3D is not a substitute for a plot.

Rating: 1/10 (23 September 2010)

There is no doubt that 3D technology has taken the whole movie- watching experience to an entirely new level. Directors like James Cameron proved themselves to be masters of 3D, taking us to an incredible universe with Avatar. But there are also directors like Paul Anderson, who seem to believe that 3D is a tool to cover up a complete absence of any vestige of a plot.
I'm not a fan of the Resident Evil franchise or the video game, and I have not watched all the previous movies. But a movie should be made for everybody and not for one set of fans. Resident Evil: Afterlife falls flat on all counts: the plot is thinner than the cross- section of a human hair, the performances are plastic, the action sequences are poorly choreographed and in some cases look like straight rip-offs from The Matrix.
There have been numerous movies on the same theme: a virus destroys most of humanity, and there's a small group of survivors trapped among the zombies, and they have to get to a safe house. This theme was brilliantly explored in movies such as I am Legend, adorned with Will Smith's masterpiece of a performance. But the Resident Evil series goes through it over and over again, offering nothing new. Then there are some pointless flashback scenes just to give an impression that this movie is part of some magnificent franchise. And on top of everything else, there are the added superpowers which the evil guy acquires, and the closing scene in which thousands of helicopters close in on the survivors' ship, paving the way for another sequel. Which i'm definitely not watching, nor recommending.
The only bright spot of the movie is the presence of Wentworth Miller, if you're a Prison Break fan. Apart from that, the needless slow- motion stunts laced with an overdose of CGI (all in 3D) do not add up to anything resembling a movie.