The first time I saw Dark Descent, the 2002 direct-to-video feature from writer/director Daniel Knauf, I thought it was one of the worst pieces of garbage I had ever seen. It was showing on the Sci-Fi Channel not too long after its release. By that time I had a long relationship with bad movies, but nothing like the scale and familiarity I have today. I remember a film with awful CGI, cheap and drab sets that would make Roger Corman blush, and a pace that was deathly slow. All this remains true, but in comparison to the bottomfeeders in the Shitty Movie Sundays Watchability Index, this flick is a gem.
A shameless rip of Outland, itself a thematic rip of High Noon, Dark Descent follows US Marshal Will Murdock (Dean Cain), who is in charge of enforcing law and order at an undersea mining colony. This flick’s shitty bona fides start with Marshal Will, as his last name is spelled ‘Murdock’ in the end credits, but ‘Murdack’ on his uniform. However, this could be a nod to Outland, where Sean Connery’s Marshal O’Niel had his name spelled ‘O’Neil’ at times on his uniform. Is this a deep cut on the part of Knauf, or just a regular old error?
Murdock, like O’Niel in Outland, discovers a conspiracy whereby corporate ownership is sanctioning drug abuse as a way to increase production. This theme is handled in a haphazard fashion, as if Knauf expected his audience to be familiar with Peter Hyams’ earlier film, 
and he could just shorthand his way through the plot. It all leads to three hitmen arriving at the facility in the third act to rid the corporation of this meddlesome law enforcement officer, just like Outland and High Noon.
The last act is lengthy, featuring a cat and mouse game between the three hitmen and Murdock. Like fools the hitmen split up as they wander from grey hallway to grey hallway, evening the odds for Murdock, and he ticks them off in satisfying fashion on the way to denouement.
That’s it for the similarities between Dark Descent and the earlier films. This film is a rank stinker, from as objective a standpoint as I can muster. It’s also better than I remembered in many areas. While the acting is not stellar, there are none of those dreaded dead line readings that can define a bad movie. Cain seemed like he was ready to wrap the entire film in every scene he’s in, but he still worked up enough professionalism to not sink the movie. Other cast members are largely unknown, yet the only bad performance in the bunch was a bad guy who could barely speak English (Dark Descent was a joint American/Bulgarian production, and most of the cast hailed from that side of the Iron Curtain).
More than anything, what makes this a bad movie is the cheap CGI and sets. The CGI is similar to cutscenes in a late 1990s video game, and it is extensive. The sets are a couple of hallways and rooms, painted the same uniform grey, and decorated with doodads here and there one can pick up at the hardware store. One curving hallway, meant to be for a maglev train, was lined with clear plastic sheeting to give some shine to the wall, and had a line of rope lights run along the floor. This is poverty-level set decoration, and must have been a shock to the cast when they arrived for shooting. A different lighting scheme would have helped, but not much.
Dark Descent may not be as bad as I remembered, but it’s still a bad movie, in just about every facet. There is nothing in which the movie excels, and plenty where it’s a joke. However, it is not an unwatchable mess. Dark Descent enters the Index at #351, taking over the spot from Gargoyles.