Time travel—and a boring screenplay–have their consequences in the painfully amateurish Project Almanac.
ON CONTINUITY
ARTH VADER (AV): An original screenplay that–at least on paper—showcases the ‘what if’ prospect of time travel at the hands of some pretty smart teens. The movie did a decent job of considering not just the complications of time travel but the consequences and even implications of temporal displacement. Time travel is a huge favorite topic in sci-fi to be sure but is rarely handled well. Project Almanac has an interesting take on the topic and enters the realm of asking ’what are the consequences?’ Time travel could have massive repercussions in the lives of ourselves and our world.
CASTING, ACTING & DIRECTING
AV: With a cast of relative acting newcomers, Project Almanac is filled with a bunch of beautiful, fresh-faced white kids. The acting was mediocre at best–thats for sure, but the camera work was particularly atrocious as the entire film was shot in that ‘Cloverfield-esque’ handy-cam stye. While it may have helped the film’s authenticity, Ponty, I did not love it. In truth there wasn’t much to love. It did fit (somewhat) with the film’s messaging and storytelling style but those weren’t great, either. Thoughts?
TP: Well Vader, using a relatively unknown cast (for me anyway) was a good move and probably economically viable. I really got into the characters and applaud the acting of these kids to draw me into the story. Jonny Weston was believable and carried the story well. Sofia Black-D’Elia played her role well enough, but ultimately was just very pleasing to look at and added the right element to be a catalyst for the poor decision making of Weston’s character.
SPECIAL EFFECTS
AV: Any second-semester computer graphics student at Full-Sail University can generate lightening effects and swirling leaves. Nothing knocked my socks off in the effects realm in Project Almanac. The film’s visual effects weren’t terrible, just mundane. P-Man?
TAKING A CLOSER LOOK
AV: I think I am getting to the point in my movie-going journey that trailers are becoming an easy way to decipher a film’s quality or experience. I rolled my eyes like pizza dough when I first watched this film’s trailer. The movie’s choppy, particularly uninteresting storytelling style didn’t help. While all the ‘kids’ were portraying their respective roles to their best capacity, I couldn’t help but keep looking at my watch wondering when this all would start wrapping up. As early as 20 minutes in! The film offered an interesting take on Time Travel but not 106 minutes worth of interesting. (sigh). So Pontificator, how’d you really feel about Project Almanac?
ON SEQUELS
AV: This film had little story to tell and while the ending was compelling, I don’t EVER need to see anymore of this tom-foolery.
RATE IT!
ARTH VADER rates Project Almanac: Lacking the polish and storytelling finesse of most Hollywood flicks, this movie is significantly under-imagined, especially for an original property. No viable plot, vapid, empty-headed characters and cinematography that is almost painful to watch, Project Almanac gives me very little to talk about positively, so I won’t. Suffice it to say, Project Almanac is a film that offers a great idea, but no points for grit, style or story integrity. It’s best to put away your Dad’s schematics and head back to class with no more than two (2) busted blocks.
Project Almanac – 3.5 / 10 Busted Blocks
No comments:
Post a Comment