I'm not a pothead, but I like drug comedies like Grandma's Boy, & Half Baked and thought this would be another goofy pot movie....wow what a piece of crap.

I don't think I even smirked once at this movie. I like Anna Faris, Danny Masterson, Adam Brody but the movie was just a waste of film and talent. I mean if it was trying to tell people to not do drugs, good luck with that if they get the audiences' attention quick enough, which it won't. Personally, I don't even think potheads will find this funny at all.

I don't know what the director or writers were thinking but, please no more pathetic movies like this.


The people who made this film must must really be in love with Anna Faris to think that 90 minutes of her making scrunchy faces was a movie. She is fun to watch for her physical comedy, but that was the only thing I enjoyed watching this. I thought the writing was poor and the actors miscast. Adrian Brody with dreadlocks? John Krasinski as an introvert? Danny Trejo showed up and didn't even get to do anything badass.

Was the movie trying to be clever by having pot dealers talk economics and putting in undertones of existentialism and communist dogma? Or was it supposed to be mindless fun as other reviewers suggested? The end result is that it doesn't work either way.

Here's my spoiler: a girl gets stoned, effs things up, runs from place to place meeting people and getting into situations meant to be ironic, and continues to screw things up until finally she is arrested and sentenced to community service.

I didn't think any of the situations she ended up in were clever, and the settings were very mundane--unforgivable for a movie that is meant to be a journey or a "day in the life." I should have felt more transported, but not once did I wish I was there or in her place. I did laugh a few times, but overall it adds up to one I won't watch again.


Save the remaining 85 minutes for something more important, like cleaning your cuticles. I always thought the Anna Faris was the most likable (a.k.a. least annoying) aspect of the Scary Movie franchise. In this movie it looks like she is desperately trying to recreate being stoned, funny and yet still managing to be cute while clinging desperately to a mid-20 something youthfulness. Unfortunately she comes across more like Meg Ryan on sedatives.

I wanted to like this movie, ever since I saw the trailer. Another sad example of a trailer that is better than the movie itself. It had possibilities. This is a "stoner" movie, or rather it tries to be one. The quintessential element of every "stoner" movie is the characterizations. The "stoner", though unreliable at times and high the rest of time, is generally quite likable. The "stoner" encounters unusual people and situations while under the influence. There is usually a convoluted, yet complicated story arc or a ridiculously easy plot masquerading as convoluted one. Then the "Happy" ending.

Anna's "Jane F" is pretty stupid even for a severe homeopath. There is hardly anything likable about her character. The crazy wobbling and ,"pause", Memento moments get old quickly. I do declare from the back she looks like an elderly man. Also the crows feet do not help her "youthful" exuberance. Her performance actually manged to sever any sex appeal Anna may have had left. It's all down hill from here. The movie left me empty, saddened and depressed, like Anna's facial expressions. She didn't look stoned, she look like she had Alzheimer's, needed to be committed (nervous breakdown) or is suffering from progeria (all three or in any random combination). The movie also feels as if the people making this movie are faking it (never tried the product). Her "trips" are more indicative of acid or special k, rather than cannibus. I was half expecting her to jump off a roof top or claim that she is hearing colors. And what's with all the paranoia?? Skinny (not cute), white blonde girl. What does she have to worry about from the "man"? America loves skinny, white blonde chicks. It is like making a movie with Paris Hilton and expecting the audience to feel for her character instead of cheering when that character gets horribly dead. Its just not going to happen.

Jane gets stoned, inadvertently gets more stoned when she steals (twice), then ends up in a crazy, random adventure that really was pointless in the end. For a "stoner" she also manages to flush more product than she actually smokes. The acting would have made more sense if she was a NARC trying to "act" high (instead of getting high). This movie may have worked if there had not been any other "stoner" movie in existence, except for Reefer Madness. You expect the "randomness" and some questionably impaired judgment calls. It is the way the characters deal with each other and the situations that makes it enjoyable.

Alcohol did little to impair me from the truth and pain of this movie, so I doubt smoking ganja will help the situation (unless of course you smoke enough that you pass out and do not awake until the movie ends). Grandma's Boy is a recent stoner movie that was unexpectedly good (other better possibilities include Harold and Kumar, any Cheech and Chong movie, Dazed and Confused, Half-Baked, etc). See those instead. And though I didn't like Knocked Up, it definitely was better than this.

