IMDb > Resurrection (1999) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Resurrection
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Resurrection More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 11:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 108 reviews in total 

17 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

Russell Mulcahy, eh? He's a funny one.

Author: Leigh Loveday from UK
28 June 1999

Given the opportunity of clambering to the top of the directorial heap on the back of the magnificent Highlander, Mr. Mulcahy instead managed to shoot down his own chances by unwisely having any association at all with the not-quite-so-well-received sequel. Nevertheless, Resurrection, while not exactly a triple-A title, shows that the old dog's still got a few tricks up his sleeve - even if they are being deployed on straight-to-TV efforts these days.

With old chum Chris Lambert (a man equally cursed in his career choices, and looking very old all of a sudden) on board, the scene is set for another shameless reworking of Seven - which might be an obvious comment to make, but that doesn't make it any less true. While the deadly sins are replaced with the names of apostles, the relentless rain, gloom and gritty gore are still there in force, and the plot's just as threadbare.

But! That still doesn't make it a bad film, as such. It's decently performed and nicely shot, with a few nifty camera tricks thrown in to break up the free-roaming NYPD Blue feel of the general proceedings, and there are one or two genuinely effective twists encountered along the way (with some glaringly obvious ones to balance them out, unfortunately).

So it's worth catching, as long as you're not expecting mould-breaking brilliance. One of Lambert's better films, certainly, and an example of the sort of high production values he should be aiming for. So sit back and enjoy... all in all, it's better than you might expect.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Parts of a Man

6/10
Author: sol1218 from brooklyn NY
22 November 2008

***SPOILERS*** What the movie "Resurrection" shows is that religious nuts, from all dominations and cultures, are about as dedicated to their religious beliefs as those who try to suppress and eradicate them.

This deranged psycho is out on the streets of Chicago trying to replicated Jesus' Easter suffering by using unsuspecting persons, whom he kidnaps and brutally murders, body parts in his recreating Jesus' ordeal on the Cross. This wacko goes so far as seeking out his victim in that they have the same biblical names that connects them, in the Bible, with Jesus' Apostles! He also makes sure that his victims are also the same age that Jesus was when he was crucified: 33 years old!

It's transplanted , from New Orleans, Cajun Chicago police detective John Prudhomme, Christopher Lambert, who gets the jump on the killer by deciphering his notes, that he carved into his victims bodies, he left at his crime scenes. Det. Prudhomme's attempt to catch the elusive killer leads to his partner Det. Hollinsworth, Leland Orsen, ending up not only getting shot by the police, in mistaking him for the killer, but having his left leg cut off, by the killer, when he's left alone and under intensive care in his hospital room!

As things turn out it takes FBI profiler Agent Wingate, Robert Joy, to get Det. Prudhomme as well as the Chicago PD to finally get it straight in not just why this psycho is committing these ghastly crimes but who he really is! This revelation, on Agent Wingate's part, is by far the most shocking and surprising sequence in the movie.

What really makes the movie "Ressurection" go completely downhill is that after the killer's identity is revealed he walks right into a trap, that with his great intelligence and intuition he should have seen coming, that Det. Prudhomme and the Chicago PD set for him. With the killer being so smart as well as omnipresent during the first 75 minutes of the movie he then, after he's discovered, does everything in not at all bothering to prove his innocence that he easily can, by his manipulating the law and the courts, but goes out of his way in his death wish-like effort to prove his guilt instead! This has him going on a mindless and murderous rampage knocking off some dozen people by the time the movies over! Most, if not all, of those that he murders have nothing at all to do with his sick scheme in replicating the Miracle of Easter!

You have to have a really strong stomach to be able to sit through this movie that tries to outdo the film "Se7en" which has an almost identical storyline. "Ressurection" goes to show how unchecked religion, or religious fanaticism, can effect a disturbed and unstable mind who uses it for his own sick and maniacal purpose's. In the case of the movie "Ressurection" the sick person who's mind is effected uses religion, like the psycho in Se7en, to mask his dark and deep psychotic and murderous fantasies by having it justify not, what in reality it would do, condemn them!

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

Redefining the term 'devine retribution'.

8/10
Author: Spike-65 (spikeykiwi@xtra.co.nz) from New Zealand
26 June 1999

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Due to the inability of Mitsubishi to make a VCR that can last any reasonable length of time before it dies, I had to wait two days to see this film. The frustration was worth it. This film is quintessential Christophe Lambert and a must-see for any admirer, especially if you are also into gore of the 'n'th degree (hence the British R18 rating).

