User Score
6.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 327 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 83 out of 327
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Denisdodokonyero
    Apr 9, 2009
    9
    Full or flaws but a damn good movie. OMG, the effects of the accident scenes....blew my mind.
  2. PaulW
    Apr 3, 2009
    9
    This movie is much better than the meta score given by the "critics." I was going to blow the movie off, based on the OVERWHELMING poor reviews. But then I saw that Roger Ebert, one of the three critics whose reviews I value, rated it highly. I was pleasantly surprised. The story line was interesting, the CGI off the chain, and the ending somewhat surprising. In truth, I believe the This movie is much better than the meta score given by the "critics." I was going to blow the movie off, based on the OVERWHELMING poor reviews. But then I saw that Roger Ebert, one of the three critics whose reviews I value, rated it highly. I was pleasantly surprised. The story line was interesting, the CGI off the chain, and the ending somewhat surprising. In truth, I believe the conflict between the users overall score and the metacritic score turns on the anti-religious posturing of many media critics. I'm not making any value judgments for or against religion or spirtuality - merely commenting on most media critics response to movies with underlying spiritual themes (see the LA Weekly review). Expand
  3. Jul 19, 2011
    10
    I thought this movie was amazing, the best I've seen in a while. The plotline was cool and the special effects were amazing. Nicolas cage and Rose Byrne were awesome in it. I can't believe how some people didn't like this movie.
  4. Droog
    Mar 23, 2009
    10
    I feel like I
  5. BenD
    Nov 1, 2009
    10
    Comedy of the year! The final reel's dialogue is the stuff of comedic genius. Problem is someone should have told the scriptwriter that it wasn't a comedy in the first place.
  6. DeeD
    Aug 23, 2009
    10
    I'm not a religion nut...haven't been to church in 20 years......but I look at this film as explaining the crazyness of the Revelations chapter of the bible, in scientific terms........if you read the book of Revelations ...you would think that it doesn't make any logical sense...and it's NO WAY.....if 12 year old kids saw this stuff happening...this is how they mayI'm not a religion nut...haven't been to church in 20 years......but I look at this film as explaining the crazyness of the Revelations chapter of the bible, in scientific terms........if you read the book of Revelations ...you would think that it doesn't make any logical sense...and it's NO WAY.....if 12 year old kids saw this stuff happening...this is how they may remember it, or pass it down to the next generations.......I live in Florida..and some people drive 1000 miles to save some turtles, and Sea World would spend $1,000,000 to try to say a whale....my wife MAKES my save spiders I catch in the house (and put them outside)...and 15 years ago..we were driving, and a cat ran out in front of me....and I hit it...she made me, run around for 20 minutes to catch the cat, and take the cat to a vet and spend $200...also WE can predict some major weather events....wouldn't it seem logical if some advanced life form, could predict our impending doom because of their super advanced scientific knowledge, they would try to save some of us, and help us by moving a few of us to a new safe location, the same as somebody would help a turtle out of a busy road (and its 100% sure death) and relocate it to some safe spot...we are always trying to save any animals from extinction....and spending $millions...I think that advanced life forms would do it too......my view of the movie is that they want you to think that this happened before...maybe 5000 years ago, some children were saved, and their adventure was written into the bible........and to go further......maybe every 5000 years......our planets become useless.... and some super advanced being (just like a zoo keeper, of a pet owner) keeps saving us ,and relocating a few of use to a new world with a "tree of life".....in the movie's story, it happened before to some children.....Adam and Eve, and through their viewpoints and stories passed down...the bible was written.......in the start of the movie, they say millions of planets could support life...so maybe every 5000-10000 years it happens over and over...and these advanced beings are seen as angels, and also you could throw in that they created life in their mirror image (like the bible says)....even thought they only changed thier looks so they did not freak out everyone while they were trying to save some people,they only wanted to blend in......also the part in the bible..those that heard the call were the ones choosen...the whispers were the call...and they chose the ones to be best fit.....and ready soon to start reproducing to start a new world....and there were more spaceships...so other animals and children were saved....some fo these critics say Mr Cage was too serious....I don't think too many MIT professors would be acting like clowns.......I agree with Roger Ebert...100 out of 100...I think the movie was right on target.....the perfect union of science and religion...or explaining religion in more scientific terms....I also give the movie a 100 out of 100 for coming up with a new "End of the World" idea that I never heard of before....why couldn't it happen?....if it happens every 300,000 years... would you be reading about it in some Roman scrolls?...I THINK NOT.....we can't even stop a cold, aids, or swine flu...I'm sure we will not be able to predict the end of the world...and I thought I heard all of the end of the world ideas...this one is original !!!!!!!!!.......most of those critics are CRAZY>>>>>>>> Expand
  7. KennyO
    Dec 18, 2009
    10
    I thought the soundtrack was good. Reminds me of those 1950s horror films. The disaster scenes were very well executed. The story is grim and depressing. For some people/critics who cannot accept such a storyline (end of the world) may ridicule it.