I have been giving movie the 2nd opportunity to change my mind. If I felt negatively about a movie, I will reserve the review until I had given the film a 2nd viewing. If I have the same reaction a 2nd time, it was meant to be. The first time I watched this, I was confused and a little sad. The 2nd viewing just made me mad and annoyed. "The Irony of It All."


look, i rented this because Jim from the office is in it and i love him. but this movie is awful and pointless. everything this stoner chick does makes things even worse and in the end there's no resolution. it starts with her screwing herself over and ends with her more screwed over. in fact i tried getting high half way through this to see if that would make it funnier. nope. not even then with the addition of grade a cannabis did this movie get enjoyable. i wish i could get my time and money back. anyone who says they really enjoyed this most be one hell of a hardcore stoner. even the box is deceptive. from what the back of the movie said it sounded like this sweet innocent blonde thing accidentally eats some pot cupcakes and shenanigans ensue. and in that case i thought it be interesting and funny to see a sweet girl trying to buy pot for the first time. and on a side note the drug dealers hair was ridiculous. but thats not the case, its just a stoner who gets high and then gets more high. one up side to this movie is the amount of awesome cameos. but even with all that star power the script was weak. the only joke that i found funny was when she said she had her masters in econ. but even then they don't explain why that didn't work out or why shes such a loser.


I just got back from a free tester screening of this movie and even participated in the focus group of about 30 people afterward. To sum it up, nobody said they would have paid to see this movie and nobody agreed that they would recommend this to a friend. Though it is overwhelmingly bad, it was just a tester screening and they may yet make changes to this piece.

Spoiler? ****The Upcoming portions has some stuff about the story, but there is nothing really to spoil other than if you thought this was going to be a good movie.

There were a few bright spots, AKA Danny Masterson, Adam Brody, and John Cho. Danny Masterson played the supposedly geeky roommate who Anna Faris is creeped out by due to his love of Sci-Fi. He is portrayed as being, literally, a spooky Skull-F***er, ya kind of weird but funny none the less. Adam Brody plays the intelligent and economical pot dealer and in his limited role is absolutely hilarious. Anna ends up owing him money and must travel to Venice in order to pay him off, or else. This is the basic premise of the movie, it seems. John Cho is a sausage delivery man who has no connection to Anna other than she was so high she stowed away on his delivery truck in an effort to get to Venice. The only problem with all this is that each of these characters were in the movie for no longer than 5 or 6 minutes, they had no interaction with each other, and they were the funniest characters in the flick (this is bad if they all have limited roles).

Now onto Anna, poor poor Anna. She accidentally eats a whole batch of pot cupcakes (the weird part about this is that you don't actually know that these cupcakes are pot filled) and goes on a 'fun' filled expedition to repay her debts. Sounds funny right? Not really, she acted like she more strung out on speed or trippin on some bad shrooms or LSD...Has she ever even smoked before? It was just completely unbelievable and she was basically the entire movie, considering there were no other main characters in any sense of the word. She would just go around and talk to one person, then a random event will happen leading to another person and another event.

As far as the story goes, I don't think there was one. It just seemed like a series of random events that had a beginning, a meaningless ending, and nothing in between. There were many dull moments throughout the movie that made an hour and a half seem a lot longer than that.

With that said, there were still moments of stoner brilliance and with some quality editing and an extensive overhaul this movie may still have a chance. Remember that this movie is still in the works and they have a chance to kick it up a notch, but I think it is unrealistic. Other than that, I'm sad to say that Smiley Face is Dead on Arrival.


This movie is notable for perpetuating a collection of tired marijuana myths often found in any garden variety anti-drug pamphlet. The most egregious being that the drug is capable of transforming people into simpletons and paranoid head cases barely capable of dumb grunts. And therein lies much of the premise for this shtick-fest. Gone are the humor, intelligence, wit, and charm found in recent cult hits like Superbad or Harold Kumar. Instead, we're left with Faris' galling portrayal of a drawling caricature, replete with her perpetually unfixed gaze and the script's frequent reliance on gags that center on the character's short attention span. Add the inexplicable fits of mania and paranoia exhibited by Jane and you've got all the trappings of a very mediocre and forgettable carnival ride. Despite all of its over-the-top buffoonery, cheap antics, and Faris' ridiculous pantomime, "Smiley Face" is very short on laughs. A few interesting cameos do manage to conjure up a few quick chuckles, but any comic momentum is quickly lost. All this and an impromptu recitation of Marx for just the price of 90 minutes that you won't get back. Worst of all, the movie ends with a finger-wagging moral: a denouement that assaults what little intelligence you'll have retained after a single viewing. "Smiley Face" is a mindless observation of vapid stupidity and a waste in more ways than one.


I saw the title of this movie and read the synopsis. It looked like It might be alright. I do love a good stoner movie. What followed was one of the worst 1 hour and 30 minute movies I have had the displeasure of watching.

As I watched I wondered why they would want to make such a movie. Are they trying to set back marijuana legalization 20 years? How could any producer back this? Why would Anna Farris star in this? I wondered if anyone associated with this movie had ever even smoked weed.

There were so many bad moments in this I do not know where to start or even care to try.

How did the director ever make it this far?

How is this movie getting slightly more than 5 stars???

I will always scratch my head after watching movies this bad. At least it inspired me to write a review, I suppose.

Stay away from this one. I recommend Cheech & Chong's Up in Smoke, Nice Dreams, Next Movie, Thing's are Tough All over, or any other well-known and well-liked movie about smoking pot.

