Miramax Films | Release Date: December 6, 2002
8.5
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 415 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
360
Mixed:
30
Negative:
25
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
0
CarlW.Apr 7, 2007
Beyond horrible.Take some from old sci-fi movies like Fahrenheit 451, THX1138, 1984, Logan's run, Metropolis etc, add some Matrix. Now write a script the way a 10 year old who has played videogames to much would. Develop an absurd idea Beyond horrible.Take some from old sci-fi movies like Fahrenheit 451, THX1138, 1984, Logan's run, Metropolis etc, add some Matrix. Now write a script the way a 10 year old who has played videogames to much would. Develop an absurd idea that bullets can be dodged by statistics. And make the badguys slay puppies to show how evil they are. Does this sound good to you? Then seek professional help.This is a very dumb movie that thinks it's smart and therefore appears dumber still. Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful
0
NYSep 10, 2009
This movie was asinine. I turned it off after 30 minutes (which I almost never do) because it was incredibly stupid and boring as pretty much every line could be predicted almost verbatim several minutes before they were spoken. This movie This movie was asinine. I turned it off after 30 minutes (which I almost never do) because it was incredibly stupid and boring as pretty much every line could be predicted almost verbatim several minutes before they were spoken. This movie attempted to rip off the style of several other much better movies, but it just became a mess. I also don't understand the fascination with "gun kata". Having a guy standing in one position, waving his hands around, while magically hitting every opponent and not being shot himself is not ground breaking, it's idiotic fantasy. Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful
0
[Anonymous]Sep 4, 2007
This is the dumbest movie I've seen in years. There's nothing redeeming about this; it is every post-Matrix "omg cool" dystopian sci-fi cliché I could ever hate rolled into one ball of crap. If you pay movie to see this This is the dumbest movie I've seen in years. There's nothing redeeming about this; it is every post-Matrix "omg cool" dystopian sci-fi cliché I could ever hate rolled into one ball of crap. If you pay movie to see this movie you deserve to be slapped. Expand
1 of 6 users found this helpful
1
BobBJul 10, 2009
Wow, Roger EBERT gave it a good review? Roger Ebert is also the premier elevator of pop garbage movies to pseudo-intellectual status. This movie is a steaming pile of cultural backwash re-digested by the hackneyed screenplay writer whose Wow, Roger EBERT gave it a good review? Roger Ebert is also the premier elevator of pop garbage movies to pseudo-intellectual status. This movie is a steaming pile of cultural backwash re-digested by the hackneyed screenplay writer whose only major accomplishment was to insert every distopian cliche ever written since the 19th century. This movie pretends to think while not having a single original thought. It also insults the audience with its excruciatingly obvious flogging of the already overtread plot points. This society destroys art? Well, how can stupid moviegoer me possibly understand how awful it is to burn paintings? OH NOEZ the Mona Lisa, now I KNOW this is a big deal, because anything less than the Mona Lisa being destroyed and my phillistine brain will just want to smear dung and shout at the screen, but since you showed me the MOST famous painting IN THE WORLD, NOW I am able to understand it. Wouldn't they have found the Mona Lisa a long time ago? Wouldn't the only art left be a bit more obscure so they'd miss it? Does Sean Bean HAVE to be reading Yates? Nuff said. Expand
2 of 9 users found this helpful
2
badgerfodderNov 11, 2005
Only just got around to watching this film, and without sounding like a "cynical critic", I would have to say that this film is shockingly bad. Pretentious is a word that gets banded around far too much these days, but I'm pretty sure Only just got around to watching this film, and without sounding like a "cynical critic", I would have to say that this film is shockingly bad. Pretentious is a word that gets banded around far too much these days, but I'm pretty sure that this film is a good definition of the word. Inspiration is all well and good, but if you have read and understood even one or two the works that this film cobbles together so hap-hazzardly, then you should be able to see exactly why the plot is frankly stupid. All that leaves is a film with an overtly serious tone, but no substance to back it up. I love gun battles as much as the next man, but when it's blatently tacked on to appeal to the Matrix market, you have to wonder what the point is. I could have forgiven the pathetic storyline if it had been at bit more fun, but it's just po-faced pretention at every point. Enjoyable? Sure, but only if you have no taste. I think a lot of people on this site have shown why film critics get paid to do what they do. They know more about films than most of you. I'll stop being a "cynic" when people start making more effort. Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful
2
AlM.Jan 28, 2006
So bad. I watched as one watches a train wreck. Silly, stupid trying to pass off as intelligent. The only reason I give it a 2 is that the look of the film was pretty cool visually and the fight scenes were well done. The plot is idiotic at So bad. I watched as one watches a train wreck. Silly, stupid trying to pass off as intelligent. The only reason I give it a 2 is that the look of the film was pretty cool visually and the fight scenes were well done. The plot is idiotic at every turn. I really cannot understand how anyone could give this movie a 10. It would be interesting to see what other movies those folks rated so highly. The Matrix, which for some reason is constantly mentioned in relation to this movie is 100x better. Perhaps the connection is the dark costume that both leads play. Christian Bale is pretty good, but seriously folks don't waste your time with this one! Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful
2
MichaelM.Nov 16, 2007
For a surprisingly large group of talented actors, this was pretty much a steaming pile. The premise behind the movie was beyond juvenile and rife with inconsistencies. Why would a repressive future society need to so clearly mimic the For a surprisingly large group of talented actors, this was pretty much a steaming pile. The premise behind the movie was beyond juvenile and rife with inconsistencies. Why would a repressive future society need to so clearly mimic the aesthetics of Nazi Germany? Why is art equated with emotion? Is emotion what REALLY defines humanity, is emotion REALLY what is the source of conflict in our society, rather than calculated rational decisions in the struggle for power? Is the movie self aware enough to realize the irony inherent in the actions of the principle actors in regards to the premise of an emotionless fascist society? Conceptually flawed, is the action enough to redeem this movie? In the end the answer to all these questions is no, as the action is mediocre and the acting transparent, the plot predictable and the conclusion forgone within the first few minutes of the film. I'm a big fan of SF movies, and will champion any movie that truly reveals something about the human condition, extrapolates an interesting society or scenario, or can engross me to the extent that i will suspend my disbelief and accept the premise that is being presented to me. That a movie like this gets such high marks from viewers profoundly disturbs me. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful
1
DominikK.Dec 29, 2009
really? there are people who called this a "cult classic"? i'm all for a good action sequence, but even if this film hadn't blatantly ripped off the matrix, even if it had spent more then 27 dollars on special effects, even if this really? there are people who called this a "cult classic"? i'm all for a good action sequence, but even if this film hadn't blatantly ripped off the matrix, even if it had spent more then 27 dollars on special effects, even if this movie had better effects than "Avatar" it would still be one of the worst action films i have ever seen. This film makes Japanese animes about robots seem like incredibly well thought out voyages into the nature of mankind. But then again, this film is probably aimed at that very same demographic of perpetual adolescence. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful
3
OnrushAug 26, 2012
What a mess.
I could go into detail and explain pretty much what's wrong with this movie, but I simply don't have time.
I just have no idea how this movie could appeal to so many people, in a positive way. "At least it's entertaining",
What a mess.
I could go into detail and explain pretty much what's wrong with this movie, but I simply don't have time.
I just have no idea how this movie could appeal to so many people, in a positive way. "At least it's entertaining", well, it's not. One of the dullest things I've seen in my life. It had potential, a couple of minutes into the opening scene, went downstairs after that.
Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
0
jcmascoloJan 16, 2013
This was quite a pain. This was truly done by someone that watched 1984 and Matrix too much, and made it uninteresting. Action was just silly, no back-bone story, utterly predictable. Man, why did I watch this...
0 of 8 users found this helpful08
All this user's reviews
1
LD3Jun 12, 2015
Q: 'What's the purpose of life without emotion?'