  8. JackM
    Jan 17, 2010
    9
    Great movie, way to go on the Christian symbolisms. The pebble is most likely Jesus for without Jesus theres no salvation. Only the children get saved because God requires "child like" faith to enter heaven, the aliens are actually angels come to pickup the faithful before the disaster of the world just like the Rapture event. And only those who hear the call will be saved (call to Great movie, way to go on the Christian symbolisms. The pebble is most likely Jesus for without Jesus theres no salvation. Only the children get saved because God requires "child like" faith to enter heaven, the aliens are actually angels come to pickup the faithful before the disaster of the world just like the Rapture event. And only those who hear the call will be saved (call to Christian salvation) Those who hear the whispers are basically Christians considered by the Godless to be weird even psychotic. Yet in the end they were the ones saved. Expand
  9. PJC
    Nov 22, 2009
    10
    You have to understand bible and bible prophecy to truly appreciate the literary beauty of this film. Study the author and the license he allowed the director to take and you'll appreciate it more.
  10. Sep 25, 2010
    9
    The film starts out as a sort of silly cliché idea about the ability to see the future. It expands into so much more, though. Everything throughout is intense and well-designed. The dialogue is nothing to write home about, but the actual characters are very human. You never know what is going to happen next, despite the inevitable being made pretty obvious with the wholeThe film starts out as a sort of silly cliché idea about the ability to see the future. It expands into so much more, though. Everything throughout is intense and well-designed. The dialogue is nothing to write home about, but the actual characters are very human. You never know what is going to happen next, despite the inevitable being made pretty obvious with the whole "code-that-forsees-disasters" thing. The best thing about the film is its philosophical parts. Much of its story is very symbolic of Biblical tales. By no means is it preachy, but it certainly provides ideologically sensitive material. Overall, this film is not perfect, but its unique journey through humanity and their reaction to the impending end of the world is brilliant. Expand
  11. Sep 19, 2010
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The movie starts up as an interesting story, how the professor, Cage, discovers the true story about the letter. It gets kind-a creepy when the "men in black" enter the scene. It uses the normal cliches to create unneeded tension, AKA "mysterious men who disappear when you look back" and so on.
    The story keeps going down slowly through the film, but it isn't a bad film to watch.
    Just remember that this is not the "ultimate" film you will remember after years have past.
    Or you might remember the end. It just plain sucked. Yea.
    Expand
  12. Nov 26, 2010
    10
    Awesome film!! They did a great job of mixing Religion and science together. It is very rare for anyone to tell a story of these two coexisting but yet, this movie did! Just awesome! Ending was very satisfying and it did not let you down like most films do.
  13. DeanD
    Jul 29, 2009
    9
    I was astounded when I noticed Roger Ebert voted this movie a "10' when most other reviewers voted this movie much lower. I read some of the User comments about why they didn't like the movie. Some of them admitting they were unable to understand the movie. I do not think it's wise to broadcast one's intellectual shortcomings on the Internet. Then I read Roger I was astounded when I noticed Roger Ebert voted this movie a "10' when most other reviewers voted this movie much lower. I read some of the User comments about why they didn't like the movie. Some of them admitting they were unable to understand the movie. I do not think it's wise to broadcast one's intellectual shortcomings on the Internet. Then I read Roger Ebert's review in which he substantiated his high score. His review is comprehensive and to me...makes sense. My whole family (ages 9-46) watched this movie and everyone of us enjoyed this movie. Expand
  14. AlexS
    Mar 20, 2009
    9
    Most of the times, the films that get mixed reviews prove to be the more interesting examples of filmmaking, ones that divide opinions dramatically, balls-out go-for-broke entertainment. When a film is uniformly well-reviewed, that sometimes insinuates that it panders to its critics, giving them exactly what they want - glossy, slick entertainment (what "The Reader" strived so hard to Most of the times, the films that get mixed reviews prove to be the more interesting examples of filmmaking, ones that divide opinions dramatically, balls-out go-for-broke entertainment. When a film is uniformly well-reviewed, that sometimes insinuates that it panders to its critics, giving them exactly what they want - glossy, slick entertainment (what "The Reader" strived so hard to achieve, but thankfully failed). And when a film is generally badly reviewed - well, it's rare that it actually turns out to be any good (see "Miss March"). What I don't get about "Knowing" is the fact that all the critics seemed to hate it - except one that happens to be my favorite: Roger