(TV Mini-Series)

(2009)

User Reviews

Add a Review
2 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
1/10
Huge waste of time, watching made me very annoyed
sebsk-749067 May 2015
Warning: Spoilers
First of all, I'd like to particularly reason my score of one. While this movie deserves better than one individually, the only reason I watched this was because it had gotten 7.2 score from 162 other people, the majority of them obviously acquainted to actors or staff of the set. Why? Because nobody in their right mind would come even close to rating this poorly written garbage more than 5, and obviously several people has voted this offensively badly acted movie 10. So. To bring some peace of mind to myself, I give this movie the rating of 1. I would had given 3, or 4 max, but I want to do other people a favor and help them avoid this ****.

Yes, that's right. NOTHING in this movie makes ANY sense at all. Oh no, not only the plot, which could had been decent - too bad this movie can be compared to someone having a recipe for chocolate milk and somehow manage to produce a pile of dung and broken glass (don't ask me how) - but the greatest annoyance by FAR is that there is NO explanation for the extreme irrational behaviour of every single human being in this movie. Fair enough, they get blinded. But I think the director missed the fact that there exist blind people in real life as well, and none of them are suddenly having manic seizures, loss of every other bodily function, death of logic, and a sudden desire for chaos, eventually leading to death apparently.

Don't get me started on the antagonists. Believe me, they're only put in this movie because someone read a brief explanation of what it is on Wikipedia. Their behaviour (as well) is so painfully incoherent with the events transcending in this movie, that I feel sick. I regret to my fullest watching the whole thing, and will now look for a Sci-Fi movie about regaining lost and wasted time. I was hoping for the movie to get better, like I did with 2012 Doomsday (the Christian movie, not the blockbuster), and I feel like a moron for being so naive thinking it couldn't be THIS bad. The greatest annoyance of all is that this movie has a **** 7.2 rating, and I hope the crack smokers and fanatic cast relatives are done voting now.

If I'm to pull anything positive from these horrendous 2 hours at all, it's that I can now tell people I've seen something classified as a "movie", that ends in "-Next time: (...)" Yes that's right. There's a sequel, and it was already planned in the making of the first one. Would be fun to see Braveheart cut in the middle of the movie, saying "Next time, on Braveheart 2:". Oh who am I kidding, that movie was actually good.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
6/10
Appalling script
beresfordjd5 January 2010
We all know the premise and it has been tampered with to some degree to form some kind of ecological morality tale. So far not too bad. However the script is really badly put together giving the cast little to work with. Eddie Izzard as a villain acquits himself as well as he is able but Dougray Scott and Joely Richardson have absolutely nothing to work with and to be honest it makes them look like amateur actors. The special effects are acceptable and one does want to know what happens next so I guess I will take a look at the second part of this two parter. It seems to me that the whole production would have been better constructed as a longer multi-episode series. 6 out of 10 for effort.Could do better. I think I preferred the earlier Howard Keel version which was much cheesier but much more enjoyable.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews