lost-in-limbo I thought "Black Water" was excellently pitched eco-horror, while "The Reef" was a modest survival horror. So when it came to "The Jungle", I had some high hopes from Australian film-maker Andrew Traucki. Again very similar in formula to his previous films, but just a different threat. "The Jungle" is a simple story (ala "Blair Witch Project") that takes advantage of the found-footage market. Does it work? Yes and no. It's durable, but unexceptional in that we have been here before. Animal conversationalist Larry Black along with his brother head to Indonesia to track down and film a rare breed of leopard to get documented evidence of its existence in the jungle. However in the area where they would be searching are rumours of a black magic demon, which Larry considers just local superstitions? But his guides are not so convinced. I came away liking the taut situation and the overall build-up of it. It had me engaged (be it the characters and motivation behind the trek) and there was a grounded realism, but the pay-off was less than desirable. In what becomes a whirlwind of frustration, sudden camera movement and off-screen action in the last ten minutes. It's jerky in its execution, as the repetitiveness of certain actions started to become wearisome and the jump scenes simply erupted. You are kept pretty much kept in the dark, but that didn't bother me. Although the disappearance of a character in the final few seconds baffled me. It just I didn't feel like the back-end truly captured the suspense and horror of the situation as effectively as the lead up did. The tag less is more, is used very much here. Only glimpses (glowing eyes), noises (snarling and branches breaking), symbols (black sorcery), signs (prints, blood and remains) and the humidly suffocating environment help it come alive. A creepy superstitious back-story helps a lot too. Throughout sound effects were well used, as well as the eerie jungle backdrop in isolating the danger and uncertainness the characters found themselves in. Majority of the reliable tension is fuelled by the character interactions of the unknown, than that of the unsighted beast stalking its prey (although there's one scene involving it climbing down a tree where you only see its hands is fairly unnerving). Why this works is because the performances are appealing and they're well written giving them such weight to standout from each other. The acting led by Rupert Reid is hearty and intimate by all in style that only lends well to the story and chemistry. I can why some people might not like it, but for me it does have its moments beyond its wandering nature and not entirely seeing the creature wasn't a problem. You get a good enough look in the final shot. "The Jungle" starts off strong with its gripping slow-burn format to only go off the beaten track in standard clichés and a disappointingly frenetic close.

dam_smoke Good guy movie. You know how you watch a movie and the next day or week you forgot most of it? I saw this movie about six months ago and remember most of it. It grabs you. They did a lot for a low budget movie. If you are looking for an Oscar performance then what the f are you doing watching this movie. Guys will like it. It was made by the same guy who did Black Water and The Reef, both excellent movies. While I would give them a higher rating, this one was almost as good. Give it a shot. Man, I just wanted to write "good guy movie", but IMDb wants at least ten lines. Hope the last two were enough. Nope. Still have to write more about the movie. The wife was nice.

druidlord There is little that can be said about this film that others before me haven't already written. It is a terrible film that had so much potential but decided to through that off the mountain in favour of utter trash.The main character is someone who strolls of into the jungle and acts like he knows every inch of it. He totally ignores advise from the native peoples and regularly put others around him in danger. He is an arse and frankly, I would have shot him within the first day. To then disrespect other peoples beliefs just defies belief. This in its own right makes this film utter crass. If anything needed saving, its everyone else, from him! Strangely, the two "natives" are better acted than any of the others particularly the tracker.As to the "monster/demon" Don't make me laugh. I agree with another reviewer, it should have been a super sized leopard or beast or something along that line. Not seeing the creature involved properly works in some films but not in this one. It just leave you bored and utterly disappointed. Thank god I hadn't just bought this. It would have been an utter waste.My advice - go watch paint dry. Its far more entertaining and far more riveting. Gremlins was more believable than this.Rant over. Good luck to any of you that actually sit down and watch it. You've been warned!!!

Paul Magne Haakonsen As soon as I saw the very first frames of camera-work on this movie, I know this was going to be bad. Another one of these horrible 'found footage' movies, mockumentaries, or call them whatever need be.The story in this movie is about conservationist Larry Black and his brother Ben who travel to the lush jungles of Indonesia in search of the endangered leopards. With the help of two native Indonesians, the foursome venture into the thick jungle, hoping to find proof of these endangered great cats. But they come to face the horror of being stalked by something ferocious.Right, well the storyline itself had somewhat of something that resembled the possibility of being interesting, but it was all ruined and shot to pieces (pardon the pun) by some really questionable and horrible camera-work. I am pretty sure that my three year old son could manage to hold a camera more steady than what you see it practically all of these 'found footage' movies.So the audience is to believe that there is some hybrid feline / man running around out there in the Indonesian jungle? And better yet, that these brothers and their Indonesian trackers died to make this documentary. And given the ending to the movie, then just exactly how would this 'found footage' have been recovered from the creatures den? It was just so lame, so horribly, epically lame.The only reason that the movie doesn't get a 1 out of 10 rating is because it is somewhat better than watching a screen of only static. But, mind you, not that much better. This movie gets a 2 out of 10 rating simply because of the lousy camera-work and the whole faked and staged 'found footage' genre is generally a waste of time, space and film.