I just saw this movie today and i was amazed the movie is great I love Lucy Liu in this movie but one thing i still don't understand is the low rating this movie has on this website I mean wtf.
This should get at least a 6.5 or more, and i noticed that all horror movies have low ratings over here what's up with that?
and i dont understand 5.4..this movie should be 3.0 or less..
ZZZZZZZ.....I dont have anythinG
Because horror movie fanboys are impossible to please. Yeah, it bugs the hell out of me too.
----- Made you look! -----
but i have noticed that all horror movies have a low rating on imdb.com
shareOff course, a lot off people don't like horror, hance the low rating. But this movie, in my opinion didn't quite work out.
But remember, don't use IMDB as your rating standard ;)
It just wasn't a great movie.
Plus Lucy teased too much.
Have you seen all the people (553 to be exact) that have given this a 10? What are you 13 years old? This flick is an embarrassment and it completely wastes the cast. The fact this even gets a 5 is a testament to the proving of dumbing down of our movies over the years. This is a terrible vampire flick, and even "Blade:Trinity" which was a disappointment in itself after the excellent "Blade 2" was better than this mess of a film. I love vampire movies, and even the critically hated "Dracula 2000" is better than this, (though it's rated lower on IMDB) I am curious for those that give this such a high score, what other films do you consider good? Don't say any of the frieking remakes though. Except of course the 1st "Ring" is an exception (not the god-awful "Ring 2" though) it is even superior to the original Japanese version which no other can say. I'm guessing all the 10's given are from teenage boys that think just because they're vampires and nudity it automatically gets a 10. If you want to see nudity and a good movie, try watching "Basic Instinct!" It's insulting so many people have this at even 5/10, it went Direct-to-DVD for a reason, It blows. Just look at RottenTomatoes.com they have it at a perfectly accurate 31% which is what it deserves. So tell me what films you think score as good as this? Try Watching "The Thing" now that's a horror movie.
shareI don't base my viewing of a film off of RottenTomatoes either. Just because critics or people of IMDB think a film is bad doesn't mean the film is bad. There are a lot of movies that critics and IMDB users bashed that were good to me. I think a person should form his/her own opinion of movies instead of taking others words for it. No one should be bashed for giving their opinion good or bad. We all have different tastes.
shareDitto! Couldn't have said it better. It's sad that this is Mako's last film (not exactly "The Sand Pebbles" ). Totally disjointed! A lot of decent actors cashing a paycheck.
shareHorror movies have low ratings on here because most of them are terrible just like this! I only watched this because I paid for it there was a "Family Guy" episode on I've seen a dozen times. Nudity does not make a good film. 5.4 on here is generous and it's only because all these 553 Fanboys have given this terrible flick a 10! A 10? What the hell!!! Try watching some good movies some times so you can rate this what this deserves, and it's not a frieking 10!
shareIt's not that people don't like horror, it's that most horror movies suck ass.
sharephoenix you hit it right on the head!!!! "One Last Call" "The Eye" "The Messengers" "When a Stranger Calls"and on and on! Yeceecccchhhhh! All crapola
shareWorst movie ever! The entire movie can be summarized as such: A reporter follows a story, gets killed by vampires, wakes up as one of them, tries to kill herself, goes after the vampires, kills them, dies, comes back to life, roll credits. There was very little character building, no real story to it - just revenge with a tiny crossbow. I love vampire movies, but this showed hardly anything vampiric. The movie "BloodRayne" was more of a vampire movie with better atmosphere and story than Rise! Which tells us all something I think.
"Laugh! God is... He is the funniest man in the universe."
Horror's a very interesting genre. Practically everyone says they hate it, yet it's a surefire moneymaker. My brother owns a DVD rental shop and he says outside of new releases, horror movies are his biggest draw.
share2 Alien (1979) 8.5/10 (131246 votes)
3 Shining, The (1980) 8.4/10 (123676 votes)
4 Aliens (1986) 8.4/10 (126003 votes)
6 Jaws (1975) 8.3/10 (101856 votes)
11 Thing, The (1982) 8.1/10 (50927 votes)
16 Rosemary's Baby (1968) 8.0/10 (33352 votes)
17 Exorcist, The (1973) 8.0/10 (73683 votes)
23 Shaun of the Dead (2004) 8.0/10 (89540 votes)
25 Repulsion (1965) 8.0/10 (8145 votes)
27 Dawn of the Dead (1978) 7.9/10 (31053 votes)
28 Night of the Living Dead (1968) 7.9/10 (28009 votes)
31 Halloween (1978) 7.9/10 (45176 votes)
32 What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962) 7.9/10 (8887 votes)
38 Evil Dead II (1987) 7.8/10 (32213 votes)
39 Peeping Tom (1960) 7.8/10 (6142 votes)
40 Haunting, The (1963/I) 7.8/10 (8606 votes)
41 Freaks (1932) 7.8/10 (9481 votes)
44 Misery (1990) 7.7/10 (28812 votes)
45 Wicker Man, The (1973) 7.7/10 (14298 votes)
49 Locataire, Le (1976) 7.7/10 (6389 votes)
50 Others, The (2001) 7.7/10 (67060 votes)
... Above is just a small selection of highly-rated horror films on IMDB - so as you can see, not ALL horror films have a low rating on here, just the ones that suck in manners reminiscent of Rise...