This was garbage. Nothing redeeming about it at all. Shame on you Anna.


Despite its comic intentions, Smiley Face turned out to be one of the least funny titles in a genre that has produced several winners. Anna Faris in the lead role is nearly comatose, self-destructive to the point where it's hard to laugh casually at her situation. She functions as a lost child throughout the entire film, barely speaking in complete sentences as her world collapses around her.

The movie strives for zany unpredictability by featuring one mishap after another; unfortunately, the consistently bad outcomes make the plot anything but surprising. The supporting cast is frequently as dull as the main character is demented, and the majority of the jokes fall flat. Those that don't are often written out on the screen, repeated several times, or uttered slowly in case the viewer might be high as well.

Smiley Face takes Hollywood's chic stoner anti-hero to a new low, moving at the pace of a tricycle and leaving plot holes that range from intentional to confusing to downright bizarre. Where Cheech Marin, Dave Chappelle, and John Cho had intelligent witticisms to contribute, Anna Faris displays an eternally glazed look on her face that the viewer will most likely share.


OK, I know that my rating is very hard(it deserve a 3/10), but it's just to lower down the global rating, coz this movie deserve a 3/10. When I watched it, I didn't know it was an Araki film and didn't guess till I watched the poster. I don't care if he decided to do a comedy, but this one is so lame, boring and vulgar that I'm shocked.Some people seems to argue about the fact that this film is pro or anti drug, but that's not the point. It's a just a silly comedy and that would be OK for me if it was not so slow and bad directed. It look like the work(?) of a young filmmaker trying to be shocking (but not too much) to be noticed, but it isn't a film from the heart for sure. Few jokes works but that's not enough to make a 90 min film. So I better enjoy "Trainspotting" or such dumb (but fun) comedy as "Hey dude where's my car" or "Harold & Kumar" which at least provides laughs and don't make you fast forward after half an hour.Last thing, the story is more about a stupid girl than a stoner, if someone know where she can find pot with so much effects and that last so long just tell me where.At least be honest and do a real film about drug and not a retarded teen movie, so long Mr Araki!


I can't believe I wasted money to rent this. I'm a casual fan of Anna Ferris but I can't understand why she would do this movie. If you want to compare this to anything, it seems to be an attempt at creating a modern day "Reefer Madness" but it's not even close to enjoyable. Everything is going wrong for the main character, Mary, played by Anna Ferris. The typical formula when a movie goes in this direction is that some kind of epiphany or chance event propels the character towards a resolution of there problems. I watched the entire movie only to be sadly disappointed at how it resolved these problems. To be quite honest the message delivered is "smoke pot and your world will be destroyed by its affects". The movie at times severely exaggerates the effects of marijuana to include visual hallucinations that are more comparable to psychedelic drugs like LSD. Also, the main character exhibits a stronger than normal addiction to pot that makes it appear to be more of a physical addiction like crack or heroin, rather than psychological as is more commonly considered by the scientific community. For the uninformed movie watcher it would serve as a strong, yet grossly misleading, deterrent against pot use. For someone who is informed it's impossible to relate to the main character because of the exaggerated affects it portrays. I was even a little angry because I suspect that the movie's marketing is aimed specifically at "stoners" as evidenced by the box cover and the casting (Ferris and Danny Masterson who have appeared in films and shows that are popular in the pot culture). Simply stated, if you are a "stoner" you are going to hate this movie. If your not a "stoner" you will find it very unfunny.


This is quite possibly the worst drug movie that i have had the displeasure to watch. This is the kind of dumb crap that sets the legalization movement back decades. Completely unrealistic! There is no substance to this at all. This not even close to anything that could be construed as a movie about pot. not even trippin' would be this fricken stupid. I would rather watch Miley Cyrus on the Disney channel. Posers and only posers would find this movie funny or entertaining. I cant believe that John Kranski was in this turd of a movie. What a waste of my time. If you disagree with my comments, i would appreciate it if you would respond to me and let me know your thoughts.


Recap: Jane is an aspiring actress. Nah, check that, Jane is a girl who tries to get some acting jobs between smoking weed. So why not start the morning with a fresh batch? And then accidentally eat a lot more? Not a good way to start your day if you must make an audition, pay your bills and pay back your dealer. Jane sincerely tries to save the day, but she is just horrible at it. And high.

Comments: Anna Faris is cute, sure, but having her stumbling through an entire movie with her mouth open just doesn't make a great story. Or movie. And basically, that's the entire idea. Jane's fumbles get her from bad to worse consistently, and I just wished she would learn to hut her mouth.

Having read some comments about it, many (note, not all) that think its great seem to have one thing in common. They seem to have personal experience of using drugs and overdosing on weed. And that might just be the trick, maybe you need to be stoned to appreciate this movie.

The movie does have a few bright moments though, mostly in Jane's visions and comments to them. Some scenes were actually funny. But way to few and too far between to save the movie. And Jane couldn't keep her mouth shut then either (yes, this really disturbed me).