The answer is a lesson in senseless plagiarism, a hodgepodge collage of the worst bits ripped from diverse sources such as Frank Herbert's seminal 1966 "The The Eyes of Heisenberg", Orwell's
Q: 'What's the purpose of life without emotion?'

The answer is a lesson in senseless plagiarism, a hodgepodge collage of the worst bits ripped from diverse sources such as Frank Herbert's seminal 1966 "The The Eyes of Heisenberg", Orwell's quintessential "1984" and others, that neither moves, antagonizes, entertains nor challenges the viewer in any way.

Taking place in some futuristic communist society, some desk occupying "Grammar Druid"- has a job to do: search and destroy every article that can be associated with art and bring to justice the proprietors. Art is bad because art provokes emotions and emotions lead to anger and anger leads to the dark side and war, as we're all familiar with the Bhagavad-Gita ("From attachment desire arises, from desire anger is born; from anger comes confusion" etc.). What is "art" though? Is it beauty? No. That would conflict with the vanity mirrors, statues, architecture and other things of beauty appearing in the movie.

Luckily for us the movie has a simple answer to make it easier on our feverish minds: "art" is conveniently identifiable and distinguishable by color. Because, of course nothing that's either black nor white can constitute art, and can therefore stir emotions- ergo anything color is art! In the year 2072, in an unsaturated future, human beings have devolved out of capability to emotionally interact with objects colored either black or white. So in conclusion: black and white- fine, color- bad. That's what they teach you in druid camp. Also luckily- people, dressed or not- don't stir emotions, as well as things such as sunsets or stubbing the pinky toe... so the risk lies with the two following groups: 1.) Knick-knacks. 2.) Puppies. One must shoot those puppies dead real good, especially colored ones, because puppies evoke parental EMOTIONS, and before you know it puppies=WW4, but I'm running ahead of myself with the anti-puppy agenda and parentalism... I'll get back to that soon.

Unfortunately, the problem of "defining art" is but a symptom of a much deeper problem. You see, barring art and beauty, the depicted world should have been stripped to the bone from every aspect which is not purely functional: all men and women with buzz cuts, no makeup, no tanning or color industry etc. However, and this is the main point- that spartan functionality should have been captured by the cinematography and music as well, so absolutely no stylish shooting and no evocative music until that very moment where the protagonist first starts to feel! perhaps even monochromatic shooting until that very moment, after which you allow color to start "leaking in" or entirely saturate reality, depending on your directorial interpretation. The dissonance between "WHAT you're told" about the world versus "the MEANS by which you're being told" shows total misunderstanding of the craft. So much could and should have been done with this.

Moving on... aided by the arcane knowledge of such mystic ways as "Statistics" and "Way of Chuck Norris" which distinguish him from his unlearned aim-to-miss colleagues- nothing and no one can stand in the way of our hero on his path of cold and uninteresting destruction. You can make a good short film about the inverse ratio between the effort put in the elaborate Gun-Fu moves and the viewers interest.

In order to become a more efficient law-enforcer our hero takes a kind of emotion suppressing drug. Sure- all people do in this film, however there's a specific reason why it's of paramount importance that our druid takes his pills- that's because we soon enough discover that the drug also raises his IQ from negative eleventeen to that of a functional person! We know that because at a certain point the druid stops taking the drug and goes full retard. From that point onward every single action he takes throughout the movie makes you cringe (a homage to Carl Reiner's 1979 film "The Jerk"). This is important because this issue in the plot is strengthened later when his 4 y/o son, being evidently aware of his father's non-drug-enhanced natural cognitive limitations- rescues him.

One must wonder how in a situation when feelings are suppressed- babies' survival mechanism come into play, and how they can therefore coerce parental protection and nurturing. Sparta has nothing on this, yet our druids son seems to take the reasonable and understanding way, and thus assist his dumb father in shattering the foundations of their common reality.

How to write an idiot into a hero? The inventive way with which this sensitive topic is dealt with here is by A:) Chuck Norris-ing our hero, and B:) Use the old trope of the master-plan revealing, ill-prepared arch-villain "FU-TH-UR", perhaps the spouse of the Nostromo's "MU-TH-UR 6000" computer (chronologically it makes perfect sense).

If you can stand the boredom of the cliché-riddled and predictable story, I highly recommend it to learners of cinema for its bonanza of "things NOT to do".
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews