I almost didn't rent this movie cause of the low rating... But just watched it and... WOWWWW, what a great movie!! Intense, suspense, drama, action has it all! so cool. Come on people, this is worth at least a 7.5... Any ideas, why the low rating?
shareI thought you were going to say what I was thinking: why is it as high as 6.2?
It should be 2.3 (no, not really that low - but close). I didn't find it thrilling or suspenseful. And the only thing intriguing is wanting see how it ends (and the sooner the better).
marks662 wrote:
"I thought you were going to say what I was thinking: why is it as high as 6.2?"
-------------------------------------------------
Exactly what I was thinking! I can't remember a more tedious film I've seen in the past couple of years, really dreadful and pretentious. I gave it a 4.
I gave it a 4 too. Can't understand the high rating... pretty bad movie in every aspect.
shareI don't understand you people. It's a minimum of 9/10.
I give a 10 about 1 out of every 100 movies I watch, and a 9/10 for about 3-8 out of every 100 movies I watch.
I don't see what was tedious about it. It was very engaging.
-ClintJCL
http://clintjcl.wordpress.com/category/reviews/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/clintjcl
I agree.
For a suspense movie, this pretty much delivered. I honestly don't know why it's gotten such bad reviews. The only thing that kept me from buying it earlier was the thought of Jim Carrey in a serious role. And I'll admit I was waiting for him to make a funny face the first two scenes.
Yes, the ending is a little drawn-out compared to mind-twisting cliffhangers like Memento or even The Machinist (which has a plot similar to this one, except instead of seeing the number 23, he sees a cowboy). The freaky thing is that it still left me with so many unanswered questions, like: why did Dr. Leary get so obsessed with the number when he himself wrote it off as numerology? Why did Sparrow's mother kill herself? And why was his father so obsessed with the number as well?
All in all, I found it quite good. Not a movie that left me breathless and pondering for hours about how the fabric of reality might be woven together, but still a good movie.
I'd give it an 8 out of 10.
If he'd gone with some plot-twisting ending à la Saw, I'd bump it up to 9.
I agree.
For a suspense movie, this pretty much delivered. I honestly don't know why it's gotten such bad reviews. The only thing that kept me from buying it earlier was the thought of Jim Carrey in a serious role. And I'll admit I was waiting for him to make a funny face the first two scenes.
Yes, the ending is a little drawn-out compared to mind-twisting cliffhangers like Memento or even The Machinist (which has a plot similar to this one, except instead of seeing the number 23, he sees a cowboy). The freaky thing is that it still left me with so many unanswered questions, like: why did Dr. Leary get so obsessed with the number when he himself wrote it off as numerology? Why did Sparrow's mother kill herself? And why was his father so obsessed with the number as well?
All in all, I found it quite good. Not a movie that left me breathless and pondering for hours about how the fabric of reality might be woven together, but still a good movie.
I'd give it an 8 out of 10.
If he'd gone with some plot-twisting ending à la Saw, I'd bump it up to 9.
I agree,it's a excellent movie.
shareI gave it a 4 as well. 6.2 is far to high.
shareExactly, why is it as high as 6.2?
I couldn't finish watching it. Just silly and predictable, but jarring visual shifts that reminded me of a comic book with its extreme changes in style from ordinary to dark to very high-key or high contrast. And too much gratuitous sex. The whole thing was pointless to me.
Carrey was good, but that's not enough to keep me watching. I give it a 3.
This movie couldn't hold my attention at all. After the scene where Suicide Blonde jumped out of the window, it was a big yawner. Not even Fabrizia could save this one. Also, Jim Carrey is NOT sexy - I don't want to see him in bedroom scenes! And Virginia Madsen wasn't right for this part. She's very motherly and even matronly. She was right for "The Haunting in Connecticut" but not this movie. The BEST part was the opening credits! Too bad it went downhill from there....
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. -Edison
Wow I didnt know joel schumacher commented on imdb message boards. I dont understand how anyone can say with a straight face that this film was anything above a 5, seriously, the movie was literally a 8 *beep* mini movies loosely tied into one.
shareThis film is terrible, full of dumb, washed-up clichés and pitiful acting - rented this crap on dvd and just didn't give a rat's arse about any of the nonsense after about an hour or so, when I pressed the stop button. Went for Costa-Gavras' Le Couperet, instead - way better.
shareI agree. The movie was dark but good. Ratings get lower over time, its natural.
"go ask Alice, when she's ten feet tall"
Nah, just same old 23 jerks that keep voting a 2.3 for they forgot their childhoods after 23 years and must relive it every day.
=======================================
What kind of movie are you?
A 5 or a 6 for me. Can't decide but I'm pretty ok with the imdb average. There are many other, older movies which got undeservingly rated down.
__________________________
Last watched: http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=7838626
6.2 seems a bit high to me as well; I rated it a 5. Not much of a mystery, not very suspenseful, and just not that good. I didn't care for Jim Carrey's character a lick, and it ended up being one of those movies where I'm wishing it would hurry up and end already.
It wasn't THAT bad, Jim Carrey's acting was the highlight of the film though IMHO, also even good underrated films get a weird ratings on IMDb, like John Q., Courage Under Fire, The Siege, Final Destination and a few others.
"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit' me!" Hudson in Aliens.
Ratings on IMDB don't mean *beep*
Unless you care what a bunch of pretentious douchebags (who think they're Roger *beep* Ebert) think...
I honestly don't think this film is worth more than 6.5 rating. It wasn't as good as some of you guys say.
shareCan't believe I never seen this myself. It always intrigued me except the rating turned me off. But the prospect on Jim Carrey in a thriller is too much to pass up. I will check this out soon.
shareIt wasn't terrible but by no means was it mind bending or not predictable. I'm really not impressed with the film at all and they could have used anyone to play Jim's role and it would have been just as bad.
shareCarrey's acting was the highlight because halfway through you could tell he was the only one trying.
shareI normally like his acting, but in this movie it was so bad, at times, that you could not forget that you were watching someone saying lines. In other words.... it was bad enough to ruin the fantasy that it was really happening.
shareI quite agree with the OP, this movie was so bad i remember it - months later for it's sheer awfulness, it was so appalling with such a daft and dull ending (and for a movie based entirely on the suspense premise of WTF is going on the ending means everything).
Edit (woah should read the body of messages i respond to - he said it deserved MORE than a very respectable 6.2....!!!????)
This film was a 2 out of 10.
This movie is airing as i write this. It had a 1/5 rating. Seriously, wtf?! I wouldn't have noticed it if it wasn't for Jim.
It's better than 1/5 that's for sure.
6.2 is really not a bad rating. It means "OK film, worth seeing, but don't go in with huge expectations." Which is the right call for this movie.
What's more surprising is how much the critics absolutely detested this movie. I think their hatred comes from the fact the ending is effectively a deus ex machina. We find out 95% of the way through the movie that the main character cannot remember extended periods of his life? The critics are right, that is extremely cheesy. It's no different than finding out the author was Jim Carrey's twin brother who had been living under the stairs in his house for 15 years.
But they are wrong to dismiss the whole movie for that. It's a 6/10. You could talk me into a 5.