To conclude, this movie was really horrible. Danny Masterson's talent is completely wasted as he has an annoyingly small part just looking angry. And yes, he does one more thing, but that's just distasteful. I really wonder what made him agree to make this movie. I haven't seen much if Faris' other work, but what I've seen is that she can do much better than this. Wouldn't surprise me if everybody involved is ashamed of it today. They should be.

2/10


I have seen A LOT of bad movies. I watch them on a regular basis and even some of the really bad ones, I can get through-ones that Mystery Sceince Theater 3000 wouldn't even touch. This is bar none the worst "movie" ever made. I use the term movie loosely in this case because it is more like a group of friends that got together and made a video, but sure enough it has some Troma in it. Even if you like the mindless Troma stuff, this one will make you wince in pain. It IS that bad!! The cover has Lilith Stabs on it (a hot goth/punk type girl of Bad Movie Police fame) in a little outfit with a huge gun. Very misleading. She is NOT in the movie and there are no gun toting babes gunning down zombies. Instead you get to watch an ugly chick with a chocolate stained face annoy the hell out of you with over eccentric bad acting and lisp. The imitation Cosby/Don King character-Bonejack-is something you would laugh at if it were your friend, otherwise it is just lame. The filmmakers felt free to make plenty of inside jokes (the reappearing ice cream poster in tons of shots) without letting the audience in on their little jokes. If this can truly be called a movie versus just a video that some idiots threw together, then yes. This is THE worst movie I have ever seen. It even beats out the Tempe classics such as Humanoids from Atlantis and Robot Ninja. At least with James L Edwards you know what you are getting into. I wonder how many suckers fell for the false advertising on the box cover. Well live and learn the old "You can't judge a book by its cover". Well Mulva didn't kick any zombie ass-but this movie sure kicked mine.


Being the zombie fanatic I am, I found this worthless double feature (comes with Filthy McNasty) and was EXTREMELY disappointed with its atrocity. The babe on the cover isn't the movie (Strike one!). There was no plot and the funny parts were stale (Stee-rike TWO!). The acting wasn't even middle school level(Yer outta there!). Nevermind that the 80's VHS camcorder it was recorded on is insulting to the DVD medium. Ever heard of DV or SVHS?

Aside from the few milliseconds of gore, there was nothing to prevent me from wearing out my thumb on the "Chapter Advance" button. At least throw me some random T&A or stuff blowing up, huh?

I don't care how many of you feel the need to praise and protect this putrid sub-public access Chris Seaver production. Do you owe him money or something? This hack perpetually drops names of TALENTED horror folk (Tom Savini, Lucio Fulci) and throws in five million GOOD MOVIE references to swindle the viewer into believing it's good, fresh writing. Sorry pal, ain't buyin' it.

Is mentioning Egon Spengler supposed to be funny? Anyone? Anyone? Beuller? Frye?

Anyway, there are two things about this "movie" that irritated me:

1. There's a guy in blackface doing a stereotypical Bill Cosby impression. Good one, Chris Seaver. Minstrel show humor = real classy. How about having him eat watermelon and fried chicken too? I'm far from uptight but I don't see what's funny about over-the-top-down-again-and-back-for-seconds blatant racism, do you?

2. Lloyd Kaufman and Toxie make a cameo. DEAR GOD, WHY??? Are you thereby condoning this waste of video by appearing in it? Sure, Troma isn't known for highbrow entertainment, but Terror Firmer is Anne of Green Gables compared to this. And Terror Firmer had hot chicks - a staple of any horror exploitation flick, no matter how minuscule the budget. I know Lloyd is encouraging young filmmakers, but abysmal dreck like this needs to be condemned. There are PEOPLE WITH TALENT out there who deserve the shot this Chris Seaver loser squandered.

Shame on Netflix for peddling it and shame on me for thinking it worthy of my time. Consider yourself warned.


Avoid these "movies" (and "Filthy McNasty," the other feature on the DVD) at all costs. They are probably only funny to the people who made them, and their friends. Both appear to be made on a home video camera by a group of people who had nothing better to do on a Saturday night. There is no talent involved here (except Debbie Rochon, who deserves much, much better than this). Both movies feature the white director as a black character, complete with blackface and Don King wig. No joke. The external reviews link from IMDb are mostly positive, and I can't understand why. One boldly states that Mulva "deconstructs zombie movies" and that the guy in black face "actually turns that entire minstrel concept onto its narrow-minded head" without suggesting how it could possibly accomplish this. Oh, please. These two movies are the most unfunny attempts at comedy I have ever seen on film.

My Rating (both movies): 0/10.


This is a classic case of bait & switch. The Tempe company must be really scratching if they are reduced to this kind of action. Of course one would expect to see the person on the cover in the movie but not here. It is obvious why this was necessary when you view the hideous looking performers in the product. The movie was the worst I have ever witnessed. However let us perhaps be thankful for something. I believe the cover model is Lilith Stabs & her body is her best & only attribute as her acting talent is sorely limited to use a very kind expression. At least we were spared that. If we still had book burnings as in the old days this would be a prime candidate.


