And I'm left wondering what it was all actually about. Then there's a tragedy involving the main characters THAT WE DON'T SEE! (this is a film!) and a sentimental wrap-up. There's a chance for some really tense action during a nasty confrontation in the bush, but that's bungled by incompetent direction. It's still like like a short film with padding, and an hour has gone by. There are the occasional moving moments, and the hunter's realisation that he loves the kids, is nice, but not enough. There are the occasional VISIBLE threats to the hunter and his quest, but they're also half-hearted. Then I find out exactly why the big company want the tiger, but it doesn't increase what little stakes there are. The hunter's search for the tiger is interesting, and mildly dramatic. I like them and care about them and their relationship with the hunter, but their drugged-out mother is a bore and the hunter's possible burgeoning relationship with her is, like the rest of the story so far, half-hearted. That man's kids are needy and believable. He meets some cliché opposition from the local rednecks, and a grizzled old ham (Sam Neill), who looks predictably shifty and may have something to do with the disappearance of the last man who sought the tiger. I meet a selfish, very independent hunter (Dafoe - very good) whose mission is to find the apparently extinct Tasmanian tiger, because a big company wants it. I never really understood what was supposed to be at stake here.
0 kommentar(er)
