The Jungle

The movie cover, summary and the plot all good. End result bad. The main character is a jerk who cares more about jaguars than people. As an animal lover myself that says something. You doing really get a connection to the people who you know are going to die in a thriller. For the perspective that they went for from the camera angle was alright but could have been better. The plot was your usual thriller but I was bored through the whole movie. 5,15. 30 minute mark I thought Okay maybe it will really start getting good now, now, now.. It didn't. How this came out as a 3.8 rating I'll never know. Once close up the demon doesn't even look scary.

I thought "Black Water" was excellently pitched eco-horror, while "The Reef" was a modest survival horror. So when it came to "The Jungle", I had some high hopes from Australian film-maker Andrew Traucki. Again very similar in formula to his previous films, but just a different threat. "The Jungle" is a simple story (ala "Blair Witch Project") that takes advantage of the found-footage market. Does it work? Yes and no. It's durable, but unexceptional in that we have been here before.

Animal conversationalist Larry Black along with his brother head to Indonesia to track down and film a rare breed of leopard to get documented evidence of its existence in the jungle. However in the area where they would be searching are rumours of a black magic demon, which Larry considers just local superstitions? But his guides are not so convinced.

I came away liking the taut situation and the overall build-up of it. It had me engaged (be it the characters and motivation behind the trek) and there was a grounded realism, but the pay-off was less than desirable. In what becomes a whirlwind of frustration, sudden camera movement and off-screen action in the last ten minutes. It's jerky in its execution, as the repetitiveness of certain actions started to become wearisome and the jump scenes simply erupted. You are kept pretty much kept in the dark, but that didn't bother me. Although the disappearance of a character in the final few seconds baffled me. It just I didn't feel like the back-end truly captured the suspense and horror of the situation as effectively as the lead up did.

The tag less is more, is used very much here. Only glimpses (glowing eyes), noises (snarling and branches breaking), symbols (black sorcery), signs (prints, blood and remains) and the humidly suffocating environment help it come alive. A creepy superstitious back-story helps a lot too. Throughout sound effects were well used, as well as the eerie jungle backdrop in isolating the danger and uncertainness the characters found themselves in. Majority of the reliable tension is fuelled by the character interactions of the unknown, than that of the unsighted beast stalking its prey (although there's one scene involving it climbing down a tree where you only see its hands is fairly unnerving). Why this works is because the performances are appealing and they're well written giving them such weight to standout from each other. The acting led by Rupert Reid is hearty and intimate by all in style that only lends well to the story and chemistry. I can why some people might not like it, but for me it does have its moments beyond its wandering nature and not entirely seeing the creature wasn't a problem. You get a good enough look in the final shot.

"The Jungle" starts off strong with its gripping slow-burn format to only go off the beaten track in standard clichés and a disappointingly frenetic close.

I'm all in favour of movies like Blair Witch Project with that "held camera" type of shooting.

The jungle starts off as something that could have turned into a great low budget movie. Instead it goes on a downhill road from the very beginning.

Starting with the main characters on their way to the jungle - without any actual detail of what the jungle looks like but a bunch of trees - as they dwell deeper all we get is the main character that comes across as persistent and egocentric guy trying to find A leopard... Even the fact that they bumped into the natives could've leave you guessing if you're going to find a secret cult or ritual.. but no. There is no actual development to the characters and as time goes by you'll find yourself looking at the time, wondering how much longer until it ends. After a "close encounter", 4 minutes before the movie finishes, we get a glimpse of what the creature looks like which is nothing but as what could be described as a hairy man with a wolf mask.. Something more plausible and appealing could've happened here... Not to mention that throughout the movie there is no actual scenes where this "hairy masked man" could be seen and all we get are branches braking and big roars.

It leaves the viewers without nothing to expect and with an end feeling of the so called "deja vu" - seen it all before..

Long story short:

If you're a newbie or impressionable 16-24 type who's grown up in a sterile western environment, this will probably be scary for you. Not a bad way to waste some time.

If you're an actual horror fan, you could take it or leave it. It's not bad but it's very by-the-numbers. I'd recommend if you'd just like to throw something on that doesn't take up too much attention.

They really should've made an effort to be at least a bit more original.

Good guy movie. You know how you watch a movie and the next day or week you forgot most of it? I saw this movie about six months ago and remember most of it. It grabs you. They did a lot for a low budget movie. If you are looking for an Oscar performance then what the f are you doing watching this movie. Guys will like it. It was made by the same guy who did Black Water and The Reef, both excellent movies. While I would give them a higher rating, this one was almost as good. Give it a shot. Man, I just wanted to write "good guy movie", but IMDb wants at least ten lines. Hope the last two were enough. Nope. Still have to write more about the movie. The wife was nice.