Queen of the Amazon

It's a C or D movie so don't expect too much. Some talented performers and creatives have played part in making this film, but it's seriously worsened by a majority of less talented/experienced people.

Acting is pretty terrible (D) Cinematography is quite amazing (B) Plot works, just (B) Music sounds like a midday soapy (F) Directing is scattish at best (C) Underlying Message is pretty good.

All in all. If you have nothing better to do, go for it..

The scenery was worthwhile, but couldn't carry the film. Nice little ship. A river tour on it might be an interesting voyage, espicially on the Amazon. The indigenous performers were the highlight. We don't often get to see scenes like that these days.

Its true, its not a good film, but from a technical standpoint, its deserves the three stars. The camera work is good and there are some beautiful shots taken by someone who knows what they are doing.

The script is ridiculous, 'some' of the acting is worse than barnyard productions I've seen and the screenplay isn't worthy of the disk space it took to store it. The score is terrible and overdone throughout the whole film and the direction is... I'll not go on, you get the idea.

It's definitely not worth seeing, though as background fodder, it might be something to put on while you do your chores, your taxes or just need something to lull you to sleep.

Its Hallmark channel worthy, and though the high ratings are clearly bogus, I think the one-out-of-ten scores are probably harshly trying to serve up some sort of punishment rather than reflect an accurate assessment.

I cannot recommend it.

I saw this film as part of the Las Vegas International Film and Screenwriting Festival, and found it to be a nice addition to the mix of films, especially since it was a more commercial premise and had what may be the best cinematography and location photography I've ever seen from an independent film. This genuinely raises the quality of the film, as it is such a big part of the whole thing.

One problem, as other reviews note, is the acting. It's very wooden, and I also think the film could have benefitted from "feeling" more like a film. I can't put my finger on it, but it felt like a nature show or a PBS show, mixed with a Lifetime or basic cable thriller, not a cinematic film. It could also be the overall mood of the film? I love movies, but, unfortunately I don't know enough to make a specific suggestion with one viewing.

You know when you are watching something that is done on a shoestring, the only way the makers can.

Rate it how you want, but why with such venom?

I love reading the critical analysis of some of these snobs.

I bet many of them haven't dared take that step, to try and produce something from somewhere within them, and then put it on view for the world to see.

That takes guts alone.. Why such venom, for anything> Hahaha It it was by Hitchcock or Speilberg, then okay. But these people tried to do something.

Not sat behind their screens thinking..... hmmm, I have nothing else to do in my life now, I can't move on until I have vented, hahah It wasn't great, but jeez, hahaha Maybe take up a drug addiction and fill that void in your soul.

Aurevoir (That's Greek)