I was roped into this travesty because... 1) I enjoy zombie films 2) I usually enjoy both Debbie Rochon and Trent Haaga and 3) For some reason I still think there's hope out there for Full Moon, who have lost most of my respect over the years with a succession of incredibly bad releases.

This is easily the most appalling release from Full Moon yet. Words cannot express how lousy (and irritating) this load of excrement is. Frankly, it's insulting that it received ANY kind of release and that anyone has to be tricked into suffering through someone else's home movie. I could even forgive the nonexistent budget, amateurism and awful make-up if there was something else of merit going on here (no such luck!). What I cannot forgive is the completely unfunny 'script' (granted it had one), the migraine-inducing overacting and the pitiful name dropping at each and every turn (I could list fifty other major annoyances, but I won't...) Chris Seaver has absolutely no discernible talent, but HE obviously disagrees with me. Listen to the commentary track and you'll hear the rantings of one of the most misguided, idiotic and delusional people on the planet. He seems to fancy himself as such an original talent. So Chris, I'm glad you find yourself to be so very witty and talented. I found you to be a smug, annoying, juvenile and irrelevant moron whose only possible fan base would have to consist of not-so-bright 10 year olds or someone borderline retarded.

But anyway, since you seem to be such a big fan of yourself and your own work, maybe YOU should keep your crappy movies to yourself, eh? 1/10 (If there was a zero, this 'film' would get it)


As a man who LOVES the inept film Children of the Living Dead, I was stunned by just how horrid this 'film' is. This videotape can only possibly be enjoyed by the cast of retarded amateurs whose names populate the credits.

Nothing Troma has done has EVER been this worthless. Never purchase, rent, or even download this videotape.

I must fill out a few more lines to submit this, and with the videotape still in mind I now submit these lines:

nose breathing is not funny.

not editing out the director's voice is not funny.

whacky hair is not funny.

everything in this videotape that people spent time on is not funny


Comment 1: I had to stop watching the movie after i heard the line, 'Do I have to swallow John Stamos's Semen?' i , i, I could not finish this movie and i am mad that i cannot punch Chris Seaver in his throat hole. My movie companion will not let me forget that i picked movie. I am Sorry, Sorry, Sorry. Comment 2:the hideousness of this "movie" will haunt my dreams forever. Was there a director? I don't know. Random scenes of nonsense that couldn't hold the attention of people stupid enough to pay for this movie. Boo to you. All IN ALL, I SHOULD NOT HAVE, and SEAVER, I HOPE YOU ARE HAPPY WITH EVEN GETTING A RESPONSE, GOOD OR BAD. I NOW KNOW WHAT A GOOD MOVIE IS!!!!!!!!!


Mulva is awful. Possibly the worst movie ever made, and not in a good way. The girl on the DVD box is sexy--too bad she ain't in the movie! The girl in the movie is, IMO, a disgusting troll whom no amount of intoxication could make attractive. The whole thing stinks and looks like it cost 50 cents to throw together in a couple hours--the fact that it probably cost more and took longer does a further disservice to the reputation of cast and crew. Filthy McNasty (included on the double-feature DVD) is also pure crap. These no-talent, backyard films from Tempe, SubRosa and EI Cinema are the reason most people hate SOV. Anyone who regards this garbage as anything even remotely entertaining is delusional or being paid off to say so.


Paul W. S. Anderson, the man who has directed previous travesties as "Mortal Kombat" and "Resident Evil" doesn't fail to live up to his standards which consist of a horrible script, cheesy "2 kewl 4 skool" directing styles, weak cast, and every other weakness in a film you can think of. The only person who rivals his ineptness is none other than Uwe Boll. He has already ruined other franchises with his previous films, and now by directing and writing Alien vs. Predator, he has managed to ruin two movie series at the same time.

The story of this film is bay far the weakest aspect of this derision of a movie. All the previous Alien/Predator films had simple plots with good dialogue. Just simply there was a monster trying to kill the good guys, and they had to survive it. The stories were so uncomplicated yet incredibly well written that the viewer could not possibly complain that the story was bad. Alien vs. Predator however attempts to be a big, complex story with deep meaning to it, but it just comes off as being stupid and try hard. Paul, a complex story is good, only if you know how to write that is.

It's about a pyramid that is discovered on Earth in Antarctica. It turns out that this pyramid was part of the first human civilisation ever, that the Predators built it for the humans long ago, and in return, the humans worshiped the Predators as gods and acted as hosts for the captive alien Queens eggs that are in the pyramid, to make Aliens for the predators to hunt, not for sport like in the previous Predator films, but to prove that they are men. When modern day people go to investigate this pyramid, they become the new hosts for the Aliens that they Predators are going to hunt.