The plot centres around a cop (Christophe Lambert) and his partner (Leland Orser) and their attempt to track down a serial killer (Robert Joy) who is reconstructing the body of Christ in time for Easter and the Resurrection. It is not for the faint-hearted and should be viewed during the daylight hours, as there are segments of it that will have you alternately on the edge of your seat and then running for the bathroom. Some may compare it to Seven, but the storyline is richer and more varied.

Jonathan Freeman's cinematography is ethereal, but intense, like a rollercoaster at an amusement park, with colour so subtle, it makes some scenes seem almost daguerreotypical. Just when your eyes have adjusted to the pitch of the camera..it changes. There are scenes reminiscent of many of Christophe's previous films, among them are Subway, Knight Moves, Mean Guns, Highlander, Why Me and Adrenaline. Watching it on a big screen helped, as the mood was dark, enhancing the effect rather than detracting from it.

The plot is sound and the (often unknown) collection of actors is acceptable. The only fly in the ointment was the surreptitious use of 'the laugh' at one point; one would hope this was put in to please Christophe's admirers. But once again we see the passion and the sheer volume of commitment that Christophe has given us all before. The score is understated, not at all overdone like the dozens of thrillers thrown at us lately.

If you want to sample a thick slice of what this guy is all about, it would be opportune to catch this one, especially since Christophe and Brad Mirman wrote it, while Russell Mulcahy directed. One would suspect this was a partnership made in heaven...so when do we sinners get the next taste?

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

One of Lambert's best!

8/10
Author: jbfichera from New York, New York
20 August 2002

We all him as the original Highlander and as Rayden in the first Mortal Kombat film, but Christopher Lambert has been around for awhile and has made a pretty impressive number of films (however the quality of many of them is not that impressive). Though many of his films lack something to be desired he has made some classics and he always brings in a solid "Lambert" performance and every now and then he brings in a performance that even surpasses that. Resurrection happens to be one of those performances.

The film itself is actually quite good and it is a bit of a shame that it did not get a wide release in theaters, but unfortunately Lambert just can't bring 'em in anymore (however he is a staple in the straight to video market). The film is a gritty detective story (so NO SWORDS guys) in the style of SEVEN and re-teams Lambert with his Highlander director, Russell Mulcahy. What is interesting here is that the film is co-written and conceived by Lambert, which I think is a first for him (though I'm not sure). What makes this significant is that, Lambert gets to branch out a little and play a character with a little more depth. Which I'm sure is something he's been longing to do since GREYSTOKE. Another interesting thing about the film is that it has genius/director David Cronenberg acting in a small part as a priest(That's what I'm waiting for, the Crononberg/Lambert, Director/Actor team-up).

The film is well shot and acted. It is suspenseful and even a little more thought provoking than the average suspense/mystery. It has a twist that I believe works pretty well.

Well in other words, the film is good. See it if you can.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

The year's best thriller!

10/10
Author: Teemu J. Päiste from Finland
21 July 1999

Man, what a movie! I see well over a hundred films per year and although I enjoy many of them, there are only about four or five which really impress me and this one definitely did! Of course, one could say that this film is simply another rip-off of "Seven". And in fact, it is. But is that a bad thing? I liked "Seven" and want to see more films like that. And in my opinion, "Resurrection" has a better plot, better music and more atmosphere. It may borrow the elements (rain, darkness etc.) from David Fincher's thriller but it enhances them so well that if you watch "Resurrection" before "Seven", you might even be disappointed by the latter. I know I would.

I like Christopher Lambert. I think John Prudhomme could only have been played by him. He has the looks, the screen presence and the charisma. Some might say he's wooden but I think he's acting style really worked well with this film. Prudhomme has lost his only child a year ago and there is something in Lambert's performance which reflects that, something sad but hopeful, which really makes you care for his character. This is a man who's been through hell and now he's finding out that he's seen nothing yet. I also liked the performance of the actor who played his partner.

The script is clever. The dialogue works very well and everything moves at a perfect pace. But what really sets this film apart from it's competitors are the high production values. There are clearly very talented people behind the camera. The cinematography, the music, the lighting, everything works extremely well together. I would really have liked to see this film in a movie theater but unfortunately it came direct-to-video in Finland.

I'm sure some people will be complaining about the gore. This film is quite bloody but I believe a film like this must be. In here the gore really enhanced the mood and I think the film wouldn't have been as good if it had been less bloody. There are some films which work best when the details are left to the imagination but I'm glad the director knew that this wasn't one of them. If you don't have the stomach to see gory bodies, don't watch a film involving a serial killer.

