IMDb > Alex Cross (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Alex Cross
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
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
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Alex Cross More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 6 of 15: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 150 reviews in total 

Silly, Cheesy and Nothing new

Author: Floated2
19 December 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

As someone who has not read any of the novels, and had not known much about the character or of it's plot, I still found Alex Cross to be subpar. Alex Cross played itself as a brainless and not too interesting thriller with several cheesy moments and silly dialogue. From the beginning, the way Picasso (Matthew Fox) was introduced was hard to believe. His character came down to an MMA sporting event, simply hands one of the mangers money then is put up to fight an opponent in a matter of minutes. Although Picasso was the best part of the film and Matthew Fox played his character great at points but it wasn't enough to save the film.

Tyler Perry did a decent job as the serious lead of Alex Cross, but having not read the novels, I am not aware of how the character was supposed to act. I did enjoy some of the action scenes including Picasso. "Alex Cross" plays itself as the typical film where the villain and lead first make their encounter, then the villain continuously stalks the lead wanting something of his, the lead being scared and having to to avoid it, and up to the end the lead takes his revenge and eventually kills the villain. There was some violence towards women in the film specifically where Picasso kills Alex Cross's wife (whom was months due pregnant), which was a cheap shot for a "professional" villain in which it happened. This is where and why Alex Cross goes after Picasso, as it does make sense but it could have been done different as we have seen many revenge seeking films before.

Like many of these type of films, it suffers from an interesting plot, though it does have some okay scenes but it isn't enough to keep those truly entertained to not notice its flaws. I also didn't find much of the chemistry between Tyler Perry and Edward Burns. "Alex Cross" simply felt cheesy and could have been done with another lead and a far better script, with re writes.

Was the above review useful to you?

Cross of the list

Author: Prismark10 from United Kingdom
13 October 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I have never seen the Madea films so this is the first time I have seen Tyler Perry in action. As Alex Cross he is stepping into the shoes of Morgan Freeman in this reboot. Well Freeman is a hard act to follow although I am unsure as to who Perry's Cross is by the end of the film.

The main star of the film is actually Matthew Fox as the hired killer Picasso. He buffed himself up and lost a lot of weight as the callous and amoral killer.

The biggest problem with the film is the screenplay. It has more holes than Swiss cheese. It means the performers are actually hampered with nonsensical flaws.

At the beginning Fox in a suit pays someone to get involved in a MMA fight. The spectators laugh at him even though when he takes his shirt off he has ripped muscles and tattoos. Even his opponent a seasoned fighter does not twig this guy is a ringer and gets paralysed. His performance is so impressive that an Oriental woman at the fight takes a shine to him, takes him to her home and gets involved in bondage with dire results.

Yet at the end of the film we have a prospect of Perry (a slightly overweight actor best known for appearing in drag) going one on one with Fox even though we have seen at the beginning of the film what he did to the MMA fighter!

In between this Fox who is a gun for hire seemingly gets personal for no reason other than getting shot by the police who are actually just doing their job and takes a detour by going after Perry and his comrades.

Not to forget that one of Fox's hit depends on split second timing depending on a train being on a certain position whilst at the same time his intended victims just arriving somewhere else. How he has planned all this when he is busy going after Perry and co makes the mind boggle.

Also Jean Reno the guy who played the treacherous agent in the first Mission Impossible turns up for a few minutes as the main chief executive of a corporation whose employees are being targeted by the assassin and who is the ultimate target. I wonder who the actual mastermind will be!

This is not to say that its all daftly entertaining. Its just that this is a different Alex Cross as portrayed by Morgan Freeman. We are told Cross is clever and he has his 'Sherlock Holmes' moment at the beginning but very little as to how he arrives with his conclusions.

Its a mash up of an action film and something cerebral. It passes away the time but I doubt this will be a successful rebooted franchise.

Was the above review useful to you?

Thrill, suspense, emotion and action.

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?

Tyler Perry inferior/Matthew Fox superior

Author: SnoopyStyle
29 August 2013

Tyler Perry is taking over Morgan Freeman as the fictional doctor/police detective. Morgan had played him in the previous two installments of the series, Kiss the girls and Along Came a Spider. Sadly Tyler Perry is an inferior lead.

This time Alex Cross is confronting an assassin played by Matthew Fox who is taking on a rich and powerful business. Matthew is looking completely different here. He is gaunt and unlike any of the warm-hearted nice guys he usually plays.

There is a nice tight thriller here. Tyler Perry doesn't help. But he's not so bad as to break it. He is somewhat stiff and a little clunky. He doesn't have the gravitas of Morgan Freeman. But it's also too easy to demean him.

Was the above review useful to you?

dumb film

Author: antoniotierno from Italy
26 July 2013

The greatest problem in this movie is how it's been conceived, with the whole plot seeming extremely unlikely. Nothing about this thriller is thrilling, everything's clichéd and quite tedious. Furthermore much of the dialogue feels forced as blatant exposition is placed throughout normal conversations. Even when the movie (rarely) surprises the audience the script offers very little. When you think the movie has manipulated you into trying to care about these characters, all of a sudden it reveals an unnecessary. "Alex Cross" tries to be a grand thriller but fails on nearly every level. It's the script and the plot making this Cross unbearable.

Was the above review useful to you?

