IMDb > Alex Cross (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Alex Cross
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 guide
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
Alex Cross More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 151 reviews in total 

143 out of 233 people found the following review useful:

A Real Stinker of a movie

2/10
Author: ivisuals from Chicago, Il
17 October 2012

Tyler Perry takes on the Alex Cross character and fails miserably. Though he's hardly the only one at fault here.

The trouble starts with the screenplay, which is nothing short of dismal. All of the main characters are one dimensional with no development whatsoever. Patterson's novel is condensed down to a formulaic and predictable plot, where you can see trouble coming a mile away. There is no development of the villain, why he does what he does and why a professional assassin would make the choices that he makes. Time makes absolutely no sense in this movie. Events must have occurred over a period of time in the book that have been condensed down to minutes in this movie. I haven't seen a movie in a while we're I've said to myself "You've got to be kidding me" multiple times because the scene was so implausible. Rob Cohen's direction is nothing short of terrible. Action scenes that are so blurry you can't tell who is beating up who. When there's not action scenes, the rest of the film is a talking heads 70's made for TV movie. The acting flat out stinks (with the exceptions of all to brief appearances of Cicely Tyson and Giancarlo Esposito). No chemistry with Perry and Ed Burns and no chemistry between the villain (Matthew Fox) and Perry. The movie score mostly sounds like a movie of the week from the 70's. The only redeeming value I find in this film is the location. There were some nice uses of Detroit buildings in the film. Other than that, don't waste your time.

Was the above review useful to you?

139 out of 229 people found the following review useful:

Move over, "Plan 9 From Outer Space"

1/10
Author: jbaxter-204-326379 from United States
18 October 2012

This is hands down one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life, and I've seen a boatload of lousy movies. Both the dialog and plotting are hackneyed beyond description--not one original idea or twist, and not a single exchange that feels genuine. It's the kind of childishly obvious genre rehash in which you can tell who's going to be killed just by the relative one-dimensionality of their characters. Matthew Fox, who clearly dropped his body fat to zero for this film, will one day look back and regret all those months he went without a decent meal, because a) the movie is terrible, and b) his portrayal of a psychotic killer is ultimately a study in cliché. Ed Burns furrows his brow convincingly enough, but his easygoing charm has nowhere to go here. Likewise John McGinley, whose neurotic fatalism seems plucked from an entirely different and more lighthearted police procedural being filmed down the street. And then there's Tyler Perry, who expends so much energy in a futile attempt to project faux masculinity and criminological gravitas that he apparently has nothing left for tangential stuff like changing his facial expression once in a while. Perry can thank his lucky stars he's already a Hollywood fixture, because If this were his first movie, he'd never get another offer--truly, he's that bad.

Was the above review useful to you?

89 out of 130 people found the following review useful:

Alex Cross fails miserably

2/10
Author: Josh Cummings from United States
26 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Finally, a Tyler Perry movie that is actually funny. For those who don't know, however, Alex Cross is not meant to be a comedy. It's supposed to be a serious action/drama. With all of its cheesy moments, corny dialog, and doubtful plot points, Alex Cross misses entirely.

Alex Cross stars Tyler Perry as an expert detective who is about to embark on his most difficult case. The case is to track down a deranged psycho-killer played by Matthew Fox. Matthew Fox enjoys torturing people to death and playing mind games with the detectives that are on his trail. I would like to say more about the plot of this movie but sadly, there isn't much more to tell. It's that basic. You'd think a plot where a genius detective is facing an intelligent serial killer would have more complexity, but it doesn't.

There are a lot of problems with Alex Cross. For starters, the script may as well have been written by a thirteen year old. This is probably one of the worst scripts of the year. In order to buy this script, you just have to believe everything the characters say with no explanation. The character Alex Cross never proves that he's smart. The audience is just supposed to believe he's smart because other characters say so. Cross just throws out theories without backing them up and of course, they turn out to be right. For example, when Cross and his partner (Edward Burns) walk into the first handful of murders committed by Matthew Fox, Burns guesses that this must have been the work of multiple guys. Cross replies, "Nope. This was one guy." Does he bother to explain why he feels that way? Nope. In another example, Fox is on a train and Burns comes up to Cross and says, "You need to get in his head and think like him. If you were him, where would you be?" Cross thinks and then exclaims, "He's on a train!" Care to enlighten us on how you arrived to that realization Dr. Cross? The problem is, the writers clearly aren't smart enough to come up with ways for their characters to solve the case. Because this movie is so poorly written, it is unbelievably predictable. I'm no Alex Cross, but I knew exactly what was going to happen throughout the film. Literally, every scene can be predetermined by a first time viewer.

Not only is there terrible writing, but there was also terrible directing. Matthew Fox and Edward Burns are both very good actors, but they can't do anything under poor direction. Everyone in this movie is horrendous except for one person and that's Tyler Perry. I found this very surprising because I can't stand Tyler Perry's work and I thought he would be the worst thing about the movie. However, he is the only thing that can be considered somewhat decent in the movie. You can tell Perry wants to branch out but unfortunately, he can only do the best with what he was given. There were so many bad decisions made by the director. For emotion, he tries to add some family value by adding in an old sassy black woman as character. Thankfully, this character was not played by Tyler Perry. Another terrible idea was to have the camera constantly shaking because that's an action movie cliché that everyone loves (sarcasm). The camera was shaking during the most still moments. For example, the camera was shaking ferociously when, I kid you not, a woman was typing on her computer. Perhaps one of the worst decisions from the director though, was to throw in a twist at the end. Not only did he add a twist, but he made it glaringly obvious.

The only reason anyone might find Alex Cross appealing is because they get a kick out of watching bad movies or they really might enjoy seeing Tyler Perry try and do something different. Other than that, there is absolutely no reason to see this film. The acting is horrific, the dialog is idiotic, the action sequences are poorly choreographed, and the plot is 100% predictable. This movie is so bad, that you will find yourself laughing at moments when you're supposed to be either gasping or crying. D

Was the above review useful to you?

74 out of 113 people found the following review useful:

A Cross to Be Placed on A Grave

4/10
Author: james1844 from United States
19 October 2012

When you make an action crime film please remember to connect all the dots so that we, the audience, can achieve some sense of the story line. The trailer was a slice of many of the best scenes but, unfortunately the real film falls so sadly short of good storyline due to poor dialog and some jerky acting that the viewer struggles to make sense of the various actors.

If this film had been prescreened (proof read) any average movie-goer would have pointed out just how poorly made it was. I sensed that Tyler Perry gave a over acted performance. I really wanted to like this film when it first came out but, it just was so boring and unimaginative I began to realize that it was due to faulty construction of scenes and character's dialog. This was mostly due to the director.

Was the above review useful to you?

69 out of 119 people found the following review useful:

Did I Just Hear a Line from Madea?? Sounded like it.

2/10
Author: bb-291 from United States
21 October 2012

This movie was worse than I expected. A lot worse. The blame goes all around. The script is extraordinarily weak. Too much pulling on the heart strings, not enough compelling action. The acting was completely flat, no chemistry. I swear I could hear Tyler channeling Madea at least twice. Feels like Perry and Burns dialed it in. Direction was apathetic. Hand-held camera was noticeably bad, randomly jerking and swinging wildly usually during action scenes. It felt like some weak ass 1980's/90's TV cop show. I somehow felt bad for everyone involved: Perry wanting to be an action hero; Fox trying to make a name for himself by losing 40lbs, etc. Then I thought of a line from Entourage: "It ain't easy making a movie." I heard a sequel is already being planned. Can't be any worse but don't expect me to pay to see it.

Was the above review useful to you?

35 out of 55 people found the following review useful:

apples and oranges

2/10
Author: nillobit from United States
20 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Alex Cross - fictional sleuth known for taking readers on excursions into killer's minds. Tyler Perry - personality known for making face on camera.

This film misses the whole point of the Cross stories. The public doesn't read or see Cross stories to watch Cross emote. We want to see him solve the puzzle.

Adolescent execution, the film tells us instead of showing us. We know Alex Cross is smart because all the other characters say so. We know the first female victim was brutalized because everyone says so.

I don't know for sure but this production seems to have Perry 's fingerprints on it.

Some of the action was choreographed well. In particular the rail car footage was well done. Moreover, the child who played his daughter stood out. Fox's performance was top rate.

Was the above review useful to you?

29 out of 44 people found the following review useful:

Mediocre entertainment.

4/10
Author: Troy_Campbell from Sydney, Australia
9 November 2012

Adapted from James Patterson's pulp novel 'Cross', this cat-and-mouse action flick more closely resembles an extended episode of 'NCIS' or 'Law and Order' than it does a fully-fledged feature film. The episodic narrative and say-everything-I'm-thinking dialogue destroys all subtlety and intelligence this may have had, whilst Rob Cohen's murky, in-your-face direction is over-zealous, distracting and at times makes it difficult to decipher what's actually going on in the action sequences. Tyler Perry is hugely popular in the States thanks to his dumbed-down, cross-dressing comedy output, but he goes full serious here to mixed results. Perry's not a complete dud yet is easily out-acted by Matthew Fox, whose psychotic serial killer – replete with twitches, tics and crazy eyes – is fun to watch and elevates this from total boredom to mediocre entertainment.

Was the above review useful to you?

32 out of 50 people found the following review useful:

complete waste of time and money

1/10
Author: dionneschedler from United States
26 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I have read all of the Alex Cross books. I have seen the other Alex Cross movies....this "sham" is Alex Cross in title only. It's like Alex Cross in bizarro land.....his wife Maria is still alive (for a while), yet his daughter Janie appears to be around 9 or 10 years old, Damon is the younger child, they live in Detroit, his best friend and partner is a white guy; no Sampson???? The plot, the characters, everything is so far off from what it could/should be, I have to wonder if they used the title just to sucker in the many James Patterson fans. I was very sceptical of Tyler Perry playing Cross. I have to say that overall, he did a somewhat decent job. Fox was a great creepy guy. I think had they been given a better story, like maybe..um, Alex Cross to work with, and had the directing not been so cheesy,it might have been a decent movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Do not see this movie unless you want to have fun picking out everything that is wrong with it.

1/10
Author: hurricanerobertson from Winnipeg
8 February 2013

This movie is laughably bad. The only saving grace in its favour is the ability to add it to the pantheon of movies that are so bad they are good. Only, it takes itself far too seriously, and think it's far too good, to be worthy of an addition to that list. The movie is nonsense in every way. Without spoiling anything, I will sum up how ludicrous the movie is with one comment (and this kind of stuff runs throughout the movie): we are supposed to believe that a pudgy Tyler Perry can beat a super cut, super bad-ass Matthew Fox in a fight, when at the beginning of the movie Matthew Fox destroys a seasoned MMA fighter. As Dr. Evil would say: Rrrrrrright. Tyler Perry, by the way, is a horrendously bad actor. I cannot believe they were talking sequel before this movie came out. I also can't believe that the author of the books about Alex Cross was actually touting this movie. If I had written this character, and this trash came out, I could not distance myself more from this movie. I'd be like Alan Moore, and not allow my name anywhere on this crap.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Worth a watch

5/10
Author: chris-ells88
5 December 2012

Although I have only given this movie a 5/10 I still don't regret watching it. There are simply a lot of better films out there. It was one I managed to get cheaper tickets for so perhaps that's why I am not as critical as others. I found it entertaining and I was fully engrossed in the story. I felt some of the acting was a bit ropey but then again I thought Matthew Fox was superb. He really did portray a rather scary character, very different from that of Jack in Lost. There was some rather cheesy and altogether cheap parts to the movie, but overall it was a good watch. I can understand why some may have given this film a very low rating, but for me I saw a lot of positives.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Crossed at Cross

2/10
Author: buttkick from Odense, Denmark
21 July 2013

This is perhaps not the worst film i've seen, and may deserve a 3 or maybe even a 4 if I was in a happy way. The things that pulls this down i expectations parred with the title of the film. I do not recognise Alex Crossin this movie, and whats with the sidekick. Come on if you know Alex Cross, you also know his childhood friend and that sure ain't Tommy. The whole setup was like Cross going Dirty Harry. Its like the new Sherlock movies where the great mind, becomes a chaos of violence. I don't know what James Patterson thinks of this movie, but if its positive it must be money talking. Liked Picasso thou, Matthew Fox really found his crazy eyes in this one.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 33 people found the following review useful:

Don't Ever Cross Alex Cross? More like don't ever watch Alex Cross.

1/10
Author: Zachary Tang
17 December 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This was possibly the worst movie I've watched in 2012. It made me want to walk out of the cinema before half the show was over, and that's saying a LOT as I've sat through movies like 'The hotty and the notti' and 'epic movie'. I pretty much went into the cinema with zero expectations, having seen the awful ratings it received and at the same time being a fan of the Alex Cross series. Still, i was left squirming in my seat and muttering what the f-? half the time. The script was terrible, even a children's picture book would be more fascinating and less predictable. A complete waste of decent actors with totally one-dimensional roles such as Tyler Perry himself and supporting actors like Jean Reno, who did such an amazing job as Leon the Professional, and eventually ended up being remembered only as the rich man with the ridiculous two-digit-karat diamond ring with less than 10 minutes screen time YET being revealed as the mastermind behind the murders.

In the James Patterson series, Alex Cross isn't just revealed as a brilliant psychoanalyst solely because his fellow colleagues and family members said so. There is solid evidence provided to gradually convince readers into believing and respecting this man who fiercely loves his nana and holds his own as a black man in a chaotic society like Detroit. However, the audience in the movie is expected to believe that this man can make amazing deductions just because he deduced that his wife drank a frappé from a foam stain on her blazer jacket? That is pretty much the only deductive abilities he portrayed, aside from the wildly random 'HE'S ON THE TRAIN' comment which was just implausible. The other characters are just as bad; Alex Cross' partner Edward Burns was always conveniently missing from action scenes in an absurd attempt to allow Perry and Fox to have a showdown between themselves. Getting stuck by an iron wall and injured in a car accident which could have been avoided ENTIRELY (wait, how the hell did it happen again?!), his character might as well have been omitted entirely from the movie. The side plots are even worst, an unnecessary sex scene between Burns and his girlfriend whom he tries to hide from Cross who then finds out 3 minutes later (wow, how clever!), the boxing ring scene to display Fox's violent nature which was so badly filmed anyway, the three loser jesters who got shot on the train.. I could go on but it's not even worth recalling the scenes which did nothing to develop the plot or the characters.

Additionally, the villain is portrayed as someone so much more powerful and skilled than the protagonist that the audience cannot help but think Cross is weak and unable to protect his loved ones. Personally, I felt that Perry's Cross had no redeemable qualities about him, i couldn't care less if he got killed in the end, and that is the major failure in the movie. If a director doesn't even have the ability to create a likable/competent MAIN character in an action movie where a single chasing/fighting scene can set the stage for it, that makes his film a fluke. I would never catch the sequel even if i had to be dragged into the cinema and i truly hope that the upcoming Jack Reacher, which is also based on a famous thriller writer's character, will be less disappointing than this lousy excuse of an action movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

28 out of 48 people found the following review useful:

Good, but still way below Morgan Freeman standards.

5/10
Author: 2fresh 2clean from Baton Rouge, La
3 November 2012

I just got through seeing Alex Cross. It was a good enough movie to pay the $5.75 matinée price. The movie had decent action scenes, which is totally out of the norm for Tyler Perry, that kept me entertained. The acting in this movie was pretty good and Tyler Perry himself did do a pretty good job with his part especially being that this is his first action roll. But with all that being said I still can see why Morgan Freeman turned the roll down. This movie was kind of predictable. I was telling my wife what was going to happen in the movie and I hadn't seen this movie before hand, done any research on this movie nor have I heard anyone talking about pieces of the movie. Now I've seen some of Tyler Perry's movies and those ones I have seen is what keeps me from watching his other movies, but this one, although he didn't make this one, is better than anything else he played in. Except Why Did I Get Married. So If you're not doing anything on a Sunday afternoon and want to see a little action and a little suspense it's O.K. to go and see this one.

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 39 people found the following review useful:

Cross is a gross injustice to Patterson's books

3/10
Author: dushyant chaturvedi from India
14 December 2012

Alex Cross is a "doctor detective". He is a psychologist who helps the police draw up the profiles of serial killers. He, along with his motley crew, is on the trail of a psychopath who "loves inflicting pain on people"(is there any other variety of psychos). However, the battle is about to turn very personal. Cross is a fictional detective who is the hero of eponymous series written by James Patterson. The books are generally very fast reads with little or no substance. However, these books are thrillers whereas the movie attempts to be an action movie. It combines elements from different books to make this a personal fight for Alex. Needless to say, it fails. The acting is as bad as I have seen this millennium. Tyler Perry steps in the big shoes of Morgan Freeman, who played Cross in the previous two installments of the series, Kiss the girls and Along Came a Spider and does a terrible job. He cannot emote and is clumsy in the action scenes. When he should be all fire and brimstone, he is pretty lame . Edward Burns used to star in top notch movies like Saving Private Ryan a decade back. He is less than a shadow of his old self. He sucks big time as this "beautiful cop". Jean Reno must be in a cash crunch or the director of this stinking pile must be having his objectionable video with him. I can think of no other reason for him starring in this. The script is terrible. The background music and the characters are also so clichéd that they don't stay with you for even 2 minutes after the movie has ended. The only saving grace is Matthew Fox who plays the villain. He is menacing and terrifying and looks to be the only one who doesn't sleepwalk through his role. Recommended for people who love torturing themselves.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

OK Movie.

7/10
Author: candoit333 from Canada
29 October 2012

If you think you might like this movie from the trailer...go see it and ignore the bad reviews...its a good movie. If this is the worse movie you seen - you haven't seen very much. As for being predictable - easy to say that- and there aren't many movies out there thats not a bit predictable. The acting was OK, yes it really was - some of the lines they had to deliver weren't the best, but that isn't the actors fault. The thing that keep this from being really good was the directing, camera work, and editing. It really reduced the quality of the movie. Often you will see a shaking camera during a action scene - we all seen that before - but this movie takes it too a whole new level of shaking camera...who ever decided to do this and edit it so badly -needs to take the blame here on this movie for it not being what it could have. But overall for me - last night after the football game, it was an enjoyable evening at the movies.

Was the above review useful to you?

48 out of 92 people found the following review useful:

Entertaining...Give this movie a fair shot...

9/10
Author: Nicole Burnett from Orlando, FL
12 November 2012

I think this movie is getting a bad rap. I found the movie entertaining and I think Tyler Perry did a great job. Is it the best movie in the world? no. But I think that people are being extremely critical. I think it is being rated unfairly and it deserves a chance. I liked the story. Quite honesty, most movies are predictable. It is rare to find a movie that is creative, good acting, amazing story line etc. If the way this movie is being rated was the same judgment scale of some of these other box office films, the 4.8 would be much higher. I think people are judging Tyler Perry by his other film and plays versus by the movie that is actually being reviewed. I thought he did a great job in the movie and I believe it is worth seeing. I enjoyed it and I think a lot of viewers did too. Unfortunately, everyone acts like they are a movie critic and only wants the same people doing movies. It is unfortunate that there are only a handful of African American actors used as the main character of a film in Hollywood with a role other than a Maid, Thief or some down trodden person. To see just a regular role with a person of color was nice and enjoyable. And all things being equal, he did a fine job! This movie was very good and the ratings have been played down and are unfair. Is it an instant classic? no, but it is a solid film that is worth seeing. Give it a chance... Many other films that IMDb viewers have rated at 7+ have been way more predictable than this one, less of a plot and the same people doing the same thing as they did in part 1, 2, 3 on so on. Give this film a fair shot! At least this was an original script...

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A darker Cross let down by its opening and closing action sequences

7/10
Author: jtindahouse from Christchurch, New Zealand
16 January 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'm a big fan of the 'Alex Cross' series of books. I feel they've weakened a little in recent years, but was still glad to hear they were rebooting the movie series. The most exciting part of the books for me was always the villains, The Wolf, The Mastermind, Casanova etc. and how Cross would be effected by them and ultimately track them down and confront them. This was key to the quality of each individual book to me and I felt the first two movies 'Kiss the Girls' and 'Along Came a Spider' were a real let down in this regard.

So I was glad to my find myself captivated by Matthew Fox's portrayal of Picasso. His opening scene demands your attention and his screen presence never lets up from that point on. The other thing I was always going to be interested in was how Tyler Perry went at portraying Cross. For me Morgan Freeman has always just been Cross. When I'm reading one of the books I can't help but picture him. He brought a calm serenity to the role that helped define Cross for me and I felt Perry had this as well, at least for the first half of the film.

The film really shows us two sides of Cross. At around the halfway stage, Cross's pregnant wife is shot dead by Picasso himself. This enrages Cross and sends him rogue along with his partner Thomas Kane who also has had his lover murdered by Picasso. From this point on we see a darker Cross, willing to use any means necessary to enact revenge upon his wife's killer. Perry's performance gets even better from this stage on. He nails the intensity needed to bring the audience in on the pain and drive he's feeling to achieve his ultimate goal.

The problems lie in the writing for the most part. The opening and closing action sequences just don't have any imagination. The car crash that sets up the closing one is also bizarre. Are we just supposed to believe this was a complete coincidence? Or has Cross displayed superhuman timing to achieve this, risking his friends life in the process? Incredibly lazy writing shown at that point.

It's far from perfect. The actress cast as Nana Mama was done so poorly. She had none of the charm that the character in the books has. She just came across as mean. The twist right at the end is one of the most foreseeable I can ever remember. One scene, from a big name actor, that added absolutely nothing to the story at the time = has to be a twist that he was in on it. More lazy writing.

But for all its faults its a very watchable movie. Perry and Fox are excellent and the story is entertaining, if flawed. I certainly have no objections to more additions being added to the series.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Just a Very Good Cop vs. Serial Assassin Thriller

8/10
Author: doug_park2001 from United States
20 June 2013

ALEX CROSS has all the ingredients we expect in a film of its sort: an engaging plot-line, a criminal we love to hate and want to see "get his," harrowing chase scenes, a couple of real surprises, etc. It also has several of the corninesses and unlikelihoods that are usually found in a film of this genre, but oh well.

Tyler Perry plays the role of the lead character, a combination psychologist-profiler-homicide detective, very naturally, and the character he plays is better developed than those in many thrillers. Matthew Fox is similarly good in the role of the psychopathic bad guy. Most of the supporting cast play their roles quite believably: There are some truly interesting characters in this film, e.g., Cicely Tyson as "Nana Mama."

Notably, ALEX CROSS succeeds in being rivetingly disturbing without a lot of gore, ultra-violence, or any serious sex/nudity to spice the cake (hence, the PG-13 rating).

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

An entertaining Night In Movie

8/10
Author: Kittycat63 from United Kingdom
23 March 2015

I just came across this on TV, partway through, and found it compelling enough to stop channel surfing and watch it to the end.

I think a lot of people who have reviewed this have jumped on the bandwagon and given it scathing reviews simply because some other people have and, being followers rather than voicing their own genuine opinion, they feel the need to 'tag along' and go along with the negativity.

A lot of people have said it's predictable but, as others have said, in some ways the vast majority of Hollywood movies are (and in my experience, usually the most unpredictable movies tend to come from European countries such as France, Italy and - my home country - England).

Alex Cross is NOT a bad movie and is an awful lot better than much of the usual Hollywood fodder. I thought the actors were all good and worked well together and Matthew Fox was actually more believable, and impressive, in his role than in anything else I've seen him in. I would never have thought he was capable of playing such a ruthless machine of a psychopath but he pulled it off really well and was totally believable.

So, I can definitely recommend this movie and I'd recommend anyone else to give it a go, keep an open mind and ignore most of the negativity about it on here! It's really not bad at all!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Up to the release of the latest installment of the Alex Cross movie franchise, author James Patterson had already produced eighteen books in the series.

