Wonderful production values, but ultimately brought down by poor conception, scenario, and scripting, for which adequate acting, well-intentioned direction, and skillful editing couldn't compensate.
My experience was interesting: At first, the flick was just sort of ridiculous; lots of disconnected emoting/apparent motivation and a welter of vague, disconnected scariness that was just senseless, hence funny.
And then we come to the bit where Neill's character lays the premise bare. I appreciate the idea of hoping to keep us on pins and needles, awaiting the payload of dawning comprehension of the Big Picture. The problem was that the scenario work and scripting doesn't know when to hold the cards close to the chest... so it just looks silly, especially to the same degree that we're expected to be relating to/identifying with the protagonists.
So, I think, OK: I can sort of forgive the foregoing, now that I see that there's actually sort of an engaging premise/backstory. Can the story management straighten up and fly right for the rest of the movie?
No. There's just a non-stop cavalcade of (again) disconnected emotional ebbs and flows (e.g., the boy twin breaks character to "go it alone" after the mentor had clearly established its futility; interfaces between the supernatural and "real" world characters are laughable), ridiculous close calls (e.g., the girl "almost" dies, twice), gratuitous stock creepiness (e.g., Lots of ET mucous, way, way over the top grotesquerie)... which pretty much sum up the varieties of narrative/scenario mismanagement. Now, just imagine these things coming at you a mile-a-minute.
Nonetheless, it was sort of fascinating to watch, if only for the reason that it never lets you down: There was a guaranteed disbelieving head-shake at least every minute!
The reason I watched it was because a Trivial Pursuit teammate said she was under the impression it was made under Peter Jackson's direction, so I jumped on in. Tho a Kiwi production, it _wasn't_ directed by Peter Jackson.
Don't waste your time, unless you're a film student and are curious as to how close-to-the-mark I am.
My experience was interesting: At first, the flick was just sort of ridiculous; lots of disconnected emoting/apparent motivation and a welter of vague, disconnected scariness that was just senseless, hence funny.
And then we come to the bit where Neill's character lays the premise bare. I appreciate the idea of hoping to keep us on pins and needles, awaiting the payload of dawning comprehension of the Big Picture. The problem was that the scenario work and scripting doesn't know when to hold the cards close to the chest... so it just looks silly, especially to the same degree that we're expected to be relating to/identifying with the protagonists.
So, I think, OK: I can sort of forgive the foregoing, now that I see that there's actually sort of an engaging premise/backstory. Can the story management straighten up and fly right for the rest of the movie?
No. There's just a non-stop cavalcade of (again) disconnected emotional ebbs and flows (e.g., the boy twin breaks character to "go it alone" after the mentor had clearly established its futility; interfaces between the supernatural and "real" world characters are laughable), ridiculous close calls (e.g., the girl "almost" dies, twice), gratuitous stock creepiness (e.g., Lots of ET mucous, way, way over the top grotesquerie)... which pretty much sum up the varieties of narrative/scenario mismanagement. Now, just imagine these things coming at you a mile-a-minute.
Nonetheless, it was sort of fascinating to watch, if only for the reason that it never lets you down: There was a guaranteed disbelieving head-shake at least every minute!
The reason I watched it was because a Trivial Pursuit teammate said she was under the impression it was made under Peter Jackson's direction, so I jumped on in. Tho a Kiwi production, it _wasn't_ directed by Peter Jackson.
Don't waste your time, unless you're a film student and are curious as to how close-to-the-mark I am.