Eagle Vs. Shark

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

Eagle Vs. Shark

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> Eagle Vs. Shark

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Eagle Vs. Shark - 20/8/2007 11:47:18 PM

Empire Admin

Posts: 26334
Joined: 29/6/2005

Post your comments on this article

Post #: 1

quirks abound - 20/8/2007 11:47:18 PM

bretty

Posts: 143
Joined: 6/10/2005

Great performances all round, especially Loren Horsley. A gentle tale of love and revenge from the slightly nerdy side of the fence. Sometimes the humour borders on the uncomfortable but that leaves you not quite knowing what to expect and does keep you engaged.
I noted it had lottery funding of some kind (not sure it it was ours or NZs, but a good use of pulic funds if you ask me.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 2

RE: Eagle Vs. Shark - 17/9/2007 8:17:13 PM

demoncleaner

Posts: 2166
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Belfast

A genuinely funny, genuinely must see movie.

I agree that Loren Horsley was the stand-out. I fell in love with her pinched and pensive Frank Spencer expression. Her Lily is the perfect counterpoint to the very smackable Jarrod. A great surrounding cast too. Great stuff.

_____________________________

"I know the meaning of life, it doesn't help me a bit."

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 3

RE: Eagle Vs. Shark - 8/2/2008 10:20:15 AM

Fluke Skywalker

Posts: 9540
Joined: 23/4/2006
From: the dark side of the sun

Yeah I though it was an excellent comedy as well. I really quite fancied Loren Horsley and wanted to give Lilly a big hug because the poor thing was so sweet. It does remind you of Napoleon Dynamite but that's no bad thing because NP was a great film, and Eagle vs Shark holds it's own in my opinion.

(in reply to demoncleaner)

Post #: 4

RE: Eagle Vs. Shark - 10/2/2008 6:46:34 PM

NickHilton

Posts: 101
Joined: 16/9/2006

I wasn't quite sure where it was really going. It's been a long time since i saw it but i remember feeling distinctly underwhelmed especially with the heavy praise that was being aluded upon it by other reviewers. My troubles, i think, stemmed from the fact that having been in New Zealand recently and having discussed the film with a bunch of Kiwi's even they were referring to it as the 'Kiwi Napolean Dynamite'. There were too few good laughs and an absence of original material could never lift this above 'cute' or 'extravert'.

_____________________________

Visit a film blog written by someone you don't know and who has little authority on the subject and whose blog should only be of interest to close friends and family....

www.theclapperbored.com

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)

Post #: 5

RE: Eagle Vs. Shark - 25/2/2008 11:08:12 AM

Achtung Englander

Posts: 895
Joined: 6/12/2005

This is quirky with a capital Q.

I found it to be very funny and touching. The comments about it resembling Napoleon Dynamite is correct as they both moulded from the same type of comedy. The only thing I would find a little uncredible is that all the characters are quirky bar none. However saying that I found that I was laughing more outload with this film than with many minstream so called comedies.

The joke about the "smashing him up so he can't walk" was just classic

Definitely one to recommend

< Message edited by Achtung Englander -- 25/2/2008 11:11:16 AM >

(in reply to NickHilton)

Post #: 6

My mini review: - 13/6/2008 4:43:30 PM

swordsandsandals

Posts: 12569
Joined: 6/1/2006
From: A magical forest

Eagle vs. Shark (2007, Taika Waititi)

Angels:

The stop motion animations that broke up the scenes were good. A nice distraction.

Demons:

It's just not funny.
The failed 'Napoleon Dyamite' tone. It tries to go for the awkward but funny nerd. It fails miserably. The script is so dire it misses out on the essential point of having to root for your protagonists.
Loren Horsley. Intensely irritating, about as watchable as having your skin scraped off with a rusty spoon is fun. There is no real way of expressing how bad she was to watch.
The plot. So comedies don't have to have good plots, but as this fails so badly as a comedy, it needs something to carry it along. What it has instead is a really weak story and situations that just keep dragging on.
The pace. About as fast moving as a drunk snail, it only highlights the weakness of the comedy.
The missed opportunities. This had so much potential. The set ups are rife with opportunities to be funny, but it remains resolutely dry. Jemaine Clement can be funny, as shown in Flight of the Conchords, so him playing that type of character could have been comedic gold. He's let down by the fact that in its efforts to be an untraditional comedy, it forgets to be funny.
The supporting characters. Failed charicatures that raise as many smiles as Schindler's List.

Heaven or Hell?: Eagle vs. Shark tries to be different so, so hard. But in doing this, it misses the point of a comedy, in that its meant to be funny as well. If it was just attempting to be a straight drama, it's let down by an immensely annoying leading lady, and a bad plot. Excruciating.

< Message edited by swordsandsandals -- 13/6/2008 4:45:41 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 7

A beautiful film - 24/7/2008 3:48:35 PM

Marianne

Posts: 2
Joined: 17/1/2006

I absolutely loved this film. I found it moving, funny and surprising.

It was lovely to see characters who would otherwise have been relegated to the 'quirky friend' sub-plot given top billing and I truly rooted for both of them. Many reviewers have focused on Loren Horsley's performance, which is, I agree, absolutely beautiful; but I think equal praise is due to Jemaine Clement, whose textured and pitch-perfect portrayal of a lead who, by his own admission, is 'too complex' just melted my heart. His vulnerability is just as real as Lily's and he, too, deserves their happy ending. The whole point of the movie, it seems to me, is that we are all losers. And it doesn't matter.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 8