Not only is this completely unbelievable, (a pyramid in Antarctica? Come on) but it totally contradicts the previous Alien and Predator movies. In each Alien movie the point of the film was, "Don't let the Aliens get to Earth or they will kill everything!" Yet in this movie it was like, "Oh the Aliens have been on Earth the entire time and it wasn't really that bad now that we think about it." The previous Predator films are contradicted as well because the Predators are portrayed as creatures who are noble warriors, who actually respect humans and will help them if need be, rather than the ruthless merciless hunters who killed for sport and would kill a human just out of spite if he looked at him funny. Having Predators help humans build societies contradicts their nature, and takes away the mysteriousness and awesomeness of the Predator character.

But the thing is even as a stand alone film it's a very weak story. It can be compared to the later Jaws movies where you saw too much of the shark. Both extraterrestrial species are too in your face and have no mystery; leaving them just look like guys in rubber suits running around punching each other. Human characters have so little character development that often you don't even get to learn their names before they are killed, and so much more makes you feel like the script was made from a tipped over box of alphabet cereal.

Here's a perfect example of how bad the dialogue is in AVP.

FemaleTechnician: What is it?

Male Technician: It's a data stream from PS12.

Female Technician: Where is she?

Male Technician: Right above sector 14.

Female Technician: There isn't anything in sector 14.

Male Technician: The is now.

It is obvious in that piece of dialogue that Paul W. S. Anderson doesn't know anything about mapping or geography. Look moron, there is no such thing as this elusive "sector 14", things are mapped using latitude and longitude, bearings and such. Secondly for this Female Technician to have said on the spot, "There's nothing in sector 14" implies that she has memorised the presumably thousands of sectors all over the world and what is in each and every one of them so she can recall instantly off the top of her head that the isn't anything in sector 14. This is just one example of how cheesy and full of holes the very dialogue in Alien vs. Predator can be.

It is clear that a movie this bad was made only for the action, not the story. The thing is, in this whole move THERE ARE ONLY TWO FIGHT SCENES! If you are going to make a movie that has no good script which is only about the action, put in a decent amount of fighting at least!

AND THE PG-13 RATING?! Every other Alien/Predator film released before this one had and R rating. This film has been dumbed down for kids so much, that about 95% of the movies deaths or other injuries were off screen. You would see an Alien just getting near a guy before the camera would cut away, leaving you thinking, "So not only do we have no story but we have no gore?! I want my money back!" The line "You are one ugly mother fer" which is the trademark line of each other Predator film had the last word of it not filmed to keep the low rating! Yet earlier in the film they said, "I hope it kills every fing one of them!". Why did they decide to put the F word in earlier when it wasn't necessary, yet cut it out later when it was?! If they had of just shifted the F word to the ugly mother part then there could have been just as many F words yet still kept the trademark line!

It's a POS movie. The 1000 word limit has stopped me from going on.


Many fans want different things from this film. Many fans, including myself, were hoping to see lots and lots of action. One Alien & Predator battle after another. Some fans were hoping for a edge of your seat, truly terrifying horror movie much like the original Alien. No matter what you want, hope, or expect from this film you will be disappointed.

The direction this film takes is a horror route. It tries to be like the original Alien movie in the sense that the horror has to come more from the characters and their fear than from the monsters themselves. Paul Anderson tries to show as little Alien & Predator as possible without being ridiculous and let the actors & characters sell us the fear. Now this sounds like a good approach to a film and normally it would be. Here however it is the reason the films fall flat on its face. The problem being is that the characters aren't interesting and their actually paper thin cut outs. And after a short while the characters become boring and un-interesting and then u begin to long for either an Alien or a Predator to show up and start killing people.

But as I said, Paul Anderson tries to hide the monsters and show as little as possible much like the formula Ridley Scott & James Cameron used for their films. And thats where the film fails. Fans come to see this movie to see Aliens & Predators fighting. They don't come to see Sanna Lathan and the other people run around a dark pyramid. Fans didn't wait 14 years to see paper thin characters run around all over the place. They go to see Aliens & Predators.

The film should have taken the action route and gives us large amounts of AVP battles. However Paul Anderson only gives us ONE, count them One, true fight scene between an ALien & predator. And that fight scene doesn't occur until half-way through the film and it only lasts 2 minutes. 2 minutes. As a fan I did not wait this long to see a AVP movie only to have one battle that lasts 2 minutes.

Above I said "true battle" because there is technically another battle. It is between a Predator, Lex, and an Alien Queen. Much like the first AVP battle it is disappointingly short and 90% of the battle focuses on lex fighting the queen than it does focus on the Predator. After a while you begin to think the title "Alien vs. Predator" is inappropriate and instead should be called "The Adventures of Lex". Paul Andersons direction leaves out the two title characters.

