Misteriosa desaparición en Phoenix

The film was shot in the pseudo-documentary style. t the same time, everything is pretty well done. This is not surprising given the rather large budget for this genre of films. You cannot find fault with the quality of the shooting because the genre imposes certain requirements on the picture. There are shaking cameras and low resolution and so on. The actors should be noted separately. They play very naturally. Some moments you look like a real found footage. The plot did not disappoint much. After watching, there were quite a few questions left. This provides many reasons for negative criticism. But I looked with pleasure.

Not a bad film, found it enjoyable, the story was well laid out, for a low budget film I would recommend checking this film out. A good interesting found footage story, worth checking out for sci fi horror fans.

Phoenix Forgotten portrays itself as a movie about the sister of a teen who went missing after the phoenix lights incident in 1997. If you're not familiar with the phoenix lights, a bunch of strange lights appeared over Phoenix, then disappeared and was then never explained.

Sophie Bishop, 20 years after her brother went missing, decides to shoot a documentary about what happened, and try and discover the truth. That sums up the first 2/3 of the movie and involves interviews with her family, plus footage shot by Josh (who was, of course, a camera geek and budding movie director). Caught halfway between this fake documentary and found footage movie, Phoenix Forgotten never really gets off the ground. There is some groundwork laid for the final act of the movie, but mostly the first couple acts are forgettable.

The third act is where the movie really takes off, as the director fully embraces the found footage genre, and succeeds. The camera actually makes sense that it would be filmed, and the actions seem very believable. The main problem with the end of the movie is how the movie just ends. Don't expect any explanation of what was just witnessed or what it means. Is it human, alien, or other? That's up for the interpretation of the viewer and leaves the film weaker off.

The other issue with the ending of the movie is it totally drops Sophie's documentary. While this works better for the pacing of the movie being watched, it's odd that a thread played out for so long is just dropped.

In the end, viewers who enjoy the found footage genre should find something enjoyable here. But the dropped threads, questionable first hour, and ambiguous ending hurt the film.

I thought I would hate this movie when I saw the trailer. I've been fooled before by found footage horror movies about people going to a secluded place in search of the supernatural, yadah yadah yadah. Usually they're terrible, but I saw this one and was pleasantly surprised. My biggest complaint is that the part of the movie focusing on the documentarian who has found this footage, the real meat of the movie, isn't very engaging at all. Half of the movie focuses on 3 kids trying to find proof of aliens, but we are gradually shown this story through the story of the main kid's sister uncovering the footage. Whenever it cut back to the sister, I just wanted to get back to the main plot. However, the long setup is very much worth the payoff at the very end. This is a slow burn film that takes a while for the important events to happen, but the final act of the film is well worth the wait. I don't often get scared by horror movies, but the ending of this films kind of terrified me. Paranoia slowly builds until we're treated to a very tense ending that gives enough closure to satisfy but also leaves a few things to the imagination. Phoenix forgotten isn't fantastic, but for what it's worth, it's much better than most of the other formulaic horror movies studios are currently cranking out. It's well acted and produced, and I liked it. Don't be expecting to much, but if you're in the mood for a good UFO movie, I'd recommend it.

I'm not sure if Phoenix Forgotten marks, much more than even last year's "soft reboot/sequel" of Blair Witch, the "found footage" sub-type or genre of horror, the full circle of what it's been all about. The funny thing is that this is not entirely even found footage; it is actually, to go back further, indebted too to what Blair Witch was itself doing an homage to, Cannibal Holocaust, though that didn't pretend to be the documentary that this does. While we do get to see some of the footage shot in 1997 by the main woman's older brother sporadically in the first two thirds, we don't get the full, unfiltered "found" part of it until the last twenty minutes. And, whether it's because a lot has been built up beforehand with the characters, it's the best part of the movie.

I should note that this first two-thirds feels longer because some of the character build up is of the stock kind; the acting isn't that bad, certainly considering the low budget, but this all seems to go on for a long while. It almost puts the director Justin Barber into an uncomfortable position: he has to really have something that pays off for our patience, or else we're going to be quite mad (there was a large family sitting near me which had such an inclination at the end of the film, with one exclaiming, and I quote, "That s*** was ass!") Thankfully, it pays off just enough to be passable. Could it have been more, or a little less predictable? Of course, it almost always can be.

I do have to stress that this is probably a better movie than you're expecting while, simultaneously, being reasonable enough for a rental or even a Netflix viewing - not so much for a movie theater screen where, indeed, much of what we see isn't so cinematic as to warrant a giant screen experience. What stands out is that the performances are by people who are trying (and the writing is trying for them too, at least up to a point, the actress, Chelsea Lopez I think, on the poster is the example of that), and the director and his team make some clever motions to bringing alien invasion into the found-footage horror style.

So the special effects are all seamlessly done in the frame of what *is* a shot-on-90's-consumer-grade camcorder. There isn't anything in the present day, so everything in the past has to work. As far as capturing that rough-edged 90's approach technically speaking, and getting us to believe it, they do a competent job. If anything if the whole movie had been *more* in the 90's style - say, if they found rolls and rolls of tapes and that's all they had to go on, no present-day interviews with boiler-plate answers from the parents and experts and journalists - it'd be even more appealing.