IMDb > The 7 Adventures of Sinbad (2010) (V) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The 7 Adventures of Sinbad
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
The 7 Adventures of Sinbad (V) More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 27 reviews in total 

35 out of 51 people found the following review useful:

Painful

1/10
Author: (topz-1) from Germany
23 May 2010

Seriously, people: If you don't have the money, don't produce movies that rely almost entirely on special effects.

I will not even comment on the quality of... well... everything. But let me just say this: If there were only $500k to spend (as one of the other comments mentioned), there ought to have been at least 500 Bucks to spend on a halfway decent script written by some English minor from undergrad school.

Cheap trash actually makes me smile every once in a while, but this here was just a pain. Really.

(Why can't I give 0 points for GODawful?)

Was the above review useful to you?

38 out of 58 people found the following review useful:

Surprisingly Good

7/10
Author: joemorph from United States
17 May 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

SYNOPSIS: In this modern day retelling of the Sinbad myth, Adrian Sinbad is a billionaire oil shipping magnate, the headstrong descendant of a long line of great mariners. When his flagship oil tanker is hijacked by Somalian pirates, Sinbad rushes to the rescue.

But the tanker is pulled underwater by a giant squid, and sinks into a deep sea crater where a supernatural being of terrible power resides. Meanwhile Sinbad's helicopter is struck by lightning in a storm, and crashes into the sea.

Sinbad comes to on a strange tropical island, and is immediately attacked by a monstrous crab three times his size. Narrowly escaping, Sinbad bands together with a ragged group of survivors: the helicopter pilot, his fetching science officer, the bitter tanker captain and the Somalian pirate leader (these last two, mortal enemies).

But when he meets Loa, a beautiful jungle warrior, she shows him cave paintings which foretell the end of mankind. Sinbad must complete seven ordeals, or the world will be destroyed by Elmec Ishu, the supernatural being enraged by the sunken tanker. (Though the tanker hasn't yet spilled its full 130 million gallons of oil into the sea).

A sudden earthquake strikes - and Sinbad and the group are plunged into the ocean, only to discover that the island is actually the back of a giant whale (as per the original mythology). But they're not in the water long before pterodactyls swoop down and carry them away to feed to their babies.

They next encounter a cyclops, seductive sirens, and a bloodthirsty cult led by Loa's insane father (a la Apocalypse Now, in one of the best sequences of the movie). The group dies off one by one, while romance blossoms between Sinbad and Loa. Meanwhile, back on the mainland, the world is shaken by earthquakes and tsunamis; Emlec Ishu is increasingly angry about the tanker parked in its living room.

Sinbad descends into a volcano in search of otherworldly crystals which hold the key to escaping the island. Nearly killed by a towering lava demon, he and Loa manage to flee with the crystals - which release superheated gas when water touches them - and finally get off the island, by means of an old hot air balloon.

Returning to civilization, Sinbad's final ordeal is to somehow raise the tanker and thus avert the coming apocalypse. Setting out on a suicide mission, Sinbad and Loa pilot a small submarine four miles underwater to the tanker. But en route, the first of the tanker's bulkheads finally ruptures - spilling 450,000 gallons of oil - and causing Elmec Ishu to unleash his full wrath on humanity, in the form of armies of strange waterspouts which destroy everything in their path.

Meanwhile, the sub is chased down and captured by the giant squid. But using the sub's external nozzle, Sinbad vacuums up several oil bubbles in the water outside, thus convincing the intelligent squid to release them. Sinbad and Loa reach the tanker, and start to drill into the seabed below it, where a seam of the otherworldly crystals is buried. As the waterspouts make landfall, and with the sub's power and air reserves nearing zero, the drill punches through and floods the crystals with sea water. Gas geysers erupt from the sea-floor, filling the tanker with air, causing it to rise to the surface. The world is saved, but Sinbad and Loa are dying, out of air four miles underwater. Until Elmec Ishu appears, and summons the giant squid back, to carry the sub to the surface.

REVIEW:

I thought this movie had a lot going for it. There's moments of ingenuity, and real wit - Sinbad's reaction to the crab battle is kind of priceless.

Biggest criticism: visual effects. As some of the other posters have mentioned they are not that good. The cyclops looks weird and roided out, and the squid only has six tentacles?!? Also not enough was made of the lava demon; it's a potentially cool creature but I wanted a lot more out of the scene.

But let's put this in context. The budget for the movie is listed at $500k. Are you kidding?!?! What the filmmakers did for that amount is astonishing; there are probably hundreds of visual effects shots, which cost tons of money, so how did they do it?!

