Author Topic: Rogue -- A Review  (Read 3240 times)

Online kovacs01

  • Global Moderator
  • Hoarder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2315
    • My Poster Gallery
Rogue -- A Review
« on: April 10, 2010, 12:26:30 PM »
Ok Ted, you asked for it, so here it is...........

The cover is of the blu-ray says "Jaws on four legs".  Four legs it is, but Jaws it certainly isn't.  I have an idea that is not a surprise to most people.  The best thing about Jaws, the thing that made it really special, is how easy it was to connect with the characters.  The viewer could really identify with Chief Brody, Quint, and Hooper.  The on-screen chemistry, writing, and superior acting combined to make that set of characters uniquely identifiable.  This allowed us to feel their fear.  The fear is almost palpable when watching that film.  Rogue is an utter failure in this area.  There is really very little back story offered on any of the characters and not enough build up before the killing gets going to make us care.  OF all the characters stranded out there, I cared most about the dog.  If this doesn't hallmark failed character development, I don't know what does.  Also, there is nothing original here.  The characters are cliche, the plot has been done a hundred times, and the director does not really offer any kind of trademark.

Ok, now that you already hate it, I will move on to the good things.  Yes, there actually was a lot good about this film.  The second best thing about Jaws is that it does not depend on the characters doing moronic things in order to drive the plot.  Rogue is very successful in this area.  There were some things the characters did where I thought, "I would have taken another course of action there."  But at no time did I find myself thinking, "that dumbass, this movie would  be over right now if he did what any normal human would have done."  McLean succeeds here where he failed in Wolf Creek, and I applaud him for it because its not necessarily an easy thing to do in this type of film.  Another success is the CGI.  The croc looks very believable and not overdone at all.  The cinematography here is also quite good, which isn't surprising given the adroitness displayed by McLean in this area in Wolf Creek.  It is aided a whole lot by the absolutely stunning scenery as well.  The first half of the movie plays almost like an Aussie IMAX documentary.  It is spectacular.  

All in all, we get something that is way better than Anaconda or Deep Blue Sea, a decent amount better than Lake Placid or Snakes on a Plane, but nothing near Jaws.  It offers entertainment without the idiocy that pervades much of the "natural enemy" fare, but it just doesn't have the punch to transcend the genre.  If you are in the mood for this type of film, you could do a lot worse than Rogue.

Schan
« Last Edit: April 26, 2010, 11:19:29 AM by kovacs01 »
Schan
Thanks.  You know what you did.
My Poster Gallery

Offline brude

  • Post-aholic
  • **********
  • Posts: 13565
Re: Rogue -- A Review
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2010, 02:27:11 PM »
Nicely written review, Schan.  Very insightful and honest. I will see Rogue because I liked what Mclean did with Wolf Creek, even though I have become turned off to the recent spate of "nature gone wild" films.
I am not familiar with all of the movies that you have picked up to watch, but I'm sure you'll enjoy "Run Lola Run" and quite possibly "Outlander." There are some casting issues with the latter, but I found it an enjoyable blend of the sci-fi and viking genres.
I look forward to your impression.