User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 34 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 34
  2. Negative: 7 out of 34

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. Oct 6, 2014
    Good visuals and great acting can't quite elevate this film above it's lackluster writing and predictable plot and characters

    It's a great post apocalyptic setting, and the visuals really reinforce that, whether it's how the colonies are shot or the CGI they've used, they all create a brilliantly bleak atmosphere.

    The acting, especially from Fishburne, Paxton and Zegers, is very
    good. Fishburne especially excels. It's just a shame him and Paxton aren't given more screen time. Paxton as well could have done with a lot more chances to build his character, who in the end is let down by lazy and cliché writing

    The story is ok but a bit by the numbers. It does feel a bit like like the creators had a great idea for the first half of a film but then couldn't think what to do with the rest of it. they set up a great situation and setting but they don't go anywhere with it and instead fall back to a by the numbers monster movie and the characters are never given enough time to really develop

    It isn't a bad film by any means and is quite enjoyable to watch, but its plot and characters mean it will never be a must-see film
  2. Oct 3, 2014
    Let me start by saying the movie is a complete waste of time, you’ve seen this before. Forget about the Weather towers and the barren Earth, this is like The Hills Have Eyes but in a dystopian future. The characters are one dimensional, and the whole past of a particular character (narrated on a moment obviously done to try and get us to know better the characters) was a complete waste of time and without relevance to the plot. The pace at the beginning was slow, one Colony went to find out what happened to another until they find a shocking reality: “cannibals”. That’s it, you have seen that in other movies. It isn’t original and the whole plot with the Earth and the Antennas was forgotten entirely for chases and fights. I only gave it something because the scenery was good, particularly those antennas (or whatever they were), and because I liked the idea that they completely ignored. Pass this one out, please! Expand
  3. Jul 9, 2014
    I didn't expect too much due to the bad reviews, but supprisingly I enjoyed it thoroughly. The characters were played convincingly, the plot was quite intresting and the action was well paced.
  4. Jun 3, 2014
    This is one of the rare occasions when a contemporary science fiction movie leaves me cold. The film went left when it should have gone right, turning a promising mew project into just another zombie film. It cost me 20 bucks brand new. And it was not worth the money. There were a few other less than stellar science fiction films that have come out in recent years like 'Absolon' with Christopher Lambert & 'Impostor' with Gary Sinise and both were low budget SF, but bother were better than Colony.The main characters dialogue in Colony was a bit stilted so I thought it did not deserve a 'pass go and collect 200 dollars' from this viewer. Apparently it was filmed in a now not used underground military facility in North Bay Ontario & the folk who let them film there said they were never letting anyone else film there because it had been such a big hassle. Access to a unique staging area didn't seem to help this film much. Don't bother. Expand
  5. Apr 19, 2014
    This is a really good horror/survival movie.There is a good cast and a good story.Unfortunately the movie don't have a good budget and it's easy to see it.
  6. Apr 15, 2014
    We won't often get a better done B stream movies. I never heard of this director, but he should utilize this movie's success as a platform for his future works. It was not bad as it was rated, it was quite an entertaining movie with fine performances. All the way Laurence Fishburne is the only familiar face you could find. His inclusion in the movie had the advantage. He delivered what his crew expected from him and the rest was recovered by the other cast members that I don't know anyone of them.

    Basically, this movie had a very simple concept, a story that was not expanded, but moves on a certain lane till the end. It was all about surviving which is set in the backdrop of next ice age where few people who survived live in colonies located underground. It follows the story of the colony 7, when they won't get respond from their's mutual understanding colony 5 the rescue team set to leave to know what's going on. They reach their destination and come to know everything, while escaping, the horror follows them. How it will be avoided from affecting the colony 7 and their strength of the defense system reveals in the rest.

