 |
DVD Trapped
 Run time: 92 min Rating: 4.9 Genres: Adventure | Drama | Thriller Director: Philippe Weibel Writers: Rob W. King, Philippe Weibel Stars: Oliver Walker, David Osmond, Sai Bennett |
| Storyline On an expedition into unexplored wolf territory, two zoology students intrude into a secret world. In the midst of unrelenting wilderness and hours from civilization, they encounter a strange young woman. The two men are drawn into her enchanted reality…and their friendship is put to the ultimate test. Written by Anonymous |
|
| Details: Country: Switzerland Release Date: April 2012 (USA) |
|
previous post
4 comments
Watching this alone in the cinema, I was up for a surprise. Done by a very small production crew with a small budget and some crowd financing, this movie trumps with a lean but still intelligent story, believable dialogue, some good acting and a beautiful setting.
The story never tries to be more than it can be with the limited resources at hand. It's a straight forward thriller with some minor twists and enough room for believable characterisation and character development. The pacing is great and keeps you hooked with a mix of suspense, mystery and some red herrings. There are a few hick-ups where the motivation for the actions of the characters seem to take a little leap forward and therefore seems a little rushed, but it's nothing major and you forget about it in a few seconds.
The English dialogue is down to earth and surprisingly convincing except for a few lines that are central to the plot and can come of as a bit heavy handed. My guess is that it profited a lot from the natural back and forth between the two English leads that did an overall great job with the fact that they get so much exposure for being on screen/close-up in almost every scene.
The movie is set in a mountain forest somewhere in North America (shot on location in Switzerland). The natural setting is great and nicely put in scene by the director. I'm especially impressed by the way he handled the many night scenes without artificial lighting and without using the green/night camera effect so many low budgets movies use for these kind of shots. Overall did the director a good job in not falling into the trap of making the movie some shaky-cam, pseudo-documentary, blair-witch look-a-like, while it would have been suggested by the script and the limited budget. I regard it as a great feat to go for a more classical approach without making the limited budget obvious to the viewer.
Some flaws that need to get mentioned: The make-up (especially on Michael) was irritatingly not well suited for a movie. He looked like being prepared for the next photo shoot all the time while being supposed to be in the woods for days. Another point that bothered me was that the director of photography plays a lot with the focus of the camera and keeps some important parts deliberately blurry. This is fine in some scenes but too much and irritating in others.
Overall the movie is really worth while your time. Not a masterpiece, but a well done and nicely crafted piece of cinema.
Usually IMDb scores are more or less spot-on. Really generic pieces never break 5 or 6, blockbusters are up there at 7-9, total rubbish gets down voted rather quickly, and so on. There are instances, though, when the score is completely off. This is one of them.
This movie has several strong points, some of which have already pointed out in the other reviews.
The photography and camera work are remarkable and professional– beautiful colours and tones, scenic forest shots, etc. The acting is organic and down to earth, the two young protagonists feel like real people, and you can easily connect with them. As for the plot, it's a mystery–we know just as much about what is happening as the characters, and that isn't much, to be fair. Instead of a clear narrative, we're given symbols (enchanted garden, princess, etc) and a lot is left for the viewers' imagination. Everything about the forest is shrouded in a lore of secrecy and mystery. Instead of the spoon feeding that is so common to movies these days, I find it nice when the audience can use their own imagination from time to time. As for the general tone of the movie, it was well-balanced–it was grim when needed, but it also had many lighthearted moments due to the synergy between the protagonists.
I don't know, but I guess people had problems with the storytelling in this movie. I'd advise you to forget what you have seen before and take the movie as it is. There's much to it, really.
Honestly, this film deserves more than a 4.1/10. This is a low-budget film, and to be honest, I barely recognized that it was. From the phenomenal camera shots, to the amazing acting, this movie couldn't have been better. I absolutely agree with the user who commented above about the film. Except that, I quite enjoyed the blurry effect the director gave to the scenes – it felt a bit more real, and added emphasis to what was going on. The script in this movie – spot on! Overall, I suggest that people deciding whether to watch this movie or not, should go watch it – it definitely is worth it. I too was pondering the fact of whether to watch it or not, but I'm glad I did. You can never judge a movie based on it's cover or ratings from a couple of viewers…view the movie for yourself, and judge it for yourself.
OK. So I just finished watching this. I am assuming the budget was small, given the little cast, nothing but wilderness setting and pretty much zero special effects. I will say that the mystery of it all keeps you wanting to watch it till the end, but ultimately it is a huge letdown. Nothing happens. It is a well shot film, but when nothing happens and nothing makes sense, in the end, it's just disappointing. The acting is also good and the characters are given plenty of screen time and you do begin to care about them, but ultimately for no reason. It becomes drawn out and repetitive. It could have been so much more. 4 out of 10.