Extinction

Tbh.. I only wanted to watch the movie for Neil Newbon. I saw the trailer. Knew right away it wouldn't blow through the roof. CGI ofc not good even for its time. But.. for a low budget film, it's not half bad.

The acting isn't unbearable. I just don't like how they made the cameraman so annoying. I understand trying to add humor. But there's good comedy relief; then there's just, dick energy. I feel like they could've done a tad better with the realism. Like it's supposed to be a remote area yet well driven, flat dirt roads. Supposed to be bug ridde. Yet little to no bug etc.

Overall not terrible.

Having an obnoxious cameraman on found footage is the equivalent of seated next to a loud texting person in cinema. Extinction has a couple good moments and the setting is presentable, but almost half of the movie is spent on bickering. If it's for realism of human drama, it's doubtful that actual documentary people would argue as much and the banter is not exactly appealing. For the encounter with alleged monster, it has so little impact since the effect is far from compelling, so barely anything works in Extinction.

The film follows the journey of scientists and filmmakers to the depth of Amazon. They soon find out that the forest hides a very insidious secret. The use of found footage is mainly to create a sense of involvement for audience, yet the movie has a very confrontational cast. Nearly everyone would mumble in antagonizing manner almost in every scene, especially the cameraman James who is utterly annoying.

He would instigate people and react poorly when interacting with others. It's probably for humor purpose, but it gets tiring very fast. There are the rudimentary comments on the existence of creature which are plodding the already uninteresting endeavor. Some scenes involving actual fauna is a bit better to establish the authenticity, though these are few between all the squabbles.

As expected there would be unclear shots as the monster eventually reveals itself. It's not half bad since a couple of these instances are engaging. However, the effect for said monster is not convincing. The movie doesn't have the luxury of smooth mix of usual camcorder view and CG like Troll Hunter or Cloverfield. Not to mention the cast is unfriendly, it won't garner much sympathy.

In the end, Extinction doesn't offer an amusing journey, let alone the grandeur encounter the poster falsely advertises.

Was expecting a little more - but the high-school dinosaur effects killed it. Sorry - never going to get a big thumbs-up from me. (Plus the "lost footage" camera thing has been very over used...) Turned it off after just over an hour. Luckily my wine was nice... The acting was okay. The sound effects were good. The tension of the "animals" coming into the movie wasn't too bad. The eventual arrival of "a dinosaur" was absolutely terrible. Hopefully the actors have other projects. My room mate didn't come downstairs to watch it, and thankfully so... If you thought this would be an awesome scary horror dinosaur flick then don't bother. Very disappointed. Why don't I have Fox Sports...?

I hate it when a movie has some qualities that are overshadowed by such awfulness that it totally destroys the film., For me, seeing the characters, most of which seem to know which end of the camera is the important bit seemed to offer promise. But seeing the directors take on what makes a film is both disgusting, and ludicrously bad film making. For instance, every time the camera sets down, it is focused on the female leads breast, crotch, or ass, and remains there while the dialogue plays out.,, or it sits there for some time while in no way advancing the story. Its like it was calculated what shot would appeal to juvenile prurient interest, and tries to exploit it. Then the directors involvement as an actor, talk about heavy handed, there are many, many shots of the cameraman, focusing in for a nattering boring close up that is exactly perfectly focused, no matter how terrified the cameraman is supposed to be. Why are only those shots in perfect focus you might ask. I suspect its due to lack of knowledge of his craft, ego, and a lot of poor taste.

The characters that had the potential of more interest, Tim who seemed to overact every time he had his glasses on, which made a character more like a cartoon; but when he took the glasses off he was someone else. Then there was the alpha male, who specialized in predator, and primate behaviour studies, never really did anything very interesting at all.

Then there is the special effect dinosaurs, looked poorly crafted, shown in very bad light, blurred by motion, and only visible for a second, or two.

From lighting, to camera angles, to acting, to plot, to writing, to acting, to directing, there was such unevenness that the most I could have given the film is a three. However the 1/10 I gave it still stands, as it was such a waste of time from out of my life.

Wanted to waste some time and I most certainly did!! Shame a lot of low budget films nowadays (and this seemed very much like one!), seem to want to film in a self-filmed view! This film is not worth wasting your time on I'm afraid! Sometimes you get a lower budget gem and its worth it, like tremors, but this isn't anything great! I'd rather watch Cloverfield and thats saying something! Have given it 2 stars because I'm sure I've seen worse, but shut it out of my memory, and it did waste a little time (although not the running length of the film because fast-forward was used!! Thought I'd give a real review rather than sugar-coat it!!