Author: coltens14 from United Kingdom
21 April 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

By the time this film was available on DVD in early 2013, two more books - Merry Christmas, Alex Cross & Alex Cross, Run - will have been released, The films have not been nearly as steady, only getting its third cinematic treatment and the first since 2001's Along Came a Spider. Patterson's busily stalked protagonist did fairly well at the box office if not inspiring critics into believing he was worth following for another eighteen adventures. Fans of Patterson's airport fiction might disagree despite whatever objections they had between the films and the varying text. New fans are being sought out for the franchise reboot though and they should be mostly pleased. Considering they are used to ham-handed acting, amateurish fimmaking, cartoonish villains, hypocritical motivations and a touch of old broad sass, they should be right at home watching Tyler Perry take the lead.

As the new era begins, Alex Cross is once again chasing down another psychopath and saving a battered white girl. Along with his select team, childhood friend Tommy Kane and Monica Ashe - Who are secretly hooking up behind the boss' back - they investigate crimes of some unspecified nature in the greater Detroit area. Their special unit is hardly defined by anything other than Alec being such a master of deduction that he can tell his wife had coffee based on the blouse stain big enough to be spotted by a Fisher Price telescope from Pluto. Other than dealing with the occasional crime scene, life is good for "Detective Doctor" Alex Cross who is on the short list for an FBI job in Washington and he has just been told there's another little Cross on the way.

Also on the way is another psycho. This one, played by Matthew Fox, is a professional assassin who calls himself "The Butcher" but is referred to as "Picasso" by Tommy based on him leaving a drawing at at recent upscale massacre. There is a mystery benefactor behind The Butcher's recent spree which includes getting into underground MMA fights, paralyzing women with a special drug, and concocting elaborate break-ins to take out a French financial specialist. When Cross and Co. disrupt the latter, The Butcher takes to being bullet-grazed worse that being punched in the face.

There is a momentary fascination with the film in figuring out precisely what Fox's psychotic villain is really up to. How does buying one's way into a brutal fight connect to a stolen laptop, what's on it and how it leads to international finance? Just who is Jean Reno's one-scene millionaire is not only superfluous suspect available to be funding The Butcher? Do professional mercenaries go off-script so often to take on personal vendettas after getting a little boo-boo from their adversary For ever answer revealed in Alex Cross - and few are really offered - it opens up ten different logical conundrums over just how brilliant the particular cat and mouse really are. Loosely based on Patterson's prequel novel Cross, the screenplay by first-timer Kerry Williamson and Marc Moss - whose only previous credit is the adaptation of Patterson's Along Came a Spider - actually gets less complicated and more boring as things get pieced together. What begins as a ludicrous police procedural becomes an even more ludicrous revenge thriller that asks viewers to believe this morally-principled Sherlock-wannabe is not just ready to turn into The Punisher but also possesses the superskills necessary for an over-weight, out-of-shape, dopey, doughy detective to take on a cage fighter who overreacts to taking a single punch. There has not been a less convincing avenging angel that Tyler Perry's Alex Cross since Thomas Jane portrayed the comic world's Frank Castle by interrogating a suspect with a melting popsicle.

The stakes in Alex Cross are raised even further with the kind of vengeful horror that most professional assassins would admit is against the code. Both of the Taken films pushed the boundaries of the ratings system but did so under a kind of unwritten guide that throat-punching is less graphic than the more macho-violent fare that Sylvester Stallone has done in his Rambo and Expendable films. Alex Cross will never be confused with those, but its violence is shocking for an MPAA-rated "PG-13" mystery thriller. The connection between sexual fetish and murder is pushed during a torture scene. No less that two other crimes are committed towards women with one worthy of a funeral and the other nothing more than a cell phone snapshot. Patterson's specialty of bruising-up the fairer sex received an "R" rating when Kiss the Girls came out. Fifteen years later, viewers are apparently so numb that it can be extrapolated even while being dumbed down for those used to Perry's cartoonish portrayals of man-on-woman crimes.

All such shocking moments of Alex Cross could be all part of some calculated plan for Perry to prove that he is going hard in trying to prove what a serious, demonstrative actor he can be. Most would recommend a stint in acting classes for starters which co-star Matthew Fox is more than happy to teach. First lesson: Act with the eyes. Bug them out as far as possible to prove the depth of the character's villainy. The originally cast Idris Elba as Cross would have had to take the class on keeping a straight face in the middle of this nonsense. Lesson two goes to director Rob Cohen. With no competency as an action director and stars was wooden as Perry and Burns, shake the camera as much as humanly possible to justify urgency. James Cameron could not make a call to OnStar more dramatically riveting. Mainly because he would never create and action sequence around a call to OnStar. Alex Cross is equally silly, boring, offensive and implausible which are also its best qualities if the viewer is in a mocking kind of mood.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Not as bad as other reviewers suggest

6/10
Author: jsaus63304 from United States
17 April 2014

I have long been a fan of the John Patterson series of books about the Alex Cross character and have read almost all of them. I read "Cross" which is the book this movie was based on. Too bad the writers and producers did not read it before making the movie.

First of all, the good about the movie. Tyler Perry fits the Alex Cross character description as given by James Patterson in the books more than Morgan Freeman did in the earlier movies (a resemblance to a 40 year old Mohammad Ali and Freeman sure is not that). There is enough plot to keep you interested and some pretty good stunts and special effects to keep you stimulated.

The bad is that it had little to do with the book. Alex Cross was single throughout the book series because his wife had been killed many years earlier. His partner, John Sampson, is absent and replaced with a different character. Cross is already working for The FBI in the book. The story takes place in Washington DC, not Detroit. I could go on and on, but you get the idea. On top of that, the plot was different as was the ending. I believe that if you want to base a movie on a book, it should at least resemble the book.

The next movie is supposed to be "Double Cross" which brings back the Kyle Craig character. There needs to be at least some background on Craig, his FBI ties, his relationship to Cross and to the Mastermind before this movie can become viable. Absent this, it will just be another movie that has no relationship to the book it is based on.

Bottom line is-if you just enjoy action, suspense, mystery, detective movies, you will enjoy this. If you are a fan of the Alex Cross series and somewhat of a purest, you will be disappointed.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Thrill, suspense, emotion and action.

7/10
Author: Sayasam from France
6 October 2013

This movie is a great one.

I understand some people may not like it as it's not "Hollywood classic style".

It's still very enjoyable to watch though.

Watch it if you like action films with lot of suspense.

It's a very nice story, with ups and downs, an epic manhunt with a psychopath... Wonderful.

It also contain emotion, since some of the main characters are killed.

But the main interest of this movie is the chase.

Very nice movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Action Packed, but just not the Alex Cross thriller of old.

6/10
Author: JohnRayPeterson from Montreal, Canada
20 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The principal character still bears the famous name of James Patterson's 20 novels series (20 as of early 2013) but unlike the previous two movies 'Kiss The Girls' and 'Along Came a Spider', based respectively on the second and first novels (1st movie based on the 2nd novel and 2nd movie on the 1st novel), the actor Morgan Freeman has been replaced by Tyler Perry. Perry has not been pretentious about the switch and had only praise for Freeman; he brings with him some fresh characteristics to the character, which director Rob Cohen may well have wanted to use for a more action based storyline, as opposed to the more suspense and thriller mood the Gary Fleder and Lee Tamahori directed versions are recognized for. This latest movie instalment is based on the novel named 'Cross', the 12th in the series.

Needless to say, the reception by critics and audience alike has not been warm, given the success of the previous two and mostly because of the departure from the thriller base, to the more action based plot. That's not to say that all three did not have both action and suspense elements, because they do, but on screen, the latest instalment tips the balance in the other direction. The books don't, then again there's the development of Cross' character in the ten novels between 'Cross' and 'Kiss The Girls'. Perusing the comments from critics and other users, it would seem that Freeman's depiction of a forensic psychologist was so much more believable than that of Perry's. In the series, there is of course consistencies and circumstances that would have benefited an actor whose age and range would have been better suited than who was picked for all three movies so far. What I mean is that the Cross character in the first two movies, as successful as he was, did not depict the physical traits of the written character of the books nor does now the one depicted by Perry. In any event, it's unlikely producers of the movies have the means or luck to find actors that can, over a long period, sustain the novel series character depiction with consistencies; they adapt, always, and results are whatever those will be. We know already that the 13th novel will be put to screen and that Perry will reprise the role, building no doubt on the previous one. It may very well have better success under those set of circumstances. I believe this should prove to be the case.

I don't rate 'Alex Cross 2012' as highly as I had 'Kiss The Girls', but I found more to like in the latest than have the critics and audience. If you can view and consider 'Alex Cross 2012' on its own merit, and that appears to be difficult for many, you may rate it better than it has been. The critics could not find that objectivity, try as they might. Also influences against Perry, are the roles he played as Big Mama; that had to be a very big hurdle to overcome. I was able to disassociate Perry as Big Mama as did not see those films and have no intentions of ever doing so.

I liked Edward Burns's portrayal of Thomas Kane; he's not done any second banana role performances in all the movies I've seen with him in such roles. He added credibility to this movie and so did Jean Reno, a favorite of mine. I was delighted by the excellent performance of Matthew Fox in the role of bad guy extreme, Picasso.

I believe in time and with the upcoming "Double Cross" sequel, the 2012 film may pick up some popularity and the negatives currently in play will slowly dissipate, allowing the new Cross to find his way in the midst of movie hero worth a view.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Should have been a straight to TV movie

4/10
Author: KineticSeoul from United States
6 March 2013

If this was straight to TV movie or even straight to DVD movie it might have been a alright watch. But for a movie that went straight to theaters, this one is not worth it. Tyler Perry is decent as Alex Cross, but he plays the more softhearted and intelligent Alex Cross that is good with psychoanalysis. And I thought I couldn't take him seriously at all after his Madea movies. Matthew Fox on the other hand is great as this psychotic sadistic killer. Who has a lot of insecurity issues. He sort of reminded me of the villain Zsasz from the Batman series. In fact if there is a Zsasz in the next Batman reboot Mathew Fox should play that character. Unfortunately this character just wasn't developed enough at all. There just wasn't enough substance to the story nor enough good action sequences or thrilling sequences to merit this a watch. It's a rental at best but there are plenty of other better thrillers to rent and watch. Oh and Edward Burns is pretty awful in this and took most of the believability out of this flick.

4/10

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Why did I watch this despite the bad reviews?

1/10
Author: phd_travel from United States
4 June 2013

Hollywood has got to stop making such sickeningly violent movies which have violence for the sake of violence and not for entertainment. If this movie has any use it can be the movie that stopped Hollywood from making such crap since it was a box office flop.

The premise would have been mildly tolerable if they didn't make the crazy killer so violent for no reason. Matthew Fox turned into an unrecognizably gaunt monster "Picasso" for the sake of this nonsense. Tyler Perry better stick to his roles in which he is wearing a wig. Edward Burns is above this.

Don't watch it. It's just disgusting and a waste of time.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Horrible Cameraman

1/10
Author: tillithz
16 February 2013

The action scenes are absolutely horrible. The cameraman must have had Parkinson's Disease. The shaking makes the movie unwatchable. The story line is old, and has been done repeatedly. But wait, this time its with a black man, that makes all the difference.

Save yourself some time and money, if you want to see it grab a pirated version but don't pay for this garbage.

Or skip entirely.

Seems awkward that a professional and mature law enforcement officer acts out in the way depicted here all the while on the backdrop of gangsta rap. If there was a way to get my ~1:41:26 back I would. I have never reviewed (publically) a movie as I haven't had the need to, but this was so bad I had to review

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Who ever thought this was a good idea?

3/10
Author: martinrobertson300482 from United Kingdom
20 March 2013

With a tag-line like "You better not cross Alex Cross" I'm wondering why I bothered to go see this at the cinema at all. I think I was curious to see Matthew Fox of "Lost" try his hardest too shake off the "nice guy" image he has, by playing a toughened up psychotic killer.

Ever since I saw the trailer and got closer and closer too seeing it, "Alex Cross" has gradually gotten worse. And after seeing the whole thing, I can only describe it as bad. I first started getting weary when I found out that the film is a reboot. Apparently Morgan Freeman has played this character before. Yet they felt the need too restart the franchise, ignoring movies "Kiss the girls" and "Along came a Spider," even though most probably didn't realise it was a franchise too begin with. Then one of my mates, the one who wanted to go see it the most, pulled out, leaving me and another friend off mine (who had barely any interest in seeing it at all) sitting there ready to judge it! And it wasn't hard to start finding faults.

The Plot is so straight forward I can't believe its based on a book. Unless its just been poorly adapted, as it does come across as a bit off a rush job. The script is awful. The entire cinema was laughing un-intentionally, and a lot! and the lead actor who plays Alex Cross (The One you've not too Cross remember) was awful. The whole thing played out like an episode of a bad TV show, and one that's supposed to be rebooting/improving on what's been done before. Seriously?

I actually feel kind off sorry for Fox. Hopefully he gets a better part from this, as he's the best thing in the movie, and has clearly put a lot off effort into what he does here. Its just a shame that no-one else tried at all.

Was the above review useful to you?

Disappointing

5/10
Author: grantss from Sydney, Australia
2 January 2014

Disappointing. Started well, and looked set to be a good game of intrigue between the two main protagonists. However, just when it started to ramp up the tension, it all got released in a rush by becoming a conventional action-thriller and sprinting to the conclusion.

Some more character development, especially of the killer, was required. Might be one of the few movies I wished was longer.

Tyler Perry seems out of his depth as an action hero. His ideal roles are more intellectual. Matthew Fox is great as the killer though. No real stand-out performances among the supporting cast.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

So bad it actually hurts...

1/10
Author: Hans Miniar Jónsson from Iceland
6 May 2014

I flicked from channel to channel to find something to watch and found this, Alex Cross, sitting there with it's promising basic plot hook and started watching it. Heck, I even made a point of leaving the channel on while some drivel finished off before it.

When it first started it was disjointed, and it took a while to get remotely invested in following the plot line, but as it progressed it became nearly impossible to be invested in anything relevant to the movie whatsoever.

The performances of pretty much every single actor in this movie is poor or worse. They deliver the lines without any flare, any emotion, with extremely rare exceptions, but to be perfectly honest, it's understandable. You see, the lines they were given to deliver are mostly utter rubbish. NO ONE TALKS LIKE THAT! No one even acts like that. The few scenes not marked by dramatic underacting by the main cast are made hilariously bad by the overacting of the supporting cast.

The whole movie feels like the writing was done by someone who's completely socially inept but fascinated by crime dramas and has spent a little too much time watching movies like Seven.

This movie is so bad it doesn't even serve as a good "background noise" while you mill about on your computer. It's so bad you just can not ignore it. It's so bad it hurts to watch it.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

1 hour 40 minutes

2/10
Author: cageydog from D.C.
21 March 2014

If you can think of ANYTHING else to do for 1 hour 40 minutes, do it. Poorly scripted, odd casting, poorly executed, worst stunts since the 70's. The movie simply fails to ever become interesting. Matthew Fox's performance as Picasso was over the top, unbelievable and was the worst performance I have seen from him. Tyler Perry was equally hard to buy as Alex Cross though he was better than Fox. The storyline included way too much unnecessary distraction that could only have been left in as filler. I also found the over the top stereotyping of Germans to be insulting, but it is this hypocritical double standard that connects this movie with Perry's other works and it is not OK. Perry has a core audience and a formula for success that is based around generating as much revenue as possible from that audience, utilizing works not based on production value, dramatic story lines or artistic expression. If this is an example of the best he can produce outside the lucrative niche he has created, he should stick to what he is famous for.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Thirty years younger

5/10
Author: Iain McDougall from Bristol. England
10 March 2014

I'm sure Morgan Freeman wishes he was thirty years younger if he watches this effort with his characters' name attributed to it. This is nothing like 'Kiss the girls' or 'Along came a spider'. The performers can only actor with the script they're given but surely there must be somebody better than Tyler Perry? Idris Elba would have been perfect for this role.

This movie feels more like a spoof than an action thriller. Poorly acted by both lead players and the plot is so predictable that it's painful. The cast do their best with the material, 'Lost' star Matthew Fox appears to have invested a lot into the film, almost unrecognisable as the heavily tattooed, muscular psycho. His physical transformation can't disguise overacting, but at least it's a menacing performance.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A piece of garbage

1/10
Author: tchase98
26 January 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The only thing this movie has in common with the book Cross is the name of the character. From the location to the type of vehicle he drives is wrong. It might of been an enjoyable movie by itself with different characters. The whole motivation of the Alex Cross character is the fact that he doesn't know who his wife's killer is and why she was killed for many years. His partner is a giant of a black dude who is named Sugar. Cross doesn't have a profiling unit of his own within the police dept and Nana Mamma is his grandmother not his mother. The writers of this movie must of never of read a Alex Cross book before or at any time while writing this movie. I didn't mind the actor who is mostly known for dressing up as an old black woman playing Cross. He did a OK job. I'm surprised they didn't have him play Nana Mamma also. In the end this movie sucked!!!!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Perry acquits himself adequately; too bad he's a bit out of his element

4/10
Author: callanvass from victoria b.c canada
25 August 2013

Perry's foray into a more serious genre is a bit of a misfire to say the least. I've said it before. I quite like Tyler Perry. He's fearless and ambitious, but when I found out he was taking over for Morgan Freeman, that really made my head spin. It's certainly not a horrible performance. He tries his best, and he does nail one really emotional scene, but he was rather awkward to watch. You can also tell he had some serious influence into the making of this film. His character is religious. There are some decent chase scenes which provide excitement, and I was never truly bored. It was just there and nothing really special ever came out of it. Guys like Edward Burns & Jean Reno lend solid support for Perry. Matthew Fox is the best thing about this movie. He gives a very good performance as Picasso; very creepy stuff from him. I admire Perry's foray into another genre, but I don't think he is gonna usher in a new era for the Cross series like he was hoping for.

Final Thoughts: It's worth a look if you see it on cable, but I wouldn't pay money to see it. It's pretty mediocre stuff when all is said and done. You could do a lot worse, but you could also do much better. Watch Kiss The Girls if you wanna see a decent Cross film.

4.5/10

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Are you kidding me? Such a disappointment

2/10
Author: Enjoy Movies from United States
6 March 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

***Spoiler Alert***First, this should have been rated R. There was torture of women with drugs and extremely violent. Aside from that, the flow of the movie was ridiculous. Right after Cross's wife is murdered, he doesn't go straight after the killer, he pauses to have a public funeral first with all of his family and he himself a target. It ruins the flow of the movie and is so insane you can no longer suspend belief to enjoy the film. The scene between Perry and Tyson could have been extraordinary, but it is ruined with poor writing. And then the last scene between Cross despite them both losing the loves of their lives, they try to make the scene a distastefully upbeat. The movie could have been a good thriller, but those involved puked all over it.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Cross it out

4/10
Author: TomMix86 from United Kingdom
5 March 2013

You may think it wouldn't be possible to disgrace an author who cranks out seven or more novels a year, but ALEX CROSS may just about manage it.

I have read a number of James Patterson's Cross novels, including CROSS (ostensibly the source material for this film). I would not work hard to defend their literary value, but they are very entertaining, and they certainly have the potential to be the basis for a solid series of movies. In a world where EON productions are gearing up for their 24th James Bond movie, there is no reason there couldn't be a string of decent Alex Cross movies; looks like that isn't going to happen anytime soon though.

The Alex Cross character previously appeared on screen in KISS THE GIRLS and ALONG CAME A SPIDER, where the character was played by Morgan Freeman. Given that Cross is written as a bulky, handsome, imposing man in his early 40s, Freeman was in some ways a curious casting choice. Still he has the gravitas, screen presence and charisma to pull audiences through these sometimes convoluted plots, which is more than can be said for Tyler Perry.

Perry was clearly cast because of his strong box-office track record with a loyal audience; however Perry is almost completely unknown to audiences outside the US, and even domestically his figures have been in decline (this followed suit). To be fair, Perry is just about passable in the role. He's wooden, and conveys neither the intelligence or belligerence needed to successfully bring the character (at least as written for this film) to life, but he's far from the film's biggest problem.

CROSS was a good choice of adaptation for "rebooting" the series on screen, with some nods towards an origin for the character and a strong story of a personal mission for the main character. The novel took place over a time-span of over a decade, the film condenses the events to a year or less, which was a good move. Unlike the Freeman films, ALEX CROSS does showcase Cross' home and family life, which some Patterson devotees may appreciate. On the whole however, the film is a very loose adaptation of the novel, which is fine. At least, it would be. Unfortunately, the script (co-written, oddly enough, by Marc Moss, whose only other screen credit is ALONG CAME A SPIDER), doesn't come up with anything fresh or interesting. Patterson is not the most original writer, but this film stoops to clichés that even he (to my knowledge) wisely avoids; fellow cops with clandestine relationships etc. The movie descends into generic revenge pabulum with debilitating ease, when it aspires to be a suspenseful psychological thriller. Cross here seems less a gifted, intellectual criminal psychologist, more a man blessed with psychic powers and the occasional premonition.

In the 90s, director Rob Cohen was a competent journeyman making adult potboilers, including DAYLIGHT and a TV Movie Rat Pack biopic. Suddenly, in the early 00s (his early fifties) he tried to convince the world he was a teenager with THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS and xXx, and seemed to succeed. He likes things which makes no sense but seems cool, which is OK, as most of the world does too, but water-pressure alarms and security doors which don't open from the inside are unlikely to attract the kind of audience enthusiasm that drag racing and extreme sports did a decade ago.

To his credit, Cohen has become a fairly distinctive director, and this movie has a similar feel to much of his other work. Unfortunately, his style is not appropriate for the material, and unctuous fake European accents are not necessarily the best directorial trademarks either. He has little skill with narrative, and one scene cuts to the next with no rhythm, generating little interest. The climactic fight scene is, even by recent standards, excessively incoherent and unexciting.

As it happens, where the movie does succeed is also where Patterson's writing is generally the strongest; the villain. Matthew Fox gives a very memorable performance as a fairly intriguing character. Unfortunately, he doesn't get enough screen time to get the film up to a passing grade, perhaps held back, as much is, by the PG-13 rating.

Though messy and a little silly KISS THE GIRLS was a fairly savvy adaptation and a far more intriguing and cinematic viewing experience. ALONG CAME A SPIDER was absurd and squandered much of the potential of its namesake, but it was slick, lively entertainment with welcome touches of arch humour, and was clearly the work of a gifted director. Perhaps neither were films for the ages, but while watching ALEX CROSS you find yourself pining for them.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A Bore.

2/10
Author: Convictions from United States
26 February 2013

Usually when movies get panned, I avoid them. However, once in a while my curiosity gets the better of me and I can't resist. I probably should have skipped this one, I never read the books but, I'm going to go out on limb here and say that the book or books did not transition well to the big screen. Yes that was sarcasm. I'm sure the books are an exciting and an engrossing read, but here, the exact opposite comes to mind when describing this movie. It's a complete bore and sitting through this is a chore. It borders on unwatchable and though it might not have been 2012's worst it's certainly close to the top.

I'll do the best I can to remember everything but, not even 16 hours after viewing this, it's been corroding from my mind fast. That should give you a hint on just how memorable this cinematic dump is. The only reason why I'm giving it a 2 is because of Matthew fox. He got himself into shape and prepared himself for this role, and it shows. Even though his character may have been scribbled in with a crayon,(let's face it, his character is about as one-dimensional as a cardboard cut-out, same goes for the rest of the cast) his loony, over-the-top performance is the only thing that kept me awake from slipping into a coma. As for everything else, I'm at a loss for words.

From the guy who directed The Fast and the Furious and xXx, I was at least expecting some exciting well-shot fighting scenes but, we can't get what we always want. The very few actions scenes are boring and nausea-inducing, especially the climatic fight scene. Why director Rob Cohen decided to shake the camera so much? I don't know, the two films I mentioned showcase that he's a competent action director, whatever the excuse was it doesn't matter, this is just lazy.

With the exception of Fox, the cast is dull. Though, I'm not sure the cast it completely at fault, they're not given much to do. Perry is miscast here, he has the chops but, there are better suited roles out there within his range. When he's required to show emotion he's good but, when he's required to do action he doesn't fit in well. The rest of the cast is bland and unmemorable, they all seem like they don't want to be here and I don't blame them. I'm sure they at least got nice paychecks.

I'm going to on a little tangent about the MPAA, so skip to the next paragraph if you'd like. I don't understand how something like this could get a PG-13 rating and then another movie who uses the "F" word a couple of times get an R. I would rather let a 13 year old watch something that's R because it has the "F" word a couple of times in it than letting them watch this. I'd say see this for yourself, but then that would mean you would actually have to watch this garbage. So I'll give you a few examples instead. This doesn't spoil anything but, I can't imagine why anyone would care anyway. There is one scene where we're shown a woman getting her fingers cut off, sure it's brief but, we see the whole thing. Then there's a legitimate sex scene, and I'm not talking about the brief PG-13 ones I'm talking about an actual sex scene. These are only a few examples as there are more but, that would give away something. I'm done now, time to continue....

Like the ending of this movie, I'm going to rush things here because thinking about this movie is giving me a migraine. The pacing is uneven, we're given slow set-up then the movie keeps shifting, rushing things here and there, slowing down things here and there, this is an on-going process and by the end I found myself wanting to grind my face against a cheese grater. The characters are all underdeveloped, thanks to the lazy script, I didn't care about anyone. This movie clocks in at 100 minutes yet, it felt like I was watching Titanic again. It seemed like this movie would never end.

Overall, don't even bother wasting your time. The acting is dull, the character's are cardboard cut-outs, the direction is horrible especially during the climatic fight scene, the script is lazy, and the pacing is widely uneven. There is nothing good here, except Matthew Fox, but it's still no where enough to recommend this on any level. How this movie made it to theaters is one mystery I'd like to solve.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Poor effort all around

3/10
Author: Bryne Zuege (byrntzuga) from Northern Colorado
12 February 2013

Watched this movie last night and I have to say I was quite disappointed. The story was OK and the cinematography was good. The acting, however, was quite horrid. Ed Burns mailed in the worst performance I have ever seen him produce. Never once was I convinced that he had anything but a "little chip" of an involvement with the female partner. Nothing showed the possible love that the scripted words professed. I won't beat the dead horse about the comparisons of Tyler Perry to Morgan Freeman. There were flashes of what could have been a compelling portrait of a character, such in his interaction with his wife. The overall effect of this portrayal though was disjointed and shallow. And none of the female roles had any substance. Even the great Cicely Tyson was watered down and washed out. Disappointing.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Disappointment

3/10
Author: Jay Schwenk from South Africa
12 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First off I have to say the movie was not what I expected. If you are a big Tyler Perry fan then you may enjoy it more than most action/thriller fanatics. I for one was very disappointed when i watched the movie. Unfortunately i have read the complete Alex Cross series written by James Patterson and I have also watched the two previous movies with Morgan Freeman. This made my expectations high as I was looking forward to a new look into the "world of Alex Cross".

The story line is a complete mix up and the details are so far off from the original stories it actually feels as though the writer of this script thought that James Patterson's work was not up to a level that could be appreciated. Having said that there are a few parts in the movie that are good though, the acting of the criminal is something that does meet the same level as imagined when you read one of the novels. I guess it is all down to personal preference but I did not enjoy this as much as i thought i would. If they had a whole new story line with a new serial killer but kept the facts from the books it might have been better.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

The Vidiot Reviews

4/10
Author: capone666 from Canada
7 February 2013

Alex Cross

The difficult part to being a psychologist/police officer is deciding if you should bill your client for time spent beating them with a phone book.

Sadly, the shielded shrink in this crime-thriller does not expound on his invoicing practices.

Detroit police lieutenant Dr. Alex Cross (Tyler Perry) and his partner Tommy (Edward Burns) are called to a crime scene where a businesswoman (Stephanie Jacobsen) was brutally murdered.

Following a clue left by the artistic assassin dubbed Picasso (Matthew Fox), Cross sets a trap at his next hit.

After Picasso eludes capture, Cross deduces that his true target is a billionaire (Jean Reno).

Angered by the detective's constant meddling, Picasso focuses his crosshairs on Cross' wife.

Full of retributive violence but low on tangible mystery, this adaptation of the popular literary character lacks a suspenseful script and a believable lead.

Besides, psychologist cops blame every murder on the killer's mother.

Red Light

vidiotreviews.blogspot.ca

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Silly, poorly made mess that misses its mark

4/10
Author: Robert W. (Robert_duder@hotmail.com) from Ontario, Canada
1 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I had heard a lot of people say how bad Alex Cross was but I wanted to hold out and see for myself. I have read one Alex Cross book but never more than that so I was going in mostly blind to the character and the book series. To say the film was a mess is an understatement. Its hard to say exactly where the film goes wrong but bad casting, bad acting, bad music, horrible direction and horrible editing just to name a few of the main points that derails this film. I don't usually comment on the intricacies of the actual film making but the editing was simply awful. The sound and music for the film goes up and down throughout. Sometimes the music is so loud you can hardly hear what's going on and sometimes the dialogue is so low you can't even hear it. That can be a good thing considering how poorly delivered many of the lines are. The plot holes are so gapingly large that you can fire a rocket through them. There are only a few little saving graces that save this from being a complete and utter disaster. Some of the action scenes are relatively entertaining and watchable. Matthew Fox as the villain is actually almost stunning, and the production values on the special effects are very good. But that's about where the impressiveness ends.

I heard a lot of people complain about Tyler Perry being cast as Alex Cross. I thought he could pull it off because he is a very talented and versatile actor. I was wrong. He brings no depth to the character at all and is so stereotypical that it makes you want to yawn. The scenes with emotion he over-delivers and comes across as cheesy. The character was also written very quickly so that you understand how "brilliant" he is and this comes across as pompous and annoying. He was poorly cast, no doubt about it. Edward Burns plays Cross' partner. He is written as some sort of dumb, fast talking, one liner sidekick. Its really unfortunate. The chemistry between Perry and Burns is non-existent and yet we're supposed to believe they are lifelong friends. Jean Reno makes some sort of cameo as a villain of sorts but the story around his character is so convoluted and makes very little sense that he is lost in the shuffle. I'm not even sure why he would do this. And then there is Matthew Fox who literally is the only actor that makes this worthwhile. In fact, he steals the show. His twisted, sadistic, tortured villain is a thousand times better than this film. His twitching, facial expressions, line delivery...all first rate. I don't know if I have ever seen anyone give a 10/10 performance in a 4/10 movie but Fox does it flawlessly. What a total waste of a great performance and character. However, if you're going to see this...see it for Matthew Fox.

The last thing an Alex Cross movie should be is campy. And yet the script for this and the performances are extremely campy. When watching, check out the expressions on some of the officer extras around them. Its beyond bad, like awful. With some really good action scenes there should have been some really tense moments but all of that is completely lost with bad directing and even worse editing. The fights often look low budget and cheesy like watching a WWE wrestling match. I am truly surprised that director Rob Cohen who has helmed some very good action flicks let this slip into such a bad area. Perhaps it was just the chemistry or a badly edited script but however you shake it...they screwed up Alex Cross badly. James Patterson fans may find themselves waiting a very, very long time before this gets rebooted. Until then we have the HUGELY superior Morgan Freeman films which were better in every aspect. Skip this one or watch it for Matthew Fox. 4/10

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

so many things done poorly

4/10
Author: a_m_jensen from Denmark
8 December 2012

I was looking forward to this movie, since I thought this would be more true to the books than the ones with Morgan Freeman. I was mistaken...

Our bad guy was a surprise, having only seen Fox as the doctor on Lost I enjoyed his over the top performance as a real psycho. He was pretty much the only thing I liked.

I love Jean Reno, and try to watch everything with him, but he was wasted on this movie, This role could have been filled with a nobody and it wouldn't have changed anything.

We know the actors can act, and the director can direct, so why are we left with a movie with bland acting and characters we care little about. It even seems that the characters don't even care about what happens to each other.

This movie should win an award for irritating camera-work. The climax was so shaky I wished I could skip it. Can only imagine how sick I would be if I had been drinking before seeing it.

It is far from the worst movie I have seen, and would probably have seen it no matter the reviews, and a lot of you probably feel the same way, but please don't set your expectations high since this is not a very good movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Even with a number of clever set pieces demanding tension and spectacle, 'Alex Cross' still fires blanks.

Author: Jordan Hunt (mailjordanhunt@gmail.com) from United Kingdom
7 December 2012

Adapted from the acclaimed James Patterson novels, the film adaptation of 'Alex Cross' is a mixed bag, worth watching for several notable features which can do nothing but fail to salvage the whole affair.

A painfully miscast Tyler Perry receives top billing as a rogue detective facing off against a threatening antagonist played excellently by 'LOST' alum Matthew Fox, who brings an unsettling edge to his character, exploring his motivations where the bland screenplay dares not. Equally complacent is Rob Cohen's direction, which reduces film's technical and artistic merit to that of a television serial. This isn't improved on by an attempt to emphasise characters that, at the same time, are being drawn with a comic edge that negates the serious tone.

With Patterson likely responsible for any ingenuity plot wise, the writers and producers at least owed the material a thrilling big screen adaptation. Yet even with a number of clever set pieces demanding tension and spectacle, 'Alex Cross' still fires blanks.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Patterson oh Patterson

3/10
Author: Gordon Brown from United Kingdom
8 December 2012

I was really looking forward to this movie after having read many of the books written by Patterson and I must say my eagerness to watch it as soon as it was released maybe makes my review a little more negative than it would have been if i did not know and understand the character Alex cross, one can never compare a book to the movie, but the basic building blocks of a story must remain intact for it to be at least partially successful.

I can not see any of the Patterson magic in this movie, to be honest it is one of those movies that will go down in history as being overrated and misunderstood by both actors and the director. The Alex cross from the books is nowhere to be seen, there is too much of the "leave it up to the audience to decipher his inner thoughts" and this lets it down.

Hopefully anyone looking at the director and editors of this, to do work in the future will look at this and decide that maybe taking a chance on some college graduates would be a safer bet.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

ending and lead actor!!! spoilers to some degree.

3/10
Author: redsaoe from United Kingdom
8 December 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Matthew Fox was a main reason why I think it's worth seeing the film. He's acting was perfect. Tyler Perry was on the other hand something I would skip forward if I had remote in my hand. Not sure who chose him as a main star of the film. It was almost annoying to watch him act. They made him the chosen one of the unit. It was getting really silly sometimes whole team was depending on him. Edward Burns role was bad as well, not that he is bad actor he did what he could with the poor script and role of a useless cop who always ask what to do "Dr.Alex" And can't start his relationships without Alex all mighty approval. Like please.. He is your partner not a father.

Ending was terrible if it would ended with cliff hanger or assassin running away I would give the movie hire score and would recommend my friends to see it. Last fight was terrible and doesn't make any sense. The assassin was train and skilled MMA fighter which were shown in the beginning of the film. And Dr.overweight fried chicken Alex could keep up with him and even overpower him many times. It made me angry since I practiced MMA for 2 years. Many good actors but I would rather hire one less and pay someone better to be the main detective. Yes if not for the ending or perhaps main actor I would really enjoy it more. Now how can I get a refund!?

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Casey's Movie Mania: ALEX CROSS (2012)

3/10
Author: caseymoviemania from Malaysia
4 December 2012

Before I go straight with the review, picture this: Tyler Perry, who made a fortune playing a cross-dressing, gun-toting mama in the lucrative MADEA series, tries to reinvent himself into a different actor. An action star, to be exact. For those who have seen his MADEA series before, some of you might be thinking: seriously? Frankly, an actor who is primarily known in comedy genre can make a smooth transition as an action star. Take Bruce Willis, for instance, who had successfully became an action icon when he did DIE HARD back in 1988 after a short stint in TV's Moonlighting. Unfortunately, Tyler Perry looks uncomfortable playing his first action-oriented role in ALEX CROSS -- a loose prequel to 1997's KISS THE GIRLS and 2001's ALONG CAME A SPIDER (both starred Morgan Freeman). Shame about the movie as well, which is nothing more than a clunky and haphazard thriller.

Long before we get to know the older Alex Cross (Morgan Freeman) as a brilliant FBI agent in KISS THE GIRLS and ALONG CAME A SPIDER, we are introduced to a younger version (Tyler Perry), who first working as a Detroit-based police detective. Cross and his team -- partner and best friend Tommy Kane (Edward Burns) and beautiful rookie Monica Ashe (Rachel Nichols) -- are called in by police chief Richard Brookwell (John C. McGinley) after a wealthy woman named Fan Yau (Stephanie Jacobsen) and her bodyguards are found brutally massacred in her Detroit mansion. Apparently it was done by a psychotic killer nicknamed Picasso (Matthew Fox), who is actually targeting the city's wealthy elite and slowly made his way up to Leon Mercier (Jean Reno), an oily French business tycoon with plans for reinventing Detroit city. Things goes out of hand when the killer himself starts messing around with Cross, killing one of his teams as well as one of his family members. Devastated, Cross turns the case into a personal vendetta to seek vengeance against Picasso.

Marc Moss and Kerry Williamson's screenplay is strictly by-the-numbers, and everything here plays out like a typical serial-killer thriller you used to watch during the 1990s heyday. Actually, there's nothing wrong being nostalgic here but it's a shame that the story is unimaginative and lackluster. Even veteran action director Rob Cohen (THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS, xXx) is out of his element here. The action (which often his forte) is disappointingly shot with shaky-cam and one particular climactic fight set-piece between Cross and Picasso is so incomprehensibly shaky it's impossible to figure out what's really going on.

As mentioned earlier, Tyler Perry is out of depth here. It's actually good to see him venturing out something different, but it turns out the actor's range is more limited than expected. As awkward as he looks playing an action role, he remains comfortably at ease whenever the scenes involve him with his wife and his family. Both Edward Burns and Rachel Nichols are nothing more than showing up in thankless roles, while Jean Reno (looking really old) is just as forgettable. Matthew Fox, who lost a huge amount of weight to look scarily skinny, is suitably cast as a sadistic psychopath. Too bad his character is given little room for development.

ALEX CROSS is actually meant to jump-start a new franchise based on James Patterson's crime novels, but this prequel itself is already a failure. So much for the anticipation.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Alex Cross Review

2/10
Author: mozoloman from Johannesburg
12 November 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I went for a month of no movies just hoping and waiting that something spectacular would come along, no such luck I'm afraid. When I saw Perry on the poster I didn't know what to expect so I went in there really action desperate- disappointed. So here it goes.

Cross didn't bother itself with crossing the line it played it safe and we all know that safe is boring. My mistake, safe is just plain old desperation to gross. Firstly the name is dull for an action film, secondly the storyline lacks a background that's compelling enough to want to see it again. After all the trouble that he went through turns out the villain is not the real bad guy, and the bad guy "is clean." I absolutely hate such films they make you feel naive, and we see Hollywood doing this all the damn time. Mr.Assassin kills people and we don't know why plus he loves doing it.

Cross' wife takes a bullet while pregnant very clever let's give the hero motivation to hunt down 'o mr.Assassin, because wasn't already on the case? Everything about this film is too predictable.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Why i give it 2 instead of 1?

2/10
Author: Ricardo Pinheiro (ricardo-pinheiro@live.com.pt) from Lisbon
29 December 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This flick should only receive 1, but then there is Matthew Fox, with a good performing, and i have to give it 2. The rest is simply awful. The story it's good. A nice idea for a film, but the script ruins it. The performance from Mr. Perry its pretty disgusting. I don't know where to start. I could talk about the poor soundtrack, the scenes without any meaning or continuity for the story, the stupid details emerging all over the film, but i will summit it all with this: In the beginning of the movie we see 2 characters: the daughter and the mother of Perry's character. Roughly one hour later, (spoiler) at the Perry character wife funeral, we see those 2 characters again... with the exactly same clothes as before! OMG! Even the f******* wardrobe was wrong! Everything is wrong! Except the bad guy, Fox's character. What a shame. A good director, good screen writing and specially, good actors could turn this originally good idea in a good movie, instead of crap.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Alex Cross (2012) - Madea is the New Morgan Freeman? Seriously?

3/10
Author: nickmesafilms (nickmesafilms@yahoo.com) from United States
21 December 2012

From director Rob Cohen, a guy whom has been known for making a string of mediocre action movies, "Alex Cross" is the third film appearance of, you guessed it, Alex Cross, who is known as the main character in James Patterson's series of crime novels. At a pace of 101-minutes, Tyler Perry stars as the title character, a psychological police detective who can tell what happened in a crime, when did it happen, why did it happen, or how did it happen. Now, he must try to take down a psychopathic assassin, played by Matthew Fox, sadly following the tired and formulaic cop story. Not only unoriginal and predictable, but also painful and uncomfortable to sit through, "Alex Cross" is one of the very worst movies of the whole year. Although Tyler Perry is really trying his best to make something good out of this tired material, he sadly fails to bring a lot of charm to a character that was once portrayed by Morgan Freeman, and he sadly felt miscast-ed. Nothing god-awful or anything, I just can't take Tyler Perry seriously in a dramatic role, since all he does in his career is be in drag the whole time as Madea. But, hey, at least he tried! But, don't even get me started on Matthew Fox. Although he's a very talented actor and also tries hard in this film, he tries way too hard, going way over-the-top, in one of the most unintentionally laughable performances of the whole year. Edward Burns, Rachel Wilson, Cicely Tyson, Jean Reno, and Giancarlo Esposito, all star in the supporting cast, given literally nothing to say or do than just read lines from such a horrendous script. Luckily most of these actors have higher talent than these writers, and they are really trying their best. Sappy and melodramatic moments, childish writing, over-the-top performances, and unoriginal story might have been enough, but the main problem of the whole movie involves all the action scenes, provided by director Rob Cohen and the cinematographer. Horribly directed and filmed, the action scenes left me uninterested, but most of all, it gave my brain a major meltdown. Delivered with some of the worst use of shaky-cam, it feels more like the camera-man is literally shaking the camera back and forth, which I bet actually happened. The scenes are all over the place, totally inconsistent, and Rob Cohen should stop making action movies! Generic, bland, inconsistent, sappy, over-the-top, and annoying are the perfect verbs, nouns, or adjectives to describe my hate for this film. But, if I had to correct anything to make this a good movie, I would have casted Idris Elba as Alex Cross, have very talented writers known for making very good cop movies, and a director who takes these films very seriously. Sadly, this movie doesn't give us any of that. "Alex Cross", in my review, "waste of potential, formulaic and indulgent".

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Cross? You will be...

3/10
Author: Tony Bush from United Kingdom
14 December 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Last time I saw the titular character on screen he was played as a more cerebral type of detective by Morgan Freeman. Freeman is an actor who has an effortless natural cool and gravitas, a crumpled sort of chic dignity, careworn and human. He can manage sharp and business-like, thoughtful and compassionate, passive and aggressive, by turns and make them all convincing components of the same character. This is because first and foremost he is a character actor.

Tyler Perry plays Alex Cross in this film and his incarnation is more of an action hero type. A physically chunky gun-toting ass-kicker who fancies himself as a profiling modern day Sherlock Holmes hunting down the bad guys. I don't know what the character of the books is like, having never read them, but I do know that Perry ain't no Morgan Freeman and that this Alex Cross is a one-dimensional shop window dummy with all the personality of a paper plate.

He's not alone here, though, because all of the characters run on rails like bland cardboard cut-outs wheeling through a CGI shooting gallery. None are particularly engaging or resonate on any meaningful emotional level and I didn't really care about the fate of any of them.

The film is a brash and crass churn through a dumb and irrational narrative that fails to sustain much interest after the first twenty minutes or so. There are some moments of jaw-dropping unintentional comedy. My favourite is when Cross employs his Sherlock Holmesian deductive techniques on his wife. It was almost like something out of THE NAKED GUN. To paraphrase:

"I deduce you have been for coffee."

Wife looks astonished at the sheer brilliance of his investigative prowess.

"Judging by the froth on your blouse, I can conclude it was a latte!"

Cut to wife and huge stain on her blouse that looks like half a pint of Camel slobber.

Wife is sooooo impressed that her husband is sooooo smart. Gazes at him with awestruck adoration

She's pregnant. She gets killed soon. That get's Alex cross and so it's time for a little revenge-seeking.

The story is something about a sociopathic assassin (are there any other kind?) bumping off foreign corporate types. He turns his attention to Cross and his team when they thwart one of his attempted hits. Much else I can't relate because I had tuned-out and was just waiting for it to run its course. I'd paid to see it so I was going to hang on in there till the bitter end.

If you are expecting something of the calibre of KISS THE GIRLS or ALONG CAME A SPIDER then don't. This isn't in the same league. Cross this one off your list.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Tyler Perry is NO actor and this was a pitiful farce

Author: flakfan from face of the earth
15 November 2012

Tyler Perry might be funny if he hasn't worn out his shuck-n-jive shtick with "Madea" out completely with everyone but blacks, maybe even them. This movie was just awful. Even my foreign born wife who knows good movies thought it was horrible and funny. I am ashamed of Jean Reno even consenting to be cast in it, he is one of the great living actors in the world. The whole movie had great potential but became an intolerable disaster. And BTW, just how many wigs does Cicely Tyson have? At least three or four bad ones in this movie at least.

I would be embarrassed to have my name in the credits even if my face wasn't seen. I mean really...............Tyler Perry as a brilliant crime solving detective with intuition to boot and who is NEVER wrong? Give me a break "shugah chile".

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

A made for TV movie

1/10
Author: didi g from United States
17 February 2013

I just finished watching the Alex Cross movie, which I was looking forward to but missed seeing in the theater. I am glad I ended up renting the movie for $1.50 from the library. The movie was predictable, badly written, and direction was choppy. Everything and everyone was a cliché -- bad guys are foreign (German, French), Asians are sluts, and White Anglos are not very bright. Although Tyler Perry fits the physical description of the Cross character, the writing and direction was a detriment to his acting. This story bears little resemblance to Patterson's Alex Cross books and am surprised that he allowed this mess to make it to the big screen. I made the mistake of listening to the Director's commentary which was even more boring than the movie. I will not watch another Rob Cohen directed movie again. Don't bother to watch this.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Horrible waste of time

1/10
Author: amit-misra86 from Canada
10 February 2013

The trailers for this movie looked okay. Watched it thinking it would be a regular action flick nothing special maybe with some half decent acting in it. After watching this movie I was again reminded of just how awful Tyler Perry is at acting and making movies. This movie had a horrible script and story line. No character development and the most predictable plot ever. The acting in this movie was atrocious, I was actually somewhat excited to see Matthew Fox in something after lost and playing a completely different type of role. His character had no depth at all. Some pretty poor character development I must say. I would not recommend wasting any money let alone time on this movie. By that I mean that this movie is not even worth an illegal download. Better off watching something else, I am not sure how this wasn't a straight to DVD movie I would have been angry if I actually paid to watch this in the theatre.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Elementary it isn't!

1/10
Author: alex (doorsscorpywag) from United Kingdom
15 December 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I have read some of Patterson's novels and don't think he is particularly good. I watched the two film spin offs which were OK mainly due to the superb Morgan Freeman rather than any great plot or script.

I have seen a few movies with him in but don't know the lead actor and from his performance doubt he will trouble me in the future. Bad does not even come close to his performance. Not that he was alone as some very good actors joined him in the stinking the place out stakes.

This seemed to be a modern take on a black version of Sherlock Holmes as the Cross guy would for no particular reason make wild deductions of his daughter, friends and of course the psycho killer called Picasso. Ed Burns (who is a very good actor) seemed to spend all his time looking lovingly at the genius of Shelock Cross as he burbled out his 'keen' insights into the mind of the killer which frankly would embarrass the dog in the Famous Five which had more idea. If this was the best the department had then it must have been staffed by some of the stupidest cops in America.

The script was not even pedestrian and there was no character or plot development and the one dimensional killer, victims and detectives who peopled this so called thriller were ordinary in the extreme. Only the very dull Alex Holmes stood out from this dismal pack because he could throw out some nonsense that had them in awe of him.

But of course there was no deduction involved. Simply he would say something that turned out to be right. Such as the ridiculous scene with the train when looking around the square with cops and victims everywhere he deduced with seconds to spare that the threat was coming from a train that had not yet hoven into view.

The killer who was supposed to be some super expert mercenary hit-man did some pretty stupid things such as driving around in the same car oblivious to whether some camera would photograph his number plate. Why he bothered to target Cross made no real sense as the detective surely was nothing more than a minor irritant to such a professional. But of course we needed Cross angry for the final section of the film.

The angry Cross even more ridiculous then a calm one as he and Norton carried out an armed robbery, beat the hell out of a drug dealer and somehow illegally stitched up a perp from thousands of miles away.

The finale and then the shock ending where Sherlock solved the case and the perp was brought to 'justice' was laughable. How a cop who looked like he could skip a few meals could overpower a man who looked like (and had shown in the opening sequence) that he could eat Seal Team 6 for breakfast left me bewildered.

Hopefully this will be the final nail in a series of films that was OK at best only due to the presence of Morgan Freeman.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

poorly done formula movie

3/10
Author: xcell444 from canada
15 December 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

could be spoilers but I don't think so I'm not being too specific

well this movie was not as good as it should be with today's talent. The plot had pieces missing then all of a sudden your someplace else. But what killed me is every action seen they use a hand-held camera and started to shake it. I was getting sick. Cheapest special effects why did the director call for this. Anyway overall a poor formula movie totally predictable and disappointing. If you don't mind brainless action and acting then it's great. But if you're looking for something well made this is not for you.

What gets me even more is how the writers and director expected us to believe the impossible collision and capture of the villain completely by accident. There's no real plot here of trying to capture or hunt down your psychotic killer it's just he will be handed to you on a platter completely by accident. I almost started laughing but painfully this expert bad guy seem to lose all his talent even his acting talent right at that crucial moment. They should have made this a little bit more suspenseful instead it's like they just through the script away. Just a waste of writing and acting.today's movies with all the wealth of information and skill on how a movie should be made I still wonder how these ones get produced with such obvious lack of insight and skill

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Morgan Freeman...we love you!

2/10
Author: sean simpson from United Kingdom
11 December 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It's not very often I lose interest in a movie that I've looked forward to viewing for a while, being a fan of the "Freeman originals", but I have to say Alex Cross fails miserably in most of the basic departments that make a film good to watch. Tyler Perry has NO screen presence at all...no passion, boring, painful to watch (embarrassing at times)has no depth in his character and is totally unbelievable in the lead role. I have to admit I haven't watched him in much but on this evidence alone i certainly haven't missed out and won't be rushing out to watch him in anything soon! The plot is dire...rushed but very slow in getting there (if that makes sense???) and very thin to be polite and the apparent twist at the end is dreadful and makes a mockery of everything that went before it!. The acting is terrible, with the exception of Matthew Fox (the butcher of sligo title he bestows upon himself is never explained!) who was totally underused and under developed and in the end brushed aside when he should have been the focus of the film until the end! It was boring enough the first 45 mins or so but when Fox killed Cross' pregnant wife and tortured one of his female colleagues I thought here we go...now the movie might finally get going as we have a decent psycho villain on our hands...but unfortunately no...it got worse! I really hope if they revamp the character again they find a new leading man as it looks as if it's set itself up for a few more sequels...of which I definitely won't be seeing if Perry is in the lead role. Disappointed is an understatement!!!!!!!!!!!!

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

What.. was that?

3/10
Author: killer1h from United States
22 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'm a big fan of the Alex Cross series, now after watching the first 2 movies where he was depicted correctly and played great, I just have to say. What in the hell happen here? This was a movie but it definitely has nothing to do with Alex Cross.

Let's Start at the beginning. Instead of being a profiler and knowing that giving the subject exactly what he wants is always a mistake he goes right along with playing his game and as a result loses on every front possible. Now lets look at the actual comparative of the way the movie fairs against how the other movies did. Instead of following a string of clues designed to lead to an ultimate destination this was just a run around shooter the entire time. This version of "Alex Cross" acted like a complete amateur and did nothing in the way of psychological detecting all he did was guess here and there until finally something panned out. The only time he got into the mind of the killer was right before the killer blew up his mark thus making it a complete and utter waste of time.

This movie was a great action flick and would have brought in quite a bit if some idiot didn't decide to stick the name Alex Cross on the cover and call it one of the series. The only redeemable quality I saw in the entire movie was the killer himself(Matthew fox). He did an amazing job and if you look at it from a hired assassins point of view an absolutely brilliant performance. It was very sad when he died at the end I thought it would have been a much better ending if he had killed Alex Cross which after watching this movie I'm sure the backers of this sad abomination would agree would be the highlight of all of our days.

3/10 great action movie, not even close to an Alex Cross novel.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Book vs. Movie

3/10
Author: mdavis803 from Columbia, SC
20 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Not only was this movie not like the book, it wasn't even the same story. Where's John Sampson? The Butcher of Sligo is supposed to be handsome...that's how he picks up women, but that didn't happen in the movie. It took place in Detroit not Washington, D.C. Also, where's Ali, Alex's youngest son?

I'm further PO'd that James Patterson would release the book Alex Cross (which is a re-publication of Cross) with the movie promo picture, but the story bears no resemblance to the movie.

If you've never read any of the Alex Cross books, then it's probably an OK movie. It had some good special effects.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

Stay Away !

1/10
Author: steli-babu from Switzerland
15 December 2012

To begin I have watched tons of movies in the past years out of which many were really bad. However, this is the first time I am reviewing a movie and if you watched it you surely understand why. I got this movie from a friend and I went out to read the reviews before watching it, as I usually do. Although I had the feeling it's going to be a bad picture and I postponed watching it as long as possible, I gave it a try on a boring Thursday evening. My opinion: DREADFUL. The screenplay is the worst I've ever seen. There is absolutely nothing exciting, entertaining or even interesting. To me, it looks as if it was written by a toddler. Friendly advice : do not watch it under any circumstances!

After seeing this, I went to borrow Kiss the Girls, basically the older version of Alex Cross. There is no possible comparison between these two movies, and I honestly think that Morgan Freeman deserved better. Tyler Perry should stick to Madea as it suits him much better.

1 out of 10 !

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

3.5/10, go on a cheap day

3/10
Author: scifiactionfan from Canada
20 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Really boring.

The was lots of action but very little excitement.

The ending was a nice twist but it isn't enough to make it a decent movie.

It was totally unbelievable that Alex Cross could beat Picasso in hand to hand especially after Picasso showed what he could do.

It would have been nice if they told more about Picasso's background. It's hard to believe they never profiled him in depth.

It was a bad movie and it won't surprise me when it doesn't stay in theaters very long.

I give it a 3.5/10 and my friend also gives it a low rating.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

None of the 'so called' talent attached does anything to make it bearable!

5/10
Author: Hellmant from United States
24 October 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

'ALEX CROSS': Two and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

Tyler Perry takes over the titular role from Morgan Freeman (who previously played the detective in 1997's 'KISS THE GIRLS' and 2001's 'ALONG CAME A SPIDER'). The film also co-stars Matthew Fox (looking very slim) and Edward Burns and was directed by Rob Cohen (the popular B action film director of hits like 'THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS', 'XXX' and 'THE MUMMY: TOMB OF THE DRAGON EMPEROR'). It was written by Marc Moss (who also wrote 'ALONG CAME A SPIDER') and first time feature film writer Kerry Williamson and based on the book 'Cross' by James Patterson (writer of the entire 'Alex Cross' book series). Patterson also served as a producer on the film. As far as reboots go this one took the series in a seriously wrong direction (and there's already a sequel planned with Perry reprising his role called 'DOUBLE CROSS', adapted from the thirteenth novel featuring the character). The films with Morgan Freeman were much more respectable crime thrillers. This isn't even 'so bad it's good'!

This film centers on Alex Cross (Perry) discovering his wife (Carmen Ejogo) is pregnant with their third child as he's also offered a job working for the FBI. He breaks the news to his partner Tommy Kane (Burns) who also breaks the news to Cross that he's began relations with another officer on their team, Monica Ashe (Rachel Nichols), much to the disapproval of Cross. The two respond to a murder scene where a madman (Fox) tortured and murdered a young woman (Stephanie Jacobson) and her bodyguards. Clues lead them (and Officer Ashe) to the offices of a businessman known as Erich Nunemacher (Werner Daehn), who they realize is the insane assassin's next target. They engage in a conflict with the killer before he escapes. This causes the three detectives to be marked for death by the killer and all hell breaks loose when the Cross family is put in harm's way.

The movie, like most of Cohen's work, is heavy on action and extremely light on plot and character development. The characters aren't really fleshed out at all, despite whatever moves the plot along in typical 'cops chasing killer' crime thriller fashion. The dialogue is dull and the acting is even worse. Fox is somewhat creepy as the psychopath bad guy but given his atrocious real life image as a women beating asshole it's not hard to dislike him at all. Burns is wasted and Nichols looks beautiful but offers the film nothing else. Perry is severely miscast. I've only seen one of his awful 'Madea' movies but it was enough (along with the trailers for the others) to know I'd never want to go through the pain of watching one again. He might actually be better in action films like this but he's still no actor and he's definitely no Morgan Freeman! I had heard Idris Elba was originally cast in the film instead of Perry. He would have made the movie much more intriguing and fun. As it is it's pretty bad and none of the 'so called' talent attached does anything to make it anymore bearable.

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGpMUj20Xx4

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Alex Cross....Poor Movie and Insult to James Patterson

1/10
Author: slippyfostel from United States
10 March 2016

I have enjoyed all of the Alex Cross books I have read by James Patterson. The first Alex Cross movies carried big name actors and a thinking criminal psychologist and profiler who uses his mind and knowledge of criminals to solve cases. Yes, he is active, but not nearly as active as Tyler Perry was in this movie.In fact, Tyler did not do Cross justice. That was not a pun! He didn't get inside the mind of the criminal at all and was so much more active than his predecessor in Morgan Freeman. I understand the choice not to use Morgan. However, Cross is supposed to look somewhat like a lean Muhammad Ali. Tyler was far from that and not even close. This was a sad attempt to make a movie without a real story line and poor casting. Like others said, where were the characters such as John Sampson? Tyler might have made a good John Sampson, but he was not Alex Cross.A better choice would have been Will Smith as Cross. This movie ruined the franchise in my book. It was horrible!

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Poor director strikes again

4/10
Author: Leofwine_draca from United Kingdom
15 June 2015

The third outing for James Patterson's fictional detective Alex Cross, following on from two adaptations of his work in the 1990s: KISS THE GIRLS and ALONG CAME A SPIDER. This one's a mess of a film, which is largely down to a poor choice of director and two poor choices for the main actors.

The narrative involves Alex Cross and his chums who are on the trail of a psychotic assassin who enjoys inflicting pain upon his victims. As the story progresses it becomes clear that this bad guy will stop at nothing to complete his job, which leads to a handful of mildly memorable moments including a great twist thrown in that you won't expect or indeed see coming.

A shame, then, that the execution is so muddled, with Rob Cohen once again proving a poor choice as director. You just can't take the story seriously, somehow. Tyler Perry replaces Morgan Freeman as the crusading detective, replete with Holmesian-style deductive reasoning, and I can't think of a poorer replacement. Freeman is one of those guys who constantly gives solid performances no matter the film whereas Perry's character might as well be a walking corpse. There's no emotion from him, just cold stiffness.