The idea of hiding your monsters appearance till half way through the film and rely more on your characters is a formula that has worked in the past. It even potentially could have worked here but in order for that to happen you need to do one thing. Make the characters more interesting. If your characters are paper thin then the audience aren't going to care about them and then they quickly become bored. The film should have done is focus less on characters and more on the monsters. It amazes me so much on how the film lacks on what the title promises.


If you give a toss about the story, stop reading. But believe me, this comment couldn't possibly ruin the film for you any more than Fox has. Spare a thought for Paul Anderson as he struggles to make a film that hasn't been neutered by the MPAA or a cowardly studio. Once Paul Verhoeven left America to resume his stellar work in Europe, I guess the MPAA had to have someone to pound upon. After moronic parents who took their single-digit-age children to see Resident Evil complained, I guess it was inevitable that future Anderson projects face an even bigger butcher's knife.

But I am getting ahead of myself here. There are two things that made the Alien and Predator franchises work. The first was human interaction. In essence, the films were about humans trying to screw each other over for power, with the titular enemy there to deliver the consequences of not working together. A non-subtle and somewhat shallow social statement, in other words. Then there's the gore factor. Once the human drama is set up, who cannot help but feel for the survivors as a marine's face is melted by Alien blood, or when a train full of commuters are torn to pieces by a Predator who doesn't fully understand what is going on around him?

AVP tries to set up the former factor with Lance Henriksen's character anxious to find the strange artefact under the polar cap before he dies. Unfortunately, where Aliens in particular excelled was that it managed to give every character a third dimension. Here, only Henriksen's character gets such effort. So every act of violence or mayhem is given a feeling of absolutely no consequence. It's almost like a video game.

Paul Anderson is on record as saying that he made the film with every intention of it being screened with the MPAA's R rating. Apparently, Fox, fearing it will alienate children, decided otherwise. Never mind that the audience which kept both franchises in the black are now either in their mid-twenties or middle-aged. Forget creativity or making something that people might enjoy. The lowest common denominator rules here. Those parents who complained when the studio didn't accommodate them because they were too stupid to realize a film based on a video game which is in turn based on Night Of The Living Dead might not be a good babysitter, I hope you are proud of yourselves. Meanwhile, if any studio wants to let Anderson make a film without tying his hands over his audience's eyes, I will gladly pay to see it multiple times. Trust me, you will make more money this way once backlash is accounted for.

AVP also marks the first Anderson film I have seen in which the shaky-cam technique is used. Here, they don't even bother to try and make their excuse that it puts the audience more into the action seem plausible. Every shaky-cam frame might as well have the phrase "we are shaking this camera to preserve our PG-13 rating" stamped across it in big, bold letters.

You may have noticed that I haven't said anything about the actual characters yet, apart from mentioning Lance Henriksen by his own name rather than that of the character. There is a reason for this. If a group of film characters became any more generic, they could all be played by the same actor. The Aliens and Predators do not fare any better. Seriously, why on Earth didn't they just base the script upon the first comic book series? These comic books showed more for the audience to get interested in with one issue than this film shows in its entire running length.

The story also shows every conceivable sign of not being thought through. The humans discover an alien temple a couple of thousand feet below the surface of a polar cap. Great, but wouldn't that mean it is basically submerged in the ocean? So when the intrepid humans decide to go and check it out, the Predators oblige them by firing a beam from Earth's orbit into said polar cap, tunneling the thousands of feet needed to find the entrance. I guess the budget cuts at NASA meant that nobody could notice the massive hulking ship above the Earth. I'm also guessing that Alien blood and armour made from Alien parts gives one special powers, such as the ability to stand below a spacecraft as it takes off without being burned by the thrust. Or did they just not see Danny Glover's race to get away from the Predators' ship at the end of Predator 2?

In short, this film insults the fans of both franchises, sci-fi action fans in general, as well as the basic principle of adults being able to watch and hear what they choose to. I strongly urge the viewing, DVD-buying public to give this film the butt, lest more be made in this kindergarten-oriented fashion. Fox, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves.


AVP fails on several levels. It completely fails as an addition to both series, and it fails as a film itself. When I heard Anderson was in charge of this project, I knew that it couldn't be good news.and then when the PG-13 rating came along, my fears were multiplied and confirmed. A huge fan of both series, I wanted more than anything to like this film and for it to at least be average. After all, I cannot think of many film ideas that have had more potential. This very well could have been the best action and sci-fi film ever created, only if it had a decent director. I actually gave Anderson a chance, a 10% chance of making an average film, and a 0% chance of making it into what it deserved and had the potential to be. Those who gave him more should be embarrassed. I'm embarrassed that I paid to see it, however, I have a unique way of justifying it. Since I paid for it, the only way I can redeem myself is to rip this excuse for a film apart in this review, which will be long, and tell everyone I know how much this film completely sucks and how the originals and all copies should be burned.