Ebert. Ebert, especially recently, has been known to be a bit too kind on some films, but he always justifies his review, making it hard - or interesting - to debate with. The man's been around for a while, and agree or disagree - he knows film better than 99% of you out there. So how come he gave "Knowing" 4 stars, named it one of the best sci-fi films he's ever seen, and got so inspired by it he went on to write a whole essay about determinism vs randomness, while every other critic seemed to hate the film? I think there are mutliple reasons for this. I just saw the film - and as a film-lover myself (not QUITE as experienced as Mr. Ebert - nor will I probably ever be) who has seen thousands and thousands of features - I can assure you that "Knowing" is, in fact, quite excellent. Sure, there are some cheesy/Hollywoody lines of dialogue, and a few patchy parts where the plot mechanics creak and squeak a little bit - but overall, I walked out of the theater with my jaw still open, astounded by what I had just witnessed. Critics have a prejudice against Nic Cage, you see. They tend to gang up on actors who are known to make unfortunate choices sometimes. But look at Pacino and De Niro's last few films. Wake up, people - Cage is one of our top living actors - who else has as much range as this guy does? (Read the last two paragraphs of Ebert's review of "Adaptation" to see what I mean.) Sure he' sleepwalked through "Bangkok Dangerous" and "Ghost Rider". But he also starred in the aforementioned "Adaptation", "Leaving Las Vegas", "Raising Arizona", "Matchstick Men", "Weather Man", "Bringing Out the Dead", etc. In "Knowing" he's almost in every single scene, and he carries it with aplomp, showing the mounting desperation and terror as few other actors of his caliber could match. The fact that certain critics even refer to his "perhaps botoxed" face is completely irrelevant criticism, dripping with irony and unjustified prejudice. I also disagree that the film is a mix-up pf genres. I think it flowed very well. Alex Proyas is a skillful director ("Dark City" is a masterpiece), and he handles the big budget well. The special effects serve the story instead of just showing themselves off, like, say, in "Transformers" (which surprisingly got much better reviewed - and was a crappy, dumb film with no point). Watch the airplane-crash sequence in "Knowing", filmed in a stunning single-shot handheld style, a-la "Children of Men" - it's masterclass filmmaking that will take your breath away. Or the train-wreck scene. As for the ending - well, that's a whole other story. Forget "Armageddon", "Deep Impact", and especially "Day After Tomorrow" and "The Day the Earth Stood Still". I am obsessed with apocalyptic themes, and let's just say this is how I imagine it in my nightmares. It will blow you away; I witnessed the audience in the theater, eyes wide and full of terror and wonder. This could happen. NASA has been talking recently about solar flare activity. Look it up. It's scary. To conclude, unlike those other apocalyptic blockbusters, "Knowing" has thought behind it. It questions things like religion, fate, faith, and chaos. A similar film that stunned me equally was Zemeckis' "Contact", another underrated gem. "Knowing" has an intellectual backbone, tremendous sfx, auter-ish trademarks and a powerful central performance. This is what blockbusters shoud be like. So screw those other critics. Listen to Ebert, if just this once. Expand
  15. AlA.
    Mar 30, 2009
    10
    This movie has to be one of the best movies I have seen in awhile. I typically do not like science fiction movies, but this movie grabs you from the begining and does not let you go. If you were to watch the trailer you may think Knowing is just another movie that predicts future events, but that could not be futher from the truth. The story is original and keeps you guessing in a smart This movie has to be one of the best movies I have seen in awhile. I typically do not like science fiction movies, but this movie grabs you from the begining and does not let you go. If you were to watch the trailer you may think Knowing is just another movie that predicts future events, but that could not be futher from the truth. The story is original and keeps you guessing in a smart and fresh way that few movies have brought to the big screen in quite some time. Knowing is a great movie that is a must see: when it's all over you will take a deep breath and literally thank yourself for going to see it. Expand
  16. KevinG
    Mar 20, 2009
    10
    I was expecting a lot, but this was even greater than what I could have imagined.
  17. SerinaF.
    Mar 20, 2009
    10
    One of the best movies I have seen in a long time, suspenseful amazing movie I loved it!! would watch it over and over and thats saying allot because I usually hate watching movies more than once. Will be buying it on blue ray when it comes out!!
  18. BobF.
    Mar 22, 2009
    9
    The contrast between reviewers' opinions and movie goers' ratings for this flick illustrate the taste gap between the two groups.
  19. NathanR.
    Mar 23, 2009
    9
    Go with Ebert on this one. One of the best sci-fi films in recent years. Great effects, interesting and unusual premise for a Hollywood film, and some really well-crafted sequences. Alex Proyas succeeds once again.