Simply the wrong combination of actors and director

Author: game-editor
27 March 2013

Let's start off with the director. I don't dislike Rob Cohen. Many people believe that "XXX: State of the union" was a flop because of him. However, I think he was walking into a bad one to start with. Knight Rider was iffy at best. Honestly, the last movie that he was involved in that I would give a couple of thumbs up to would be Running Man. Still a classic. Being handed a gauntlet as big as the Alex Cross books is not an easy thing to hold on to. The books were amazing, but we have seen that they can be converted into great movies simply by watching "Along Came a Spider" and "Kiss the Girls". I feel that he most likely over directed the movie. The characters were too boxed in. The lines, facial expressions and body motions looked choppy and uncomfortable. However, was this his fault? Not necessarily. The actors in the movie were simply incorrect for it. First of all, I cannot classify Tyler Perry as a top of the line actor, but he is not horrible. He has been in some good movies and has had me rolling on the floor a couple of times. Not only was he working out of his comfort zone (very noticeably so), but he was following the work of... wait for it... MORGAN EFFING FREEMAN. Not many can follow that. I think the most over directed person was probably Matthew Fox. The character he played made no sense. His actions and personality did not in any way shape or form link up with the books. The facial expressions and movements looked like they would work in a video game, but definitely not in a movie. We have seen him play a character with this type of background, so it could not be all his fault. I cannot describe what is wrong with Nana Mama in this movie. She showed none of the characteristics from the books that made me fall for the character. She acted almost as psychotic as the assassin. Fudged story line, over directing, character mismatches, failed relationship connections, on and on and on.

Was the above review useful to you?

Not Bad, But Not Good Enough To Make Me Want To See More Of The Character

Author: sddavis63 ( from Niagara Region, Ontario, Canada
22 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'm not a big Tyler Perry fan, and in portraying Alex Cross he was stepping into some pretty big shoes, since the character had been twice played by Morgan Freeman (In Along Came A Spider and Kiss The Girls) - who I do like. So my expectation weren't exactly at a premium coming in. As far as Perry was concerned, I'd say he was all right in the role. He was nothing special; he wasn't Morgan Freeman. But he was all right. He had his own unique take on the character. Alex Cross in this movie is rougher, coarser, more violent - but just as cerebral in his own way. That evolution of the character was undoubtedly to allow this to take on more of an action feel, and it was fuelled by the plot device of having Cross's wife killed off by the serial killer he's trying to find. So for at least half of this movie, Cross is less the psychologist/detective and more the grieving husband seeking vengeance against his wife's killer. Honestly, it made the character somewhat less noble, and it made the movie somewhat over the top at times.

One thing that was definitely needed was a little better explanation of the serial killer and his motives - and of the motives of the guy who hired him. Another thing that would have helped would have been a bit more passion or energy in the performances. No one (including Perry) really stood out in this and took hold of the movie. I also wasn't clear on the need to kill off Monica (Rachel Nichols) - Cross's colleague. She was involved with Cross's other partner Kane (Edward Burns) but killing her off at virtually the same time Cross's wife was killed made her death fade away into the background a bit and we never really thought about it all that much.

However, there were some things that worked well. There were a few "cover your eyes" moments at the beginning, as the torture of the first victim was portrayed. The killing of Cross's wife (although it seemed, as I said, contrived more as a way of evolving the character than an integral and necessary part of the film) certainly brought some emotional reactions forth, and the final confrontation between Cross and the killer was pretty well done.

I wouldn't call this a failure. It's received some pretty bad reviews. I'm going to rate it as a 6/10, but I don't think it was good enough to result in any ongoing Alex Cross movies, if that was the intention of the producers.

Was the above review useful to you?

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

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?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Deleted scenes would improve movie

Author: Atlvid from United States
19 June 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The DVD deleted scene with Cross figuring out the height & weight of the villain would have gone a long way to giving credibility to the character - rather than thinking he knew every thing just because he read the script. The other deleted scenes also added more to the story. Matthew Fox's transformation from his Lost character to Picasso was amazing. Switching from a good cop to bad cop seemed arbitrary and way over done. The director seemed to just go through the motions without regard for how the story would be viewed. Parts of his DVD commentary regarding current politicians and how he avoided taxes were pathetic and should have been excised by the producers.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Oh hey... A Tyler Perry movie I could sit through

Author: tiericafe from Australia
1 May 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Tyler Perry's, Alex Cross, wasn't even that bad considering the other movies he's made. So basically the movie was very average and the only thing holding it together was Matthew Fox's role. Typically, it starts off with the usual cliché 'save the day' scenario where Perry''s character, the Almighty Detective Alex Cross, catches yet another bad guy. After this ever so tiresome day of ridding the city from evil its clear his life is going smoothly; receiving news of his unborn child and a promising job opportunity at the FBI, what could possibly go awry? Cue in Mr. Fox. Matthew Fox is incredibly believable in his role as Picassso, a psychotic killer using unthinkable methods to torture his victims. His presence in the film was riveting which had you rooting for him rather than the police achieving justice. The movie in my opinion is a 5. When Cross' wife is shot by Picasso it is emphasized in the film with the scene of the death and funeral however when one of his fellow police mates are tortured and killed by Picasso its like no one cared. The movie probably mentioned it in two lines and that was it. It was if it was swept underneath the rug. So unrealistic. And the fact that Cross predicted the arrival of Picasso two seconds before he actually arrived in the last scene made me roll my eyes so hard I was borderline having a stroke. If I was deducting points from this movie for all the loose ends and its unrealistic nature, the score would be non existent. So I now present this film with 4 points for Matthew Fox's great achievement in portraying a crazy bug eyed killer and 1 point for Tyler Perry actually hiring Matthew Fox. Kudos Tyler Perry! At least you got something right.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 6 of 15: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [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