    This was not a movie made by some popular filmmaker with top actors. Like any other movie, it was also targeted commercial purpose. They want to make money and fame, but what we need is a good entertainment and so we get it. I am not saying or comparing to the masterpiece, though better than some A-list movies. I Gauratee it won't be your worst movie of the year. I was fulfilled with what I was anticipated, so no disappointment. If you are a luck it may work for you as well.
  7. Mar 18, 2014
    Not as good as I thought it would be judged on the trailer that I saw but it was not the worst film I have ever seen it was good for what it was and I would not recommend this to anyone
  8. Jan 5, 2014
    I watched it with snow out in the real world, so kind of scary to think of the snow in this movie. The Colony is nothing amazing, but it`s a good movie. I do feel like the ending was rushed. It`s one of those endings where you say well, ok????...not bad.
  9. Jan 2, 2014
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Actually, the harsh critics are exactly right on this one. It's unoriginal, contrived, and worst of all, it makes no sense. On the positive side, it's good looking the cinematography and and special effects are well down. It has a better acting cast than it deserves. The problem is that it has holes in the plot you could drive a truck through and it develops a bunch of subplots that ultimately go nowhere and just detract from the story. (SPOILER ALERT) Some examples: 1) The explanation for how "feral people" doesn't stand up to logic: The world has a long history of starving people and they've never turned into what these people turn into. 2) Why are common sicknesses all of a sudden so deadly? I know they're in a closed environment, but people live on ships and in the arctic today and common illnesses aren't nearly the grave danger they make them out to be in this movie. 3) The whole power struggle between Mason and the rest of the crew gets a bunch of screen time but ultimately fizzles out, failing to advance the story, set up a key plot element, or add drama. 4) The feral people follow our hero back to his colony by following his footprints in constant wind and snow which would obliterate those footprint in a matter of hours. 5) When the hero grabs seeds to take to the thaw-out zone to re-seed the earth, he grabs a couple jars! There are many, many others. Frankly, it feels like this film started out with a significantly different story and it got a half-baked rewrite in the middle. Perhaps it was originally a zombie movie then a lot of what is in the film makes more sense. But as it stands, it's just a pretty mess. Expand
  10. Nov 28, 2013
    We watched this just because Bill Paxton and Lawrence Fishburne were in it and were definitely pleased. There were more than a few times when we were saying "Huh?", but overall we loved it!
  11. Nov 4, 2013
    The trailer looks much better than the movie really is... It is not bad, althought i do not recommend you spending your time watching this.. The story starts nice but the rest of the movie is
  12. Oct 21, 2013
    Movie is worth watching, especially if you enjoy survival drama. Unusually story line with a few plot twists. Why the critics are overly harsh on movies like this is beyond me.
  13. Oct 19, 2013
    It sounded good from the description but then when I watched it turned out bad. Story was promising but they didn't do much with it. I thought it was going to be this paranormal kind of thing but nope just plain old humans all the way, booooooring.
  14. Oct 18, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. While I dug the premise of this movie and felt it could have resulted in an average, mildly decent sci-fi film, the end product just felt like it wasn't fully developed or even finished. The threat (a roaming band of cannibals) feels pointlessly tacked on--and they were the MAIN THREAT! It just felt like the cannibals were stand ins for what the real threat was going to be but production just never got around to actually coming up with the actual antagonist so they just left the cannibals in. The characters don't really feel that there either as there is very little character development in them. Bill Paxton undergoes a change in his character but it happens off-screen and it just makes the turn his character takes feel lazy. Granted Bill Paxton and Laurence Fishburne are great in the movie but there's just not enough of them in the screen time to carry this weak movie forward. Expand
  15. Sep 22, 2013
    This movie is hugely underestimated and the critics' score is plain ridiculous. This movie is a rare beast a quality science-fiction survival horror. Yes, a quality one. The cast is impressive and the acting is really good, Laurence Fishburne did well for sure. The movie has some beautiful scenery, and the setting (frozen Earth) and the plot is solid enough. Sure, for science-fiction it has some flaws for example, footprints hold during the night on the snow despite the never-ending blizzard. Or the "certain" tribe is so big it shouldn't be able to survive (taking into account their ration). But... that's about it. I can't recall any other major problem and I saw this movie just yesterday.
    Besides, this is the fourth post-apocalyptic movie of 2013 that I have seen. "The Oblivion" was obviously the best, hands down. And this is also the simple fact that "After Earth" was obviously the worst. Taking into account their budgets, I would say "The Colony" is no worse than "World War Z". There is no unnecessary pathos and its characters definitely has more depth and creates more of viewers' willingness to empathize them.
  16. Sep 21, 2013
    The idea for the story is good, the twist in the story excellent and cast promising. But the plot development has flaws in logic that turns the story on a path full of unnecessary events and character development. That coupled with naive last half of the movie and the ending that seemed rushed with no explanation, the movie is just a shell of what it was supposed to be.

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 9 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 9
  2. Negative: 6 out of 9
  1. Reviewed by: Kyle Smith
    Sep 30, 2013
    Can’t somebody come up with a monster that does something more interesting than run at you screaming, “Yeeaaaarrrrgh”?
  2. Reviewed by: Dennis Harvey
    Sep 22, 2013
    Utterly routine futuristic horror-thriller The Colony substitutes the term “ferals” for plain old zombies (the modern, fast-moving kind), and that’s about it for originality.
  3. Reviewed by: John DeFore
    Sep 20, 2013
    With a frost-bitten script whose skeletal plot cuts and pastes bits from innumerable other survival yarns, the biggest surprise the film offers is that four people were required to write it.