  20. Bob
    Mar 25, 2009
    9
    Other than Roger Ebert who is on the money with his score of 100 the other professional critics missed the mark entirely. This is a good movie that explores whether our fate is predetermined or random. The only criticism I had was that the ending could have been a little better if Nicholas Cage would have told the secret to our Government and they did nothing. Then it would have been true Other than Roger Ebert who is on the money with his score of 100 the other professional critics missed the mark entirely. This is a good movie that explores whether our fate is predetermined or random. The only criticism I had was that the ending could have been a little better if Nicholas Cage would have told the secret to our Government and they did nothing. Then it would have been true to life. A great film for science fiction fans of all ages. Expand
  21. RobertO
    Mar 27, 2009
    10
    I am absolutely impressed at such a great film.. I'll be honest. I didnt expect it to be THAT GOOD. This film shook me off my feet, great scrip, great direction, acting, you name it...This film is out of the extraordinaire. What can I say? This is truly a MASTERPIECE of science fiction...A real jewel...It
  22. JamesS
    Mar 20, 2009
    10
    An amazing science fiction film that is comparable to Children of Men and War of the Worlds.
  23. CarolS
    Apr 4, 2009
    9
    I loved this movie. It was thought provoking, and interesting. Fast paced, with judicious use of CGI...powerful. Thought that Nicholas Cage did his best work here that we've seen in a long time. Roger Ebert got it right.
  24. IanB.
    Jul 12, 2009
    10
    I watch almost every sci-fi film that is released. I love the genre. I also really like the supernatural genre as well. Most films that try to combine these categories stumble in one way or another with unbelievable story-lines, plot holes or hokey concepts, but that is not the case with "Knowing". I can't remember watching a film that was so well paced, gripping and, considering the I watch almost every sci-fi film that is released. I love the genre. I also really like the supernatural genre as well. Most films that try to combine these categories stumble in one way or another with unbelievable story-lines, plot holes or hokey concepts, but that is not the case with "Knowing". I can't remember watching a film that was so well paced, gripping and, considering the material and complexity of the plot, did so well at tying it all together. Cage might be the only drawback as he kind of hams his way through the performance at times. The disaster sequences are spectacular, every one of them. The film generates an ongoing creepy tension that never lets up and the ending works as well as any big budget sci-fi film you will ever see. Roger Ebert got this one right. Two Thumbs Way Up ! Expand
  25. JHH
    Aug 2, 2009
    9
    One of the most entertaining family fare we have watched this year! Some scenes too strong for the faint of heart and although the conclusion is predictable, it is nonetheless rewarding.
  26. Alec
    Mar 20, 2009
    10
    Intelligent, well paced, great acting, with an excellent twist at the end! Highly recommended.
  27. JackD.
    Mar 20, 2009
    9
    One of the most powerful movies I've seen in years. Part Omen, part Uber disaster movie, part Close Encounters and all riveting. Even the heavy handed ending or some plot loopholes didn't spoil it's power.
  28. MovieJay
    Mar 22, 2009
    10
    I think this movie is terrific and that the critics are once again dismissing a sci-fi film that in 10 years they will speak of with enthusiasm. Yes, just like Alex Proyas' previous sci-fi effort, "Dark City". I don't know what it is with this genre of film, but more than any other genre, the cream tends to rise to the top over a period of a couple decades. "2001" was dismissed I think this movie is terrific and that the critics are once again dismissing a sci-fi film that in 10 years they will speak of with enthusiasm. Yes, just like Alex Proyas' previous sci-fi effort, "Dark City". I don't know what it is with this genre of film, but more than any other genre, the cream tends to rise to the top over a period of a couple decades. "2001" was dismissed in many quarters, and now it is frequently cited as one of the 10 best films of all time. Some people just don't like Nic Cage. That's their problem, not the movie's, which is one of his best, along with "Leaving Las Vegas", "Matchstick Men", and "Adaptation", to name a few. All I can say is, FINALLY!!! A big budget Nic Cage movie that also happens to be frickin' awesome and thought-provoking. Expand
  29. AaronS.
    Mar 22, 2009
    10
    Pure Awesome! I thought the disaster secquincs were perfect. If i was you who cares about these reviewers they dont know what they are talking about. See this movie!