It's made from bits of real panther, so you know it's good...
i haven't watched this movie yet - probably going to see it today. i'm not expecting too much - it looks very b-movie. but that's cool - i like b movies.
but, anyway, i wanted to chime in about horror movies having low ratings, getting bad reviews, etc. i have always noticed this - i've been a horror/ fantasy/ adventure fan since i was little. it's true that they are often "worse" if judged by the same standard as "regular" movies. often not as much thought goes into writing, acting and believability. i think this is because the purpose of horror, fantasy and adventure is to thrill and cause a visceral reaction and/ or to be pure cinematic spectacle (costumes, makeup, effects).
- - - - - -
'it's blue. blue's the colour o' love.' -Runt
I agree with your assessment of horror movie ratings on this site. I love horror (and fantasy) films. I think a lot of people go into horror movies expecting too much. I understand and accept the fact that most horror movies cannot possibly compete with other genres as far as believability.... but if they could, then what would be the point? They would no longer be good horror because, at least in my opinion, good horror is the ability to effectively suspend reality in order to frighten the audience. In my opinion, the main obstacle that writers/actors/directors working in the horror genre face is the task of making an unrealistic idea seam plausible in the world they create.
That said... I think that's the problem with this movie. The story does not follow traditional vampire lore (yes, vampire lore tends to be rather lenient, as most vampire movies do not include all of the rules- I consider vampire "rules" to stem from Bram Stoker's "Dracula" because, as far as I know, that's the first time the vampire as we know it was really introduced into popular culture). In this movie, the vampires don't have fangs (?)... instead they use this little knife necklace thing that looked to me to be in the shape of a cross (problem? most vampires throughout history are burned by crosses), and it seems that they all still have their souls, because Lucy Liu feels bad about killing people and even the vampire who turned her says that she has personal boundaries... like not killing children (the soul thing is also a problem in the sense that if a person dies, he/she loses his/her soul... although, i admit, it's been awhile since I read Dracula but in the book, Dracula may technically still have his soul... so that may not be too ridiculous). Anyway, forgive me for over-summarizing the plot, but my point is that the movie does not follow the proper lore. That would be all good and well except that, not only does the movie not follow the traditional rules, but it does not clearly define alternate rules. The plot starts off fast and then gets chopped up into flashbacks and then back-to-realities in such a way that it becomes incoherent and prevents any real rules to be established. The plot doesn't allow for proper development of the world the writer created and, therefore, the story seems unbelievable. The vampires don't work in this movie because their powers and limits aren't well-defined.
And now for the real answer: you can't trust votes on IMDb because so many people vote in an attempt to influence the overall score towards their opinion.
For example, you think the movie should get 6.5, so did you vote 6 or 7? More likely you voted 10 to try and sway the overall score towards your 6.5. Other people come on here and see 5.4 and think "man, this movie blows, it doesn't deserve 5.4" and give it 1 instead, when if asked independently they'd probably give it 3 or 4.
If everyone voted the score they think rather than just voting the max or min to try and sway the score, IMDb ratings would be much more reliable.
You hit the nail on the head, niall-smyth.
share[deleted]
Nice argument :)
I'd just like to add that it probably got a 5.4 rating because all the disgruntled "pierced, dungeon&dragons, posers" didn't get exactly what they expected to get :)
Shame on Sebastian Gutierrez for making a smart and thoughtfull film instead, eh?
Because it sucked?
"No plot - no character interaction or motivation - no back story - no explanations - hundred year old vampires die at the hands of a newb rogue with the mere stroke of the screenwriters pen not to mention the lack of being able to defend themselves or fight back - throw in a mysterious "Yoda" figure... this movie is almost a waste of a written review if it hadn't pissed me off so much. "
It almost seems like it would have been better to leave the whole vampire thing out of it and just have it be a woman revenge movie.
I'd say 500 of the 513 10 star reviews were because of the tits - and 13 people actually liked it, either that or the film company makes fake accounts to vote their own films up. Check the reviews on NetFlix and see what the people that saw this for free thought, it barely gets 2 out of 5 stars.
Just nothing but a load of crap, it's ashamed to call it HORROR and brings shame to horror movies, YUK! this is worthless piece of crap i give 0
shareI gave it 1 Star and that was to generous!
shareIt's still overrated with a score of 5.4.
share