Also I know for a fact that Asylum movies are shot on a very short schedule of around 2 weeks. So to even compare a movie shot in 2 weeks for $500k, with today's $100 million blockbusters is ridiculous. The scope and sweep of this film, the production value they got for that tiny budget, is actually quite amazing. The cinematography is beautiful, the locations are exotic, the action is non-stop.

Performances are strong too. Muldoon's Sinbad has real heart and a dash of Tony Stark, and never loses touch with the humor. Bo Svenson nails it as the scheming CEO. But the biggest pleasure is Sarah Desage, who is not only smoking hot, but gives a nuanced performance as Loa. Look at the scenes between Loa and her father - it's emotionally rich work. She is someone to watch.

Script and direction are solid. While this isn't what you would call a character driven piece, the two writers/directors Hayflick and Silver show a command of the dramatic and visual storytelling. The camera is fluid, editing is solid. And there are some real zingers in the dialogue. The movie definitely has a brain.

So rather than hate on the filmmakers for making a movie that no, does not stack up to Avatar, I give them kudos for making an inspired, tiny budget action/adventure movie with a great spirit. It's supposed to be fun, and it is.

One of the best Asylum releases to date, if not the best.

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 35 people found the following review useful:

Worst movie

1/10
Author: jricho50 from Australia
28 June 2010

I really feel sorry for anyone who paid any money to see this poor excuse for a movie. The effects are outrageously cheap and nasty and unfortunately the acting is worse! Somebody spent money on making this move. It couldn't have been a lot but certainly some money and they were robbed blind. So are the people who are duped into seeing it. You could not even make a bad movie like this if you tried hard to. If you have not seen this movie yet, and you have the good sense to read reviews such as this....then still go and see it or watch it on DVD then you deserve everything you get. Which by the way, is nothing. Don't waste your time or your money.

Was the above review useful to you?

23 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

May I have some wine with this cheese?

3/10
Author: birdy123
15 May 2010

When I first saw the title of this movie and the poster, I thought it would be a newer take on Ray Harryhausen. Boy, was *I* wrong. Set in contemporary times (read 2010), this attempted "update" falls flat in many categories. It's incredibly disjointed - you will find yourself asking "Huh? How, when or why did THAT happen?" It doesn't maintain any of the flavor of the original. There are monsters as depicted in the poster, but this film doesn't explain, dwell on, or expand on them in any manner. From the opening shots of Somali pirates (remember, this is in the year 2010 that we are talking about) you will see this Sinbad is in name only.

Still, it isn't all bad. The female lead has an incredibly ripped body which is eye catching. The hokey special effects are reminiscent of the Sci Fi Channel from about ten years ago and are fun to watch. There are a couple of really vivid moments when the film comes alive. It's when the story strays from the monsters that it falls apart.

I wouldn't pan this movie completely, it's not totally worthless. Asylum has done a better job here than on previous efforts, but they seem stuck in the "Gotta get it into 90 minutes" mold. Just think, they could have completed a fairly good movie with a bit more time in the viewing and having done away with the dumb subplots.

Maybe.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

Not even bad enough to be 'wow that was bad'

1/10
Author: Robert Agar-Hutton from United Kingdom
21 September 2010

I have seen good movies, bad movies, bad movies that become cult movies and then sadly a few like this where if I had the sense of a dead cat I would have stopped watching.

The only good thing was that the design of one of the monsters (bird type things) was quite good - everything else was BAD BAD BAD ...

No plot - well at least nothing that made sense. Characters - were as wooden and predictable as it would be possible to imagine. Special effects - on the whole plain bad. Acting - there were real tears from one of the actors - I think it was because they realised that once this turkey was released they would never work again.

I can't go on even remembering this movie (which I only finished watching ten minutes ago) as it's causing irreparable brain damage.

WATCH ANYTHING ELSE!!!

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

Worst Graphics of all time

1/10
Author: M_o_u_s_a from Egypt
17 September 2010

I would never recommend this movie to anyone who watches graphics movies, or plays computer games.

It's just a mess ...

The movie is supposed to be about Sinbad ... and it's really a "Sin" and "Bad" .. And even "bad" cannot describe it.

Through the longest 90 minutes I've ever had, I was sick of the acting, the storyline, the dialog, the graphics, the direction ... Everything about it sucks.

Just a pure waste of time.

Go better watch 5 minutes of tom & jerry ... At least, it may make laugh!

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

It's a sin how bad this film is.