Overall, "Resurrection" is a superb thriller which should appeal to anyone who wants to see more films like "Seven". I gave "Seven" an 8 but I'm giving this one a full 10.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

More than a rip-off of "Se7en"

7/10
Author: Johnnee-2 from Ottawa, Ontario
27 November 1999

While I sat through the first half-hour of "Resurrection", all I could think about was how closely it resembled "Se7en". It had the same basic theme: two cops investigating a series of brutal (and unsettlingly gory) murders that follow a common theme. I couldn't help but dismiss it as a pointless, direct-to-video rip-off, but soon I found myself strangely immersed.

"Resurrection" is better than I thought it would be. Once the story started rolling along, I was surprised at how well the movie was made. The suspense scenes are first-rate, the screenplay is smart and intriguing, and the acting is well above average. Though it's not a great movie, it's definitely well worth a watch if you're into the serial-killer subgenre. 7/10

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Get past the similarities

7/10
Author: refinedsugar from Nova Scotia, Canada
9 September 2000

Resurrection is intended to be a dark and creepy ninety minutes of serial killer heaven so probably the first thing that will jump to mind is 'that other movie'. You know the one I'm talking about. As such, its bound to suffer the wraith of armchair critics everywhere, but if you can keep your expectations in check, you'll find a decent flick that stands on its own. Don't be too quick to judge this one.

The dark foreboding imagery, religious overtones and a crazed, mystery killer has been done. The constantly dreary atmosphere, dark locales, the detective with a broken past, the second string banana who's the direct opposite of his partner, the twist you're not supposed to see coming. These are the conventions, that is formula, but its unfair to label Resurrection a rip-off. It features some good production values and there's no denying this is one of Christopher Lambert's better efforts. He's one of those guys that has slipped into B-movie obscurity like some actors do. Appearing in the dredges of the direct-to-video market. In fact, this was such a pleasant experience than it almost made up for those poor Highlander sequels I sat through.

No one (me included) is going to come out and say Resurrection is the best thing ever, but all things considered, it's better than eighty-five percent of the dtv offerings I've picked off video store shelves. The acting and story might falter at times, but there are also moments that try to rise above. A must-watch for Lambert fans and a satisfying flick in its own right.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

'Resurrection' in Need of Resuscitation

4/10
Author: jtx from Toyota, Japan
24 January 2000

This film truly was poor. I went to the theatre expecting something exciting, and instead was afforded the opportunity to hone my "guess the next plot twist before it happens" skills. Seriously, the plot was written with an extra thick crayon so everyone could see. Nothing was truly shocking. In fact, even the gore was met with such complete suspension of belief that it really didn't add up to much.

The excessive wise cracking and cops talking shop at the crime scenes made it seem all the more phony. And the scene where Lambert's character is struggling with the clues and reaches his "investigative epiphany" goes to great lengths to indicate the level of intellect expected from the audience - little.

Probably the most annoying aspect of the cinematography was the "X-Files" treatment: Every building in the film, whether it's the precinct building, or a house at noon, or a hospital, was suffering from a lack of any discernible lighting (not to mention a lack of 'patients' in the case of the hospital). I don't recall a single scene when someone flipped on a light switch. It sure would have been nice.

Mr. Lambert really isn't an Oscar-grade actor, so I suppose you have to take this film for what it's worth. In the end, I've reached the conclusion that the only thing that would make this film seem more entertaining is to watch it after watching "The Warriors". Otherwise, you're left with an effort that is dull and unoriginal, and nowhere near the equal of films of the genre such as "Silence of the Lambs".

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Religion with a twist

10/10
Author: dragster-2 from Australia
7 November 2006

I saw this movie on TV for the first time. Right from the beginning, I had a strange feeling of sickness and disgust and the top scenes were not even on yet. It is compared to Se7en, but I feel it has more action in it while the gore is the same in both movies. The serial killer is very disturbing and has no pity towards his victims like most "respected" SKs. I don't remember the soundtrack to the movie, but I think it does give that eerie touch to a movie that is in itself disturbing all along. The killer doesn't give himself away that easily and he is seriously involved in what he's doing. The final scene is one of the best in horror movies, but can be quite sickening for many light-hearted viewers.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

far better than average

8/10
Author: khouston86 from texas
27 November 2002

Not a very well-known film, but far better than the average thriller/suspense/horror rental. Good story, good acting (except the out of place Rick Fox in a small role), very creepy killer. Don't worry about the "Seven" comparisons. It isn't all that similar, really, and I don't consider it a rip-off. Extremely gory in some scenes, but effectively so.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 11:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history