped.as for the plot, why do we hear growling and weird reverberation sounds when the monster is a man? obviously a man who has been to the surface. they might have used echoing wolf growls and godzilla scream since it obviously proves to have nothing to do with the monster. Shouldn't nick have noticed if the monster was around them (while being chased) if he wasn't going crazy? who killed the crazy homeless guy? why did the monster take away tom and not go back for the others, they were close enough to hear. That whole walkie talkie conversation was so bad, it was obviously meant to cause tension but it was so badly done. the signals apparently cut out 5-15 seconds at a time but then come in crystal clear (for a walkie talkie).I'd skip this movie, the tunnel was so much better.btw, the "footage" message in the beginning is a disclaimer, not a prologue. I made the mistake of only glancing at it and thought it was another blair witch set up. I also suspect some other reviewers who mention this film was made in actual tunnels are more possibly shill reviewers trying to point out the authentic atmosphere.

"Mole": dull, jittery, overall numbing and clearly inept. I was somewhat surprised to see that this movie has met with such overwhelmingly positive reviews at IMDb. First of all, I would like to state that I have absolutely nothing against independent movies or low budget realizations of such a cinematographic genre that relies on originality and engaging shooting methods to better convey a certain atmosphere of either realism or artistic bizarreness, and, at its best, a convincing hybrid mixture of both. Alas, that is exactly where "Mole" fails. The technical shortcomings would be more than enough to undercut whatever impact it might otherwise have had, had the camera not been handled with all the competence of a five-year old. By choosing to shoot the great majority of the movie in a purposeful darkened environment the terrible camera handling comes across as an intrusion to the viewing experience, since all one sees are blurred images, followed by tantrum and randomly annoying scenes of unfocused walls, that are a prelude to scenes crammed with solid darkness and nothing else. It could be argued that this was the whole point of this production, to create and ambiance of claustrophobic intensity by refusing to deliver much, leaving it to the viewer to decide for himself what the message is. If so, that did not work. Instead, what is presented is only a terribly amateur movie, trying to reenact the Blair Witch Porject in another setting. If one bothers to compare the two, it becomes painfully obvious that "Mole" was only trying to explore a certain formula that had proved to be effective, in the desperate hope that its unpretentious gritty atmosphere would be taken as "genuine" instead of purely disheveled, which is what it is.Plot-wise I have no complains, it may be far-fetched that a reporter would get all hyped over the remote prospect of finding homeless people living in some abandoned tunnel complex, but in this kind of movie one should never be too strict about such conventions as "plausability". Regardless of that, characters wander aimlessly along badly shot tunnels, scream, are chased, and all along there is no feeling of tension and, surely, no brooding impression of lingering threat. As for the amazing twist...I'd say it was somewhat predictable, does not actually add up to what came prior to its disclosure and might even add more. I am quite sure I detected some goofs on this gem as well, but I am not inclined to share them, as I don't even think it is worth it.On a final note, the editing is bellow standard in a way that is remarkably incompetent and the acting is only mediocre. Just because a movie happens to hail from an independent effort does not immediately confer it the title of greatness or brilliancy. "Mole" is a clear example of that.

For a small independent thriller this movie really delivers. The filmmakers actually shot most of it underneath New York City and it looks great. I can't even imagine how a studio would try to tackle this story. They would probably have to reconstruct the entire tunnel system underneath the city in some warehouse but this picture is the `real deal' as far as authentic locations and I think that is what struck me as so cool when watching.The basic premise involves a reporter named Susan Pei (played by Sam Tsao). She's trying to earn more on screen time and better assignments, and the discovery of several bodies in an abandoned subway tunnel seems to be the springboard she's looking for. She gets a cameraman named Nick (John-Luke Montias) and a guy who claims to be an expert guide, Tom (James Cox), and she heads into the abandoned tunnels to find a story. She finds a story but soon fiction mixes in with reality as they discover more than they bargained for and find themselves struggling to survive against an unknown tunnel dweller.This movie gradually evolves into a potent, creepy concept, and even though I can't imagine how they did some of the shooting of this film on subway tracks, the filmmakers actually managed to create something fairly stylish and moody by really pushing the extremes of light and shadow. It's a must see for any underground enthusiast and a nice twist at the end makes it a picture worth watching There is more than `scares' coming out of `Mole' but a moral theme I think works at its darkest level. This movie is a great example of independent filmmaking and despite its limitations as a low budget movie it surfaces as quite a movie because of its imaginative style and content.