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 6 of 16: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [Next]
Index 152 reviews in total 

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?


Page 6 of 16: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [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