Found footage of an expedition into the Congo jungle where a team of explorers stumbles upon a colony of Dinosaurs.
Similar titles
You May Also Like
Reviews
Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful
When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.
All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.
The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.
This film scores a 31% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 4.7/10 on IMDb. That is nothing short of ridiculous. This film had absolutely nothing worth complaining about. The dinosaur CGI was totally top notch. It was possibly even better than what was used in the Jurassic Park films. The acting was great, saying I hadn't heard or seen any of the actors involved in anything else. The storyline was not only very, very interesting; but it was actually somewhat plausible, at least comparably to growing dinos out of DNA found in amber. Everything about this film was just great. I cannot comprehend these low scores in the least. Watch this for a true treat. Fans of dino films will be happily surprised by this gem. 10/10 stars.
Which is hard to believe of its director. However, if your familiar with Conan Doyles Lost World and Michael Crichtons Congo then you will have to be happy with the fact that its a very good enthusiastic rehash. Except that the unrestrained use of hand-held camera work is so annoying. Still this is the only credible Dinosaur movie since Jurassic Park 1 so if - like me - you feel the dearth it is definitely worth your time. In fact I hope they make a sequel (with normal camera work). Richard Dillane is a more credible Indian Jones than Harrison Ford and the location Scenery is excellent. Why IMDb discriminates against concise reviews is beyond me, there's surely enough waffle in the world already
This movie is bad. If you don't mind the whole "home footage" style of cinematography then you might like a little more then me, but that won't change the fact that the plot is terrible and the characters are horribly written. (They seem almost inhumanly dispassionate about the tragedy that befalls other members of their party.)The only plus is that the CG is not too bad. So kudos to the people in charge of that... but that's about the only good thing I can think to say about the film.I could go into further detail, but really, I'm trying to save you time here. So just trust me. It's not worth it. I watched this for free while we had some downtime at work and I still want my 83 minutes back. Save yourself!
Normally when I watch a movie, I start liking, or hating, it right from the start. Those first few minutes are crucial in grabbing an audience's attention and making them stick in their seats. With Dino Project, however, even before the first filmed image appeared, I knew I was on to a loser.A caption appears right at the start, extolling the fact that the movie was made from found footage from an expedition etc. etc. In other words, trying to convince us that it is real. This was the first, but not the last, clue that the filmmakers were taking themselves far, far too seriously with this one.This made me suspect that the movie is intended for a much younger audience. I adjusted my expectations accordingly, but it wasn't far enough.There are so many plot holes...The son, having been told he can't with his father on the expedition, magically manages to teleport himself into the helicopter. Seriously, we see the father walking out the door to go to the heliport. Next, the boy is somehow in the cargo section of the chopper. Exactly how he managed this feat of reverse Houdinism is never explained, because it can't be.Then there is the father. A man who is supposed to be a skilled expedition leader. You judge this... A man who, following a crash, makes everyone leave the area, contrary to accepted doctrine. Later, when they find a village where there has clearly been bloody, and recent, violence, decides they should stay the night. A man who, when they are inevitably attacked, makes everyone run out of the defensible huts and into the jungle in the dark, causing the death of one team member. A man who, despite clearly seeing a pterodactyl through the helicopter window just before the crash, declares them to be "African waterfowl".Then there's the father/son problems. Save me from this in every damn movie! They both act like dicks most of the time and through much of the film I hoped they would die.The token local character goes from being a modern, knowledgeable guide, to being a stereotypical native frightened of the unknown in just a few scenes. Ridiculous and god-awfully patronizing. It got so ludicrous that I expected her to be cowering around a campfire in the next scene, muttering about "Bad Juju!"Someone also watched one-too-many episodes of Ghost Hunters and similar paranormal movies. How do I know this? Because, quite simply, when someone says "There's something moving over there!" you look in that direction, whether you are holding a camera, or not. Not in this flick! Here, when that call goes out (as it does frequently) the cameras more often than not focus on the expressions of the watchers, and not the event itself. This is total nonsense. It's counter-intuitive and makes the movie look even more amateurish and fake than it is.The script is also rather tedious. When they aren't running with the expected shaky-cam scenes, they are clinging to a boat whilst something under the water attacks them. The movie's action sequences are mostly one or other of these two staples, interspersed with the aforementioned Ghost Hunters facial shots to show how frightened everyone is.At one point, they put a camera on a baby dinosaur to see where it goes. It goes down a hole in a riverbank. I kept expecting the obvious story line to be that, on the other side, the camera'd up dino sees the girl who got attacked first. Not dead, but badly wounded. It could have even been her friend, bringing her food to keep her alive. That would have given them an actual reason to go into the hole. I know, its a bit cliché... a rescue. But it would have been so much better than what did get them into the hole. Basically, they simply get sucked into the hole by the river. Remember my comments about lack of imagination? Whilst I'm pulling this apart, take a good long look at the poster for this movie. The one with the people crossing a ravine on a fallen log, a la King Kong. That scene does not exist in the movie. Now, I do appreciate that posters don't have to be 100% accurate. They are meant to convey a feeling for the movie. Well, you know what Dino Project's poster conveyed to me? Imagination. Sadly, the movie doesn't have any of its own, so the poster remains about the most interesting thing about it.I could go on. The kid has cameras that pick up sound from dozens of yards away and they have a transmission range that varies depending on the requirements of the story. Despite being rugged, able to cope with all variations of light intensity and even work underwater, the cameras mysteriously fail at any moment the movie would otherwise have had to spend money on special effects. It's like the cameras passed out with all the excitement going on and come around after it was over. It's a cheap way of not showing what is going on because you can't afford it. Also, very much overused, like the rocking boat and running scenes.This is a movie that tried to be serious when it shouldn't have. A movie aimed at smaller kids, but with enough scares to not be really suitable for them. Teens then? No, not really. Whilst there is teen angst here, I kind of think most teens would find this a bit ridiculous and boring, to be honest. Adults? No, because we (well, some of us) have enough life experience to see the 'stupid glue' holding the plot together.SUMMARY: Lacking imagination, poor acting, dull plot, characters that you have no empathy for. Not one to see twice. No, seriously. I mean that.