  30. ChadS.
    Mar 20, 2009
    9
    Knowing about science, John Koestler(Nicholas Cage) pooh-poohed god and caused a rift in the family. The arrival of his sister reminds the black sheep that he's a minister's son, but the estranged widower is still unrelenting about his stance on prayer: he's against it. The scientist is also a father, however, so he allows the boy to place his mother in heaven, while at the Knowing about science, John Koestler(Nicholas Cage) pooh-poohed god and caused a rift in the family. The arrival of his sister reminds the black sheep that he's a minister's son, but the estranged widower is still unrelenting about his stance on prayer: he's against it. The scientist is also a father, however, so he allows the boy to place his mother in heaven, while at the same time, implicitly encouraging empiricism in Caleb(Chandler Canterbury) while the boy looks at Saturn's rings through the scientist's telescope. No need to be didactic, like John's father probably was(more on that later). Caleb will soon realize that heaven is nowhere to be seen in the night sky. (SELF-POLICING SPOILER) Late in "Knowing", John calls the minister to warn him about an event of cataclysmic proportions, but he doesn't heed his son's warning. During this phone call, there's a quick shot of John's mother sitting deathly on the sofa, who by all appearances, is sentenced to die without having a choice in the matter. Knowing about god, John accepts their fate(on behalf of his silent wife), but he doesn't know that the so-called apocalypse is science-based with no bearing on what's inscribed in the Book of Revelations. The man of god got it wrong, but so did the man of science. They don't know. Only the kids know. "No spaceships go" to heaven, as it's written in the alternative bible, the neon bible(not a reference to the John Kennedy Toole novel), in which Win Butler proselytizes "us kids know" on the day than an arcade fire scorched the earth. Expand
  31. austinh
    Mar 22, 2009
    9
    As a thrilling horror movie, knowing is was a little sad, but it was still very good.
  32. SethS
    Mar 22, 2009
    10
    I am interested in prophesy and loved this movie. Yes, it was draggy at times but the ending was a scientific probability and depicted the result of this possible event.
  33. Sandylittle
    Mar 22, 2009
    10
    This is one of the best movies I have seen in along time. It was creative and compelling... Nicolas Cage, took you there and is amazing. It was dark ,scarey, heart warming, Well written and directed... Amazing!!!
  34. MichelleH
    Mar 23, 2009
    10
    I have never seen a better movie in my entire life. GO SEE THIS MOVIE. I have told everyone i know about how scary it is and i just loved everything about it.
  35. ChristopherK.
    Mar 23, 2009
    9
    Great, but the end kinda sucked.
  36. Gaddie
    Mar 26, 2009
    10
    One of the best movies ever.
  37. MilesE
    Mar 27, 2009
    10
    I have to first start by addressing "the straight out of scientology" comment. Anyone who has a reasonable knowledge of the Christian religion knows that what was represented towards the end was one of , if not the ,greatest portrayals of the rapture ever to penetrate out imaginations!!! Alex did the same "wooing" in Dark City. There was not one iota of scientology depicted in this film I have to first start by addressing "the straight out of scientology" comment. Anyone who has a reasonable knowledge of the Christian religion knows that what was represented towards the end was one of , if not the ,greatest portrayals of the rapture ever to penetrate out imaginations!!! Alex did the same "wooing" in Dark City. There was not one iota of scientology depicted in this film except for a few of the idiots that were left on the Earth before the destruction. I will say this "pseudoreligious" plot was actually based on the story of Ezekiel's wheel/vision found in the "pseudoreligious" book called the Bible... The underlying theme throughout the entire movie was the age old question of Determinism vs Free Will. It's hard to have the courage to explore something so complex and so offensive to some people, but Alex and Nicholas do this in both acting and directing. I really think this movie can pose the same problem as superpositioning: I'ts not that we don't see what we are watching, we just cannot grasp all the elements to what is going on. There is one plot with unbelievable character development through Koestler's dynamic character. Caleb is both the catalyst, a character, and personified ray of hope for Jon Koestler. This movie , in a word, was amazing. And the best thing about it- the effects weren't the best part. GO and see it, but before read Ezekiel Ch.1 and have a "doubting Thomas" mentality and you will, like most on this forum, be left gasping in awe. Expand
  38. Shane
    Mar 28, 2009
    10
    Fantastic movie. Very few movies make you think like this one. Roger Ebert was bang on!!!
  39. AlainAvakian
    Mar 30, 2009
    10
    I am an avid fan of Sci-Fi, and was very surprized at how much I enjoyed this movie. The critics who panned it, I think, are looking at this movie as if it has something to teach us, instead of just looking at it as a 2 hour movie meant to entertain. Entertain is does, and very well.

    Be warned though, there are some very graphic scenes and I would not recommend you take your kids to
    I am an avid fan of Sci-Fi, and was very surprized at how much I enjoyed this movie. The critics who panned it, I think, are looking at this movie as if it has something to teach us, instead of just looking at it as a 2 hour movie meant to entertain. Entertain is does, and very well.