Equally stiff is a lamentable Matthew Fox as the supposed villain. Although Fox certainly looks imposing, when it comes to his acting it's rather dire. I've never liked this guy, and his attempts at wide-eyed menace fall flat every time. Lower down the cast list we get a bloated Jean Reno and the walking plank of wood that is Ed Burns. Even the requisite fight scenes and action bits can't lift this lifeless thriller out of the doldrums.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

More super bland than super cop

4/10
Author: Adam Peters from Birkenhead United Kingdom
30 March 2015

(31%) A hugely by the numbers action thriller that I can only imagine the sheer number of people who walked out of a cinema after the final scene (or more likely after the first twenty or so minutes) and never giving it a so much as a seconds worth of thought ever again. Big name star (in America at least) Tyler Perry is decent here as he's clearly trying his best with the lame material he has been given, while bad guy Matthew Fox is much better that the one-note character he's been lumbered with. The biggest problem by a mile though is the fact that this isn't interesting enough to make it as a proper thriller, while the action is on the whole is too badly shot utilising the annoying shaky-cam technique to full fullest which just ruins all possible enjoyment. This isn't a terrible watch, but there's so little reason to actually do so.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Frequently so bad it's good again

5/10
Author: Adam Foidart from Winnipeg
28 February 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

So Bad it's good rating: 3,5/5 "Alex Cross" is a by-the-book detective thriller that's kind of enjoyable to watch, but isn't particularly good. Dr. Alex Cross (Tyler Perry) is a psychologist and police lieutenant who's one top of the world. His long time best friend Tommy Kane (Edward Burns) is his partner on the police squad, he's got a beautiful, loving wife, two daughters, another baby on the way and his sassy mother (or is it grandmother?) lives with him in a huge house. He's so good at his job he can tell you what your favorite colour is based on the type of ice cream you ordered. That's when our villain for the movie comes in. Matthew Fox plays a devious serial murderer nicknamed "The Picasso Killer". He uses a drug that paralyzes people's bodies (but not their eyes or their mouths) yet enables them to feel pain. He tortures them to get information, then kills them for fun and, feeling inspired, creates a charcoal drawing afterward for the police to keep. Apparently, this guy's been hired, or has some kind of super elaborate agenda because he is going after high-ranking employees of CEO Giles Mercier's company (Mercier is played by Jean Reno). When Cross gets in the way, Picasso decides to take the fight to a whole new, personal level...

I'm not going to say that this movie's great. I wouldn't even say it's good, but it is entertaining. The entertainment value is mostly due to the game of cat-and-mouse between Alex Cross and Picasso. I give credit to the movie for actually making two characters that feel like they are evenly matched. Alex Cross might be a super detective, but Picasso, he's a super assassin with Batman-level gadgets and insane skills. You will not believe to what lengths this guy goes to get his prey and you will wonder how many people will bite the dust before Cross manages to take him down. I also enjoyed Matthew Fox's totally outlandish performance as the killer. It's a nice balance to Tyler Perry's totally wooden and bland performance. Kind of like a steak that's totally burnt on the outside and raw on the inside, but tasty around the edges where the two extremes meet. The film is that right mix of flat-out ridiculous, predictable and bad elements combined with enough actually intriguing developments to make the whole thing watchable. Well, as long as it's with a bunch of friends who will make it that much more fun by laughing at it.

When it comes to the bad elements, there's no shortage in "Alex Cross". Here are some more memorable examples. Characters that appear to be crucial to the plot are suddenly dropped from the story entirely. What, I ask you, happened to Rachel Nichols' character? I don't mean the obvious. I mean: can someone tell me why there's a big moment with her, and then we never see her again? Characters are either ridiculously skilled, or so dumb they would struggle to survive on a daily basis. When it becomes obvious that the Picasso killer is inside a building, looking to kill his next target Tommy hears an explosion and runs out of the room, leaving the intended target alone for the killer to pick off. What a dummy! This is also a movie where characters just know things because as long as they're off-screen they don't actually exist within the movie. While on the side, they're sitting in a comfortably while reading the script and taking notes. Take the Picasso killer. He's just encountered the police for the first time, unexpectedly. Somehow though, he just happens to have a newspaper clipping showing Alex Cross, his partner and the other officer that confronted him tacked on his wall. How did he figure out who was going to come after him? Afterwards, how does he figure out where these people live? The only explanation can be that he read the script and it told him where to go.

Another great example: Cross is talking to a high-ranking criminal in a car so that they can be "alone". He's bribing the criminal in order to get some much needed information to catch Picasso. The bribe in question is a piece of evidence that would otherwise incriminate the guy if the case was ever revived. The bad guy comments that on top of the pistol that Alex is offering him, there was another one in the evidence locker. At that very moment, Tommy shines the laser scope on the mobster's forehead, shutting him up and making him agree to cooperate. Understand that Tommy is at least 10 meters away and there was no way he could have heard the conversation. How did he know the exact moment to shine the light on the guy's forehead? For that matter, why didn't the body guards catch the guy pulling out the gun and pointing it towards their boss? "Alex Cross" is a film that's badly put together and not particularly inventive either. The editing is simply awful when it comes to the action sequences, the characters' actions often don't make any sense and the story is utter madness more than once. Let's not forget the performances from the leads, which are so outlandish I recommend you watch the film just to see them. Tyler Perry is 100% uncharismatic and about as emotive as the Easter Island statues. Matthew Fox, he's playing an all-out lunatic, so over-the-top he's straight from a cartoon. The film is never really painful to watch, but the director really let these actors down. It boils down to a complete mess that's so bad, it becomes good again. (On DVD, August 1, 2014)

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Movie is Only Like Book In Name

3/10
Author: italianredneckgirl from paradise
13 January 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

***Contains Spoilers****** I have been a fan of the Alex Cross series since the very beginning. I was shocked when we found out the ending in Big Bad Wolf and waited and waited for these movies to start rolling in. First, Tyler Perry, come on! Where was James Patterson when castings were auditioned for? Alex Cross was clearly more of a,the late, Michael Clark Duncan, Denzel role. But anyone, anyone other than Tyler Perry. Frankly, the entire movie was cast inappropriately. And the spots where it's clear, the screen writing was trying to cram Cross' entire back-story into 1 movie, was sloppy at best. Not true to the integrity of Patterson's fast-paced, page turning fervor we are accustomed to. The only hope is that they aren't making any more.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Bang Ka-pow-thud

3/10
Author: rps-2 from Bracebridge Ont
29 November 2014

I continued watching this movie with increasing disgust just to see how bad it would get. It did not disappoint me. This is yet another graphic (and bloody and violent and pornographic) example of the decay of American society. If they had made movies in the last days of the Roman Empire, they would have been like this. The film starts with a violent gun battle, moves to no holds barred bare knuckle boxing and soon is showing sexual scenes that leave nothing to the imagination. On top of all this, it is set (although only partially shot)in Detroit, that urban symbol of everything that is wrong with American society. Hollywood pours out violent, negative films like this, full of gun violence then people recoil in horror when an 11 year old boy brandishing a BB gun and believing that life really is as portrayed in the movies is shot and killed by police.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

It turns out that Morgan Freeman is the REAL serial killer . . .

5/10
Author: Edgar Allan Pooh from The Gutters of Baltimore
22 November 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

. . . back in Detroit, when he was Madea. It's as if director Rob Cohen was bankrolled to make history's most ridiculous cop film ever. His cynical treatment suggests that the FBI recruited ALEX CROSS (portrayed by Mr. Freeman in two earlier films set AFTER this "prequel") because Cross was more of a rogue operator\"loose cannon" than Col. Oliver North. Cross is willing to bludgeon fellow (but HONEST) cops, return murder weapons to the known killers, manufacture illegal weapons, plant "evidence" to frame suspects on capital charges, and summarily execute unarmed citizens. The one thing that Cross is NOT good at is figuring out criminals and solving or preventing crimes, as he enables the crooks to rub out one of his partners, plus his wife, as well as most of the non-Black population of the Motor City. To make matters worse, LOST's heroic Dr. Jack is reduced here to cutting off hot chicks' fingers for the fun of it (when he's not destroying guys twice his size in cage fights). Yet when Matthew Fox ("Dr. Jack") faces Tyler Perry ("Madea") Mano A Mano, Madea makes mincemeat of a guy who up till then has been twice as tough and ten times as smart as anyone else on screen here. It's as if somebody spiked Popeye's spinach with stupid pills. The only thing about ALEX CROSS that rings true is that everyone DOES flee Detroit sooner rather than later!

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

A horrible mess from start to finish

4/10
Author: brchthethird from United States
14 November 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Tyler Perry and, to a similar degree, Matthew Fox do the best they can with a mediocre film which suffers from poor writing and direction. The drama and suspense is greatly lacking, and the action is poorly shot in the currently vogue shaky-cam style. The worst instance of this is in the climactic scene, which should have been how the movie ended. This brings me to another fault I have with the movie: the second ending, where Jean Reno's character gets his comeuppance. The scene was completely unnecessary and didn't make too much sense, especially with the way it ties things up a little too conveniently. Honestly, his character didn't even need to be in the movie. Doesn't really deserve a rental or VOD, but it's fairly good for one, mindless viewing.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Cross it Out

4/10
Author: kapelusznik18 from United States
3 November 2014

****SPOILERS**** Off the wall police drama involving super-cop and brainy Alex Cross, Tyler Perry, a Detroit policemen as well as part time psychoanalyst. Cross gets himself involved with this high priced just released from a mental institution assassin known as the "Butcher of Slygo", Matthew Fox, who's out to destroy the cities's, that's on the verge of bankruptcy, top political financier German industrialist Giles Mercier, Jean Reno, so it can be taken over, in what were made to believe , a group of Wall Street vulture capitalists. Cross himself was looking to exit Detroit and get a job with the FBI as a criminal profiler that paid 35% more then as a Detroit cop as well provided him and his family with full dental care which was all the motivation he needed. But it was his gabby old lady, wife, Maria, Carmen Ejogo, who wanted no part of it. Which made Cross have second thoughts putting her in front of him getting ahead in the world of law enforcement.

It was a lucky stroke for Cross when the "Butcher" knocked off Maria at a local restaurant, when he distracted Cross on the phone, that the by know mad as hell cop decided to stay in Detroit, like his old lady wanted him too, and take care of business in giving the "Butcher" everything that he had coming to him. This had Cross and his team of crime fighters Thomas Kane, Edward Burns, and Jody Klebanoff, Bonnie Bentley, get on the "Butcher's" tail who in fact was anything but the freelance psycho killer that Cross thought that he was.

****SPOILERS**** It's later on that we realize whom the "Butcher" was working for that involved a sick financial scam thought up by his greedy employer to save what little in money he still had left after the disastrous stock market crash on 2008! As well as keep him from going to jail for both stock fraud and insider trading that in fact, by backfiring on him, almost wipe him out. This ridicules plan also was soon to soon backfired when Cross and his partners Kane & Kelbanoff planted two kilos of cocaine on him at his hideout in far off Indonesia. That sudden turn of events had him busted by the local police and sentenced to death, by firing squad, by the state court!

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

I'd better have watched a German police movie.

4/10
Author: david-robin from France
18 September 2014

- the crime-scene cop, the one who is supposed to convey the horror of what he just found ... is the doctor of "Scrub". - the romance between 2 criminal investigators, in love since they're 12... - "Our killer thinks he is a Picasso". says the police team-mate... - "We are all formers from the German police" say the bodyguards...

At this point in the film, I had HUGE doubts regarding the potential of film. And then I saw skinny Matthew Fox swimming in a decorative water pipe, and I totally lost hope.

I will try to stick to plans, and produce a serious review :

- the plot is stupid. Main character Alex Cross (Tyler Perry) investigates the crimes of a contract killer, who gives out transparent clues on his next target by drawing Picasso-inspired fusains (just because he is crazy). The uninspired writers had several reminiscence of David Fincher's seVen (pregnant wife, self-punishment, etc).

- the cinematography is worse than most TV series.

- the music score by John Debney (several Marvel soundtracks, "Hanna Montana") is transparent. The crying violins are repeatedly boring. The moments of emotional tension are highlighted by digital percussions.

- the actors? ...ah ah. AH AH AH!

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

A tough act to follow

7/10
Author: bowmanblue from United Kingdom
6 June 2014

In 'Alex Cross' Tyler Perry steps up to try and fill the shoes of Morgan Freeman, who played the titular character in both Kiss the Girls and Along Came a Spider. Unfortunately, although he gives it his best shot, he does seem to fall a little short of the mark. When Freeman played the role, he gave it an air of quiet dignity where he was always ready to outwit his opponent. Perry is a big man, therefore a big gun suits him and he comes across more like he's ready to star in an action movie.

However, the lead role aside, the film chugs along quite nicely. It's based on the book of the same name and is quite tense and thrilling (if a little far-fetched in places). It's a buddy-cop film where the law enforcement are on the hunt of a killer/hit-man known by the alias 'Picasso.' There's nothing new to see here, but if you're a fan of the genre, you can certainly do worse. However, you could probably read a newspaper while watching it and still completely understand everything that goes on.

Worth a watch if there's nothing else.

http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/

Was the above review useful to you?


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

Add another review


Related Links

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