Event Horizon

Movie Info

Genre(s): Horror  |  Sci-fi  |  Suspense/Thriller

Written by: Philip Eisner

Directed by: Paul W.S. Anderson

Release Date:
Theatrical: August 15, 1997
DVD: August 19, 2003

Running Time: 96 minutes, Color

Origin: UK / USA

Summary

RATING: R for strong violence and gore, language and some nudity

Starring Laurence Fishburne, Sam Neill, Kathleen Quinlan, Joely Richardson, Richard T. Jones, Jack Noseworthy, Jason Isaacs, and Sean Pertwee

The year is 2047. Years earlier, the pioneering research vessel Event Horizon vanished without a trace. Now a signal from it has been detected, and the United States Aerospace Command responds. Hurtling toward the signal's source are a fearless captain (Fishburne), his elite crew and the lost ship's designer (Neill). Their mission: find and salvage the state-of-the-art spacecraft. What they find is state-of-the-art interstellar terror. What they must salvage are their own lives, because someone or something is ready to ensnare them in a new dimension of unimaginable fear. (Paramount)

Also On Metacritic

FILM: Alien vs. Predator Resident Evil

Also On The Web: Internet Movie Database Official Studio Site

What The Critics Said

All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...

What Our Users Said

Vote Now!The average user rating for this movie is 7.1 (out of 10) based on 8 User Votes

Note: User votes are NOT included in the Metascore calculation.

Laura D. gave it a10:
This movie scared the crap out of me, I'm a big sci-fi buff and I could not listen to The Prodigy in the same way again

Eric C. gave it a0:
This is a cult classic. Jeez. It's laughably bad, to be painfully honest. But as funny as it is, I never, ever want to see it again. Seriously, people, go watch The Thing if you want to be disturbed or the orignaly Solaris if you want your mind to be blown.

Aaron S. gave it an8:
I couldn't believe how low a score this film received. I saw this film when I was about 15 years old, in the theaters, and recently picked it up on DVD. I have always considered this film a truly classic horror film, which is why I am befuddled at the obnoxiously low score this film received. Although, it made me realize something: critics don't like horror films...end of story. They just don't "get" them, the same way people in the mid-west don't "get" Seinfeld. None of their criticisms have any validity whatsoever. It's always something like, "It doesn't deliver any 'real' thrills," or "goes for cheap thrills." Which, by the way, is a completely arbirtrary statement with no depth or critical value. What are these "real" thrills that they keep referring to from some non-existent film from the past. Stop saying the plot is derivative and/or unrealistic. It's a horror film! It's supposed to be derivative and unrealistic! It's why people go and see these films. What makes Event Horizon such a masterpiece is, for one, it's visual asthetic and the atmosphere of the sets. Very rarely does a film really just captivate you with its visuals the way Event Horizon does. I truly believe that even if I had not seen this film before and it was in a foreign language, my eyes would still be drawn to it. It is, by far, one of the most visually stunning films to date. Secondly, this is one of the few films to successfuly blend suspense and gore into one cohesive package. I don't know how much more "real" the thrills can get than they do in this film. It's almost like a symphony, the way the film is paced. A slow build up of teases and disturbing images that ultimately lead up to a crescendo of terror. It even ends on a moment of catharsis. Truth be told, it is a brilliant horror film. But the problem is that the audience for horror films is relatively limited. The content alone, severely isolates your core audience. There are very few movie-goers these days, anyway. Fewer still, who have the intestinal fortitude to sit through a good 'ole fashioned horror fest. if you can appreciate it for what it is, it's a masterpiece. On the other hand, if you feel lost, confused, and disturbed, you're a critic. Good on ya' critics!

Kurt M. gave it a10:
I don't understand the bad critics. I feel this film ist the best horror-scifi film since 2000. It's better than Alien 4 (but not better than Alien 1-3). The horror in this film is not only physical it is also psychological. The acting is good to very good. The plot is simple but absolutely OK for a horror movie. And it's also great to see that african american actors not only play roles as cannon fodder or comedic relief. I think some critics are very narrow minded and dogmatic, when they claim a horror movie should only rely on suspense and thinks you don't see". Concluding I i would say that this movie is way to underrated - you don't have to feel like me and give it a 10, but come on this film deserves at least a 8 .

Aaron S. gave it an8:
I couldn't believe how low a score this film received. I saw this film when I was about 15 years old, in the theaters, and recently picked it up on DVD. I have always considered this film a truly classic horror film, which is why I am befuddled at the obnoxiously low score this film received. Although, it made me realize something: critics don't like horror films...end of story. They just don't "get" them, the same way people in the mid-west don't "get" Seinfeld. None of their criticisms have any validity whatsoever. It's always something like, "It doesn't deliver any 'real' thrills," or "goes for cheap thrills." Which, by the way, is a completely arbirtrary statement with no depth or critical value. What are these "real" thrills that they keep referring to from some non-existent film from the past. Stop saying the plot is derivative and/or unrealistic. It's a horror film! It's supposed to be derivative and unrealistic! It's why people go and see these films. What makes Event Horizon such a masterpiece is, for one, it's visual aesthetic and the atmosphere of the sets. Very rarely does a film really just captivate you with its visuals the way Event Horizon does. I truly believe that even if I had not seen this film before and it was in a foreign language, my eyes would still be drawn to it. It is, by far, one of the most visually stunning films to date. Secondly, this is one of the few films to successfuly blend suspense and gore into one cohesive package. I don't know how much more "real" the thrills can get than they do in this film. It's almost like a symphony, the way the film is paced. A slow build up of teases and disturbing images that ultimately lead up to a crescendo of terror. It even ends on a moment of catharsis. Truth be told, it is a brilliant horror film. But the problem is that the audience for horror films is relatively limited. The content alone, severely isolates your core audience. There are very few movie-goers these days, anyway. Fewer still, who have the intestinal fortitude to sit through a good 'ole fashioned horror fest. If you can appreciate it for what it is, it's a masterpiece. On the other hand, if you feel lost, confused, and disturbed, you're a critic. Good on ya' critics!

Joshua E. gave it a3:
I was just reviewing the terrible AVP which I, unfortunately, just saw. I thought I'd see what was up with this one since I knew Anderson directed it and actually thought he had a tad bit of potential after I saw this movie, but Alas, it's a resounding no. Well, from what I can remember, Event Horizon was pretty good up until a certain point and then took the proverbial nose dive into total shlockery. It looked great and had a pretty convincing atmosphere of dread. The palette was very sickly and put me off for most of the film. It was a very effectual way of making me feel uncomfortable in a good way. I remember a lot of yellows and greens. So, I was thinking the climax was going to be very satisfying, but it unravelled once they really started to "explain" what the mystery was. I will just say it was ludicrous, ruined the movie, and I will leave it at that. I think that was the point where Anderson started his trip into bad director land.

Read more user comments >