    Be warned though, there are some very graphic scenes and I would not recommend you take your kids to it.

    Roger Ebert's review was right on the money. I too loved Dark City, and this movie gave me the same kind of thills as Dark City did. Very well done, and I absolutely loved the ending.
    Expand
  40. JaneD
    Apr 11, 2009
    9
    The critics got this one wrong. There are a few minor flaws, I admit, but it's mostly solid. I've seen it three times just so I could better assess it. That's because I couldn't decide what to make of it at first, but couldn't let go either. The first time, the cgi/action scenes blew me away. The second time, the story carried me through. The third time, it was a The critics got this one wrong. There are a few minor flaws, I admit, but it's mostly solid. I've seen it three times just so I could better assess it. That's because I couldn't decide what to make of it at first, but couldn't let go either. The first time, the cgi/action scenes blew me away. The second time, the story carried me through. The third time, it was a balance of both. Interestingly, Ebert got it mostly right, though in the past he's been way off the mark--i.e., he simply didn't get Gilliam's cult classic Brazil. Minor flaws: the airplane scene has Cage yell "Hey!" at a burning man (well, people do strange things under extreme conditions). Stupid line from MIT colleague, "You were there?" (Hence the strained delivery.) I thought the scene involving the subway was confusing. What was moving where (or was it just me)? Would the female lead really get an ambulance when all hell is breaking loose? (I guess the announcement was just recently made, so full chaos hadn't yet set in.) Why does Cage's character get beyond the cops when they're firing warning shots at everyone else? These flaws aren't necessary for the plot either. For example, eliminate the cops and the ambulance and you have a much more believable scene. Ultimately, there's more than one ship involved here! Why do so many people miss this? The alien/angel intervention is going on all over the world and we merely get a glimpse at two families caught in the mix. The adults are mostly helpless, and the children have the weighty decisions. Is there value in knowing? Not for the reasons Koestler originally thinks. I'm not Christian. Aliens or angels? They've got wings when they ascend, so it begs the question. I don't care. The spiritual fantasy and the sci-fi interweave here so brilliantly we can't tell which is which and who is who. Expand
  41. RyanK.
    Apr 21, 2009
    9
    Great movie. Action-packed, suspenseful and magnificient special effects and magnificent writing. My favourite scene was the airplane crash scene... that was AWESOME!
  42. RonaldK
    Apr 22, 2009
    10
    I saw this without knowing much about it, except that the critics were dissing it. I'm glad I didn't blow it off. I agree with Ebert's score. And I'm glad Proyas took the risk. I wish more studios took risks with science fiction, rather than doing reboots or sequels. At least it gave me something to think about.
  43. ChrisW
    Jun 22, 2009
    9
    I simply cannot understand how the film critics (if they can call themselves that) can attack this film in the way that they have. Yes, it had a few flaws but I personally thought it was excellent with many underlining meanings. I normally dont pay attention to most of their insane/moronic points of view but in this case, I just think they have been blinded by their own ignorance.
  44. SteveK
    Jul 15, 2009
    10
    This was a hugely entertaining movie. It's gripping, white-knuckle suspense but also a thought-provoking blend of sci-fi with a touch of religious allegory, esepcially when it comes to the end-times. The ending is jarring, unsettling, and thoroughly enigmatic. That it inspired me to think for hours after the movie is reason enough to give it a 10. If you are the kind of sort that This was a hugely entertaining movie. It's gripping, white-knuckle suspense but also a thought-provoking blend of sci-fi with a touch of religious allegory, esepcially when it comes to the end-times. The ending is jarring, unsettling, and thoroughly enigmatic. That it inspired me to think for hours after the movie is reason enough to give it a 10. If you are the kind of sort that want to pull your hair out at anything that even smacks of being religious, then you will probably hate this movie. It's ironic that those that those that are so dogmatically anti-Christian are just as close-minded as the people they peg for being close-minded. There is nothing preachy in the movie; the religious overtones are suggested, but never fully fleshed out. (They never even use the "J" word once.) The haters need to calm down. Have an open mind and you will enjoy this ripping, relentless sci-fi suspense flick about the apocalypse. Remember: its a movie about the apocalypse, what did you expect? Expand
  45. DonaldI
    Jul 27, 2009
    9
    An almost perfect movie. Striking the right blend between science fiction with a morality play worthy of the old Outer Limits and a 70's disaster flick, this movie, starring Nicholas Cage is a surprising treat. The special effects may draw you in, but this film has so much more to offer than that. Thought provoking and intelligent. I cannot recommend it highly enough. Unless..... you An almost perfect movie. Striking the right blend between science fiction with a morality play worthy of the old Outer Limits and a 70's disaster flick, this movie, starring Nicholas Cage is a surprising treat. The special effects may draw you in, but this film has so much more to offer than that. Thought provoking and intelligent. I cannot recommend it highly enough. Unless..... you don't wish to have any preconceived notions about spirituality you might have be challenged. The movie does tend to draw extreme reactions from some people due to it's subject matter. So much the better. Great films will do that. Expand
  46. BrentP.
    Mar 21, 2009
    10
    This movie was not only good. It was amazing. The critics definitely have it wrong on this film. It will give you a lot to talk about after the film. My boyfriend and I have been discussing it all evening.
