got some Razzie noms. Was it really THAT bad?

I just watched it, and I thought it was okay. Better than what the current IMDB rating of 4.9 would suggest to me, anyway (I think a 6 or maybe a 7 would be about right). Certainly it could have been shortened a little, and the motivations of the main bad guy been made more explicit.

Its pretty bad, the acting, lame dialogue and poor jokes make it horrible, I thought the only good bit was Matthew Fox portrayal of a cold psycho killer. I thought he did a good job, other than that it was pathetic.

Yes, it realy was that bad. As one of thee reviewers commented, at best 3 or 4 stars if he was in a good mood. For me, I found it excrutiatingly bad and found it hard to judge which was worst, the writing, the directing or the acting.

To me, I think it was the writing and the direction and acting followed it from there. Watching the film, I could not help thinking that James Patterson (the writier of the original novels) receivved author's royalties to the rights to use the protagonist's name and nothing else unless he sold the concept as a franchise. It felt as if the screenwriters of this dreadful script had not bothered to read the original James Patterson books (let alone the previous film versions) to get some understanding of the characters, the writing style, the plots and sub-plots etc. Essentially, the character Alex Cross is an intelligent forensic investigator with finely honed skilles as a successful criminal profiler. In this film, the performance of 'Alex Cross' as a profiler amounted to no more than a basis 'criminal profiling 101' without any sign of depth or perception. The other issue I had was that these screenwriters turned the character into an unbelievable full tilt action hero, rather thaan an intelligent profiler and investigator. In other words, the full "Rambo".

The most terrifing thing about this movie was in the closing scenes where it is intimated that there will be a sequel in this franchise. Sincerely, I hope not and I would hope the box office takings, the critical reviews and the imdb ratings will kill that idea before it gets any oxygen whatsoever. I hope they don't get any fanciful ideas of returning the great Morgan Freeman to the role he perfected in "Kiss the Girls"and "Along Came a Spider". I can only presume he refused any part in this film (if indeed he had been offered the script to read). Obviously, he couldn't resurrect the role as he is quietly aging now and it would be hard to accept a septegenarian into a role fitting for a 40/50 yo man. It is bad enough seeing Harrison Ford trying to pass for a 40 yeor old in films and looking ridiculous and unbelievable in the process.

The best thing I could say about this film is that it should have went straight to video and the whole crew nominated themselves as 'Alan Smithies' and the cast requested to be 'uncredited' for this shocker. It would not look good on a c.v. imho.

I rate it 3/4 stars as I am in a good mood today.


Locked my wire coat-hanger in the car - good thing that I always carry spare keys in my pocket :)

You probably gave the best sentiment I've read on this board, just forgot the book fans (like me) who are disappointed in the adaptation of the character and the omission of some (like Sampson).

Fighting a religious war is like fighting over whose imaginary friend is better.