3/10
Author: Ecto Loki from London, England
20 June 2010

First of all, I'd like to say that I enjoy the particular genre of films that the Sinbad movies generally fall into the category of. This film, however is not one of them. If you go into this expecting to see your classic Sinbad action then I'm afraid you'll be disappointed.

It's not necessarily a bad decision to attempt to convert the themes of Sinbad onto a present day setting, but it wasn't pulled off well here and I, for one, would have preferred to have seen a new rendition set in the traditional era, or at least sometime in the not-too-recent past. There are no seven adventures to be seen here anyway, that's for sure.

The main character is a descendant of Sinbad apparently - his name is John Sinbad or some such rubbish. Apart from that, this bears no real relation to any of it's name-sakes except for one scene involving a tribe of alluring female demons who attempt to enslave Sinbad and his crew, via hypnosis, which was taken from an earlier and better Sinbad movie. This made me wonder if this is some kind of remake but I soon realised that it is not. There were a few computer generated monsters to 'behold' - or try to at least - among them, a computer generated cyclops and giant octopus, both of which failed to evoke any of the the glory and wonder of the more organic effects of older films of the kind. Ray Harryhausen, for example, is still the king after all this time.

Overall, pathetic storyline, boring progression of plot, Underwhelming acting and uninspiring character performances, cheesy one-liners which don't work, sad visual effects and void of any real tension or ability to provoke any kind of emotional response at all. From me, at least.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

What's this got to do with Sinbad?

1/10
Author: torrentstorm from United States
16 May 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Modern day parodies seem to be in demand these days. Nothing wrong with that, provided the screenwriters can come up with an imaginative and original story.

However, there was nothing funny in this movie, or imaginative, or exciting. The different ways the producers tried to mimic Sinbad's adventures taken from the time honored fairy tale, or past movies, proved a mockery and charade in this one. I watched the preview clip on Youtube and read about Asylum, the company producing and marketing the film. I confess I was hopeful and thought better. After about 45 minutes of watching, I thought to myself: what a shame and a waste - in this day and age, you people must think we movie watchers are morons with mentalities of 2-year olds.

Whose idea was it that Sinbad (in name only) is a company owner of oil tankers, one of which is hijacked by what seems some Black (Somalian?) pirates, and while on a rescue mission, said tanker is attacked and sunk by what looked like a gigantic crab? Then for no reason here our chopper crashes into the sea and we are marooned on an uncharted island with a handful of survivors from the ship, including (guess?) the pirate leader who has now become our ally? At the risk of writing a spoiler, I won't say more, but you can pretty much imagine the jamboree of hastily written and badly scripted plot lines, followed by some of the worst acting I've ever seen on the big screen. The cgi graphics were terrible. They must have gone on a shoestring budget to make these. Oh, and how do you fight off and kill a 20-foot cyclops intent on eating you with just a rope, which you somehow mysteriously seemed to come up with in your shipwrecked state? I'll leave you to guess that one without watching the movie. (What?)

I'd watch this one if there was nothing else to do with my time, and I'm prepared to play brain-dead. Definitely one of the stupidest movies I've seen throughout the years.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Worst Movie Ever

1/10
Author: Mike Boyd from New York, USA
8 July 2012

I really think the voting system ought to allow negative scores, just to counter some of the positives given by people clearly connected with the film - either on the production side or acting side.

I guess I'm referring to Mr. "joemorph from United States" who wrote a ridiculously long and praising review that was clearly aimed at him getting some of his investment back.

Hard luck Mr. joemorph from USA. This film is appalling.

Even worse than the film was the acting of the lead actor. Apart from the ridiculous "crab" scene where he had a little tantrum, his face rarely broke into a smile, a frown, or gave any other indication of what he was feeling other than a look that said "I don't believe I'm in such a pathetic film".

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

The 7 Misadventures of Sinbad...

1/10
Author: TheLittleSongbird from United Kingdom
14 July 2011

To be honest I wasn't expecting much when I saw The 7 Adventures of Sinbad, but this was worse than expected. Granted it is not the worst SyFy has done, there is one decent special effect and that is the giant bird and Sarah Dessage breathes some life into her role. The rest though is atrocious. The rest of the graphics are best forgotten, a vast majority of them are crude particularly the cyclops and the cheap settings, costumes and photography don't fare much better. The story is also disjointed and predictable, the dialogue laughable and unintentionally funny, the pace sluggish, the soundtrack out of place and intrusive, the direction non-existent and the acting particularly the lead appalling. Overall, a big mess. 1/10 Bethany Cox

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot synopsis Ratings External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history