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 guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Alex Cross More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 16:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 151 reviews in total 

22 out of 38 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?

15 out of 27 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?

47 out of 91 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:

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 4 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 6 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 8 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?

1 out of 1 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 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:

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?


Page 2 of 16:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [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