  47. JonathanV.
    Mar 21, 2009
    10
    Great story. The acting and special affects go seamlessly together.
  48. SusanO
    Mar 23, 2009
    9
    I'm really glad the only critic I listen to is Roger Ebert - he loved this movie and so did I. It had a ton of heart, and kept me on the edge of my seat the entire time - fabulous CGI as well!
  49. ZackFromont
    Mar 26, 2009
    9
    Awesome movie, shit critics ! I'm 14 and this movie was really good. And not only for the disaster scene, but for the whole thing! The problem there was was the funny but unintentional parts. Other than that, it had most of it: Action, Suspense, good plot... but RUSHED ENDING ( Wich ain't good). SPOILER It's like if the director had no more ideas and did the same thing than Awesome movie, shit critics ! I'm 14 and this movie was really good. And not only for the disaster scene, but for the whole thing! The problem there was was the funny but unintentional parts. Other than that, it had most of it: Action, Suspense, good plot... but RUSHED ENDING ( Wich ain't good). SPOILER It's like if the director had no more ideas and did the same thing than in Indiana Jones (You'll understand if you see the movie) Expand
  50. WilliamS
    Mar 27, 2009
    9
    Knowing is one of the more intelligent, interesting and engaging science fiction films I've seen in a while that has a very compelling apocalyptic ending.
  51. BB
    Mar 28, 2009
    10
    I don`t what people`s problem. This was one of best sci-fi movie for a long time. Nothing was wrong with script, performance or anything else. You have to critic movies in their category. I was totally satisfied when I left the movie. Good work Nicholas Cage
  52. PantelisK
    Mar 29, 2009
    10
    Best film since I've seen since January 2008.Very good scenario, fx, atmosphere, music score and directing by Alex Proyas.
  53. SW
    Apr 11, 2009
    9
    This is a good film. The story is tight too despite what some are saying. There are no major flaws. Seriously. The film goes out of its way to foreshadow and explain crucial details. Cage's performance is okay. How did Koestler know to look at the door and so quickly find the right one . . . There is some setup but it could have been dealt with better. But by then the plot was moving This is a good film. The story is tight too despite what some are saying. There are no major flaws. Seriously. The film goes out of its way to foreshadow and explain crucial details. Cage's performance is okay. How did Koestler know to look at the door and so quickly find the right one . . . There is some setup but it could have been dealt with better. But by then the plot was moving along quickly. An extended search would have killed the momentum. Also they didn't need Caleb to write down numbers. That was superfluous. I think that when there is more than one writer they either catch each others' flaws or branch off incoherently. The former applies here more than the latter. Implausibility does not have so much bite in this realm of film as does incoherence. The plot of Knowing is coherent. The children make the decisions and have special knowledge. The adults mostly don't know what to do. The rest we leave to suspension of disbelief. I think that the religious aspect helps more than hurts the film. It isn't exactly a marriage of science and religion so much as a mixture. The critics are reviewing according to the wrong genre. Parts can't be explained by either alone, unless you allow for science fiction and supernatural fantasy. In is the play on these two that is so intriguing. Expand
  54. AngelaSmith
    Apr 11, 2009
    9
    This film rocks! Definitely entertaining, not too intellectual or religious, simplistic dualities, and the ending is a little clumsy.
