MovieChat Forums > Assassin's Creed (2016) Discussion > What would you rate it out of 10?

What would you rate it out of 10?


I haven't seen the film yet, and all I've heard from most critics is that it's terrible. I want to know the opinions of the average movie-goer. How good did you think it was out of 10?

reply

I'd give it a 7/10.

For the people giving it a 3-4 "which is generous" - this just isn't your type of film. It is more motion and action than story, and I kind of like that.

As a viewer who is a fan of the games, yes - it has little in common with the game story, but it wasn't suppose to be an adaptation in the first place.

reply

It is more motion and action than story?? Dude, it's the other way around, it's too overplotted that made it confusing for those people who don't play the games.

reply

The whole plot of the film can be summarized in 3-4 sentences. Are there unexplained things in it - yes. Is this something new for movies - no. Is it confusing - it depends. Everything related to the plot of the movie was somewhat explained, everything that was blurry and mysterious would be explained in an eventual sequel (like in the actual games).

reply

But I guess the sequel wouldn't be produced now considering the flop that's happening on the box office. They need more than 250 US dollars only to make a profit.

reply

Dont get it :/ people dishing out 8s which is lit "One of the better movies ive seen in my whole life" when 10 is Masterpiece nothing will compare to it. This movie is an average 4 its below ok its watchable a meh and a shrug, just because you like the games does not mean you have to give this movie an 8, when the games has so much more depth then this movie, its like giving "Avatar the last airbender M nigh an 9 just because the cartoon is so darn good etc.

reply

That's what those ratings mean to you. They won't mean the same thing to other people

reply

5

reply

3/10, for the cinematography and the interiors in Irons office. OMG that was one of the worst films I have ever seen in a long time. I don't know who came up with the bright idea to focus most of the idiotic story on the animus Asbergo industries when that's a small overall portion of the games.

There won't be a sequel. Hopefully someone will make a historical mini series based on the games.

"Queens Conquer"

reply

6(,5)/10 I also played the games but none of that changed my mind on the film as a whole.

reply

8/10 but I gave it a 10/10 because of all the paid trolls and paid reviewers on IMDb, like Amazon.com and Rotten Tomatoes.

reply

Better than i expected, an okay action flick, 6 from me.
Was more entertaining than any of the games i've played in the series, but that's not saying much.

reply

I've never played the game (gave up playing video games years ago), and I was mostly motivated to see it because I enjoy Michael Fassbender. That said, even he couldn't save it, although it was a bit better than expected. I gave it a 5/10. I checked my voting history, and live action based-on-video-game movies seem to have a ceiling of 7/10 with me.

reply

Why did you give up games? I felt as I got older I would too but they've become an escape of sorts for me. Nothing's going on I need to escape from but I enjoyed the escape from reality

reply

6 or 7 out of 10

reply

Having never played the games (not a gamer at all, really) and being a history major who heard people constantly talking about the game whenever we saw pictures of cities featured in the game's historical scenes --- I'd rate it a 7/10. Definitely worth catching a second time at theatres.

Negatives:
-Couldn't understand half of what one character was saying when she spoke.
-Little disjointed at the beginning.
-Not enough Maria (female assassin from Aguilar's timeline)
-Could've used more explanation of the bleedover stuff, but was cool none the less, and an interesting concept.
-Felt like, for people who aren't familiar with the games, there needed to be just a little more info about the Assassins.

Positives:
-Michael Fassbender (PS: Great American accent, by the way, not the vanilla one often done) is excellent as always.
-Jeremy Irons, also excellent as always. I want to know more about his character, and of his late wife (I assume he was married to Sofia's mother, and that he is indeed her biological father).
-All the fight scenes were well done, lit well enough to actually be appreciated without having to go home and seriously brighten the screen, and at a pace that flowed like a well choreographed dance.
-Brenden Gleeson, again excellent as always. [PS: Can we have more of him in the next one, flashbacks or something?]
-Maria (Ariane Labed) was amazing, and I wish she could get her own movie as some prequel/sidestory to A.C.
-The transitions between C.L. in the present, hooked to a machine - going back to Aguilar's life, then returning to C.L. in the present. Well done, actually quite stunning.
-Maria and Aguilar's fighting together, their sparse dialogue, and all the non-verbals between the two.
-The Aguilar era stuff was all fantastic. I loved it.
-The scene with Moussa explaining things to C.L.
-When the descendants, including Moussa, come for C.L. in the machine and they use all the old weapons, plus we see Joseph's final fight.
-Sofia and C.L. at the end.
-The final shot of Moussa, C.L., and Lin (I think I got her name right?) on the rooftop.
-The whole idea of the Fruit and what it does, is just cool. (I say this as someone who watched the old WITCHBLADE TV series where her gauntlet was made of a branch of the tree from the Garden of Eden.)
-Aguilar and the other Assassins appearing during the last session with the machine (I know it had a name, just can't remember what it was), particularly C.L.'s mother & the woman who I swear looked like Sofia.

"There is still hope." - Arwen

reply