  55. NC
    Apr 14, 2009
    10
    Good not great. I heartily agree with those who are saying that the critics other than Ebert got it wrong, hence my rating of a 10. C'mon! This movie deserves far more than 41 which is two points over the Paul Blart - Mall Cop score of 39! It should have got around a 60 or so. They often reviewed it out of genre too. This is basically a sci-fi film. That you can't tell whether Good not great. I heartily agree with those who are saying that the critics other than Ebert got it wrong, hence my rating of a 10. C'mon! This movie deserves far more than 41 which is two points over the Paul Blart - Mall Cop score of 39! It should have got around a 60 or so. They often reviewed it out of genre too. This is basically a sci-fi film. That you can't tell whether it's religious or sci-fi is a credit to it. I'm not even Christian and I can appreciate that. Sorry some people got lost, but I agree with posters who say it's pretty clear with lots of foreshadowing and setup. There are several minor flaws, many having to do with the Australian location of the filming. See the imdb link for that. There are at least two bloopers that can easily be written off though. That the Mazda could make it through the the woods is arguable in favor and I thought the mother introduced Abby early in the game. Imdb claims that the Mazda would have trouble in the woods and that Koestler knew Abby's name without being introduced. Kind of random of me to grab on to those two, but they're just examples of the debatable. I thought that the plot and editing was together and good, except for maybe when Caleb writes numbers. What was that about other than to remind Koestler that Lucinda didn't finish writing them? You should see this film and perhaps read Ezekiel 1 before making the final judgment. Expand
  56. CurrenW
    May 19, 2009
    10
    This movie was a lot better than I was expecting! The trailer looked extremely boring to me, but the movie was an entirely different story! Nicholas Cage sends out much more effort than he did in many of his previous films. The action scenes were the scariest I've ever seen in my life. It was also very emotional, and if you've seen the movie, you know what I'm talking This movie was a lot better than I was expecting! The trailer looked extremely boring to me, but the movie was an entirely different story! Nicholas Cage sends out much more effort than he did in many of his previous films. The action scenes were the scariest I've ever seen in my life. It was also very emotional, and if you've seen the movie, you know what I'm talking about. Overall, Knowing was an incredible film, and one of 2009's finest! Expand
  57. Aug 18, 2010
    10
    Analisado com o devido escrutinio e bom-senso, o enredo focado no debate sobre a regencia do Universo pelo determinismo ou pela aleatoriedade carece de sentido. Isso pouco importa ante a precisao com a qual o responsavel pelo visionario "Cidade das Sombras" manipula nossas expectativas, sujeitando-nos a visoes aterrorizantes de catastrofes misteriosamente profetizadas, que eclodem na telaAnalisado com o devido escrutinio e bom-senso, o enredo focado no debate sobre a regencia do Universo pelo determinismo ou pela aleatoriedade carece de sentido. Isso pouco importa ante a precisao com a qual o responsavel pelo visionario "Cidade das Sombras" manipula nossas expectativas, sujeitando-nos a visoes aterrorizantes de catastrofes misteriosamente profetizadas, que eclodem na tela de maneira inesperada. Entre cada sequencia de destruicao, e mantida uma atmosfera de inevitabilidade, misterio e ameaça, fazendo com que nenhum segmento da narrativa esmoreca em folego. Cliches flagrantes como o relacionamento complicado entre o pai viuvo (Cage) e seu filhinho precoce adquirem verossimilhanca gracas ao texto bem lapidado. "Pressagio" alcanca estados sublimes de imageria sci-fi em seu derradeiro ato, consolidando Proyas como o midas do genero desde que se lancou em meados dos anos 90. Expand
  58. Jan 12, 2013
    9
    Made by the Mayas to warn us of the impeding doom, or was it by Summit entertainment to empty our pockets? All joking aside, this exellent doomsday film looks gorgeous in nice desaturated sephia-like tones with razor sharp imagery captured on the RED One camera. The film does take some time to get going but it's well acted (by Mr.Cage), has a brooding atmosphere and a satisfying ending.Made by the Mayas to warn us of the impeding doom, or was it by Summit entertainment to empty our pockets? All joking aside, this exellent doomsday film looks gorgeous in nice desaturated sephia-like tones with razor sharp imagery captured on the RED One camera. The film does take some time to get going but it's well acted (by Mr.Cage), has a brooding atmosphere and a satisfying ending. One of the better Alex Proyas films! Expand
  59. Sep 7, 2014
    9
    " The numbers are the key to everything." - John Koestler

    This movie is one of the best movies i ever seen. Special effects are ok but the story I liked the most.
Metascore
41

Mixed or average reviews - based on 27 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 27
  2. Negative: 11 out of 27
  1. 50
    Science fiction fans will feel gypped, disaster movie fans will appreciate about 10 minutes of screen time and be bored by the rest, and no one else will care.
  2. 100
    Knowing is among the best science-fiction films I've seen -- frightening, suspenseful, intelligent and, when it needs to be, rather awesome.
  3. Reviewed by: Jim Ridley
    30
    What would a Christian Apocalypse movie look like with a big budget, a talented director, and star power of higher wattage than a discount Baldwin brother? Here comes the answer: like a glum hybrid of the "Final Destination" movies, an Irwin Allen disaster bash, and the kitschiest parts of Darren Aronofsky's "The Fountain."