MASSIVE spoilers:

First off, it fails right off for having a weak and unbelievable story, all thanks to the brilliantly moronic Anderson. Full of holes. An ancient pyramid, reminiscent of the Cube, 2000 feet below the ice in Antarctica? Riiiiiight. Predators have hunted humans for years, so let's send some adolescent ones to go after the fiercest species in the universe, and hey, let's only have them do it every 100 years.Riiiight. A chained up Queen Alien that's also been frozen and imprisoned by some wimpy ass Mongoloid Predators that get schooled like little b*tches? Riiiiight. A Predator and a woman make friends and the Predator even makes a shield and spear for her out of an Alien carcass? Oh-f-ing-KAY! I'll stop, but it doesn't take a film professor to see where this is going. They might as well have put an Alien Predator sex scene in it. So much potential and this was what Anderson shat out.

Anyone with even a lick of respect for either franchise can see how utterly stupid this film was even before any production was set forth. It gets even worse. Why in the hell would you claim to be a fan of both franchises and then go against many things we know about both creatures and make yourself look like a fool? Easy, Anderson is a fool. Face-huggers now fall off within minutes of attachment, the gestation period for the chest-bursters is now also a few minutes.and, to top it all off their blood is only sporadically acidic. How's that for consistency? Want more? Why in the hell would Predators set up an entire human civilization to perpetuate their ritual Alien hunts and bring weapons with them that melt when they come in contact with Alien blood? If these things have been hunting Aliens for hundreds of years, you'd think they'd be smarter than that.

And while we're at it, let's change the way the Predators and Aliens look. The Preds in this film look like they have down syndrome with their masks off. The fact that they look like linebackers doesn't help either. The original in 1987 looked infinitely better and more realistic, not like some lumbering oaf in a rubber suit. And just to make them fiercer, as if it were needed, let's make the Aliens so that they can open their mouths as wide as a Muppet, particularly Guy Smiley, can. This is the material we waited 14 years for?! I actually felt sorry for the Predators in this movie, they're just sad. On top of looking like they rode in on the short ship, they get their asses KICKED. Colonial Marines did better against a HIVE of Aliens than the Preds did against a few running around.and these were friggin' Predators!!! I thought the Predators hunted the ALIENS? These Preds were sissies, and were about as stealthy as a rhino giving birth during an electrical storm. Utterly ridiculous.

The cinematography used is entirely out of place. The quick-cut editing used during the fight scenes is some of the worst I've seen to date. You can't see anything that's going on and you might as well not even see the fights at all. That's exactly what I was looking forward to after 14 years, especially in a film with 'Vs.' in the title. While some of this may be possibly attributed to the studio axing it to make it PG-13, the shots that are left are far too close to the action, leading me to believe that this may have not been the studio's fault as some Anderson supporters claim. It's truly confusing and annoying. Straight out of The Blair Witch Project. And let's not forget to throw some Matrix bullet time into a face-hugger sequence, we'd be lost without that. And for a film that is obviously meant to be action-packed, it certainly isn't. Half of its measly runtime is spent setting up this ridiculous scenario. Where is the damn epic showdown?! This was a Versus movie right?

End of 'spoilers'.

And to all of you people defending this film, what in the hell are you thinking? Just because you're a fan of both franchises doesn't mean you have to swallow this and embarrass yourself on these pages. We deserved more. If you are OK with this film and do find it enjoyable, you are completely void of any taste in film. I simply do not understand your mediocrity.

For having more potential than almost any film in the last decade and releasing this stank pickle, I give AVP 1/10. R.I.P. Alien and Predator.


This movie is the perfect epitome of Hollywood taking something beloved, running it straight to hell (Predator 2, Alien 4) and then taking it even one step further by completely disjointing the stories and continuity, *ahem* alienating the fans and basically wasting everyone's time while marring the original (Caddyshack 2 anyone??) all in the name of the mighty dollar bill. Seeing this movie only eggs them on people! This is a movie that you immediately wish you could UNWATCH and erase from your memory banks.

I would be highly surprised if more time went into the script of this film than the actual marketing. I'm not even going to complain about the PG-13 rating because it is what it is.... just a bad movie.

Horrible acting. Pointless plodding sub-plots. Decent action sequences and a precious few cool moments in what should have been a fan-boy's wet dream. The lead in this movie is a demographic friendly woman with barely enough acting ability to make a shampoo ad believable. Any mildly entertaining characters were immediately destroyed in the first twenty minutes of the film with zero payout. Even the marquee monsters end up looking bored as the audience is lead along in a by numbers popcorn sales ploy.


well mainly that out of the 3 predators, two of them are killed easily, i mean watching them fight that one alien was like watching a 2 old child fight a lion. however the one "main" predator who is the biggest wuss ever to come from the predator home world because he has a soft spot for humans, well human, kills dozens with relative ease also, in aliens the acid burns through a lot of METAL floors, however this woman's face has developed the ability to with stand this potent acid? i therefore deduce that the woman is in fact a terminator, sent back in time for a completely irrelevant mission....at least my explanation makes more sense then the movie!


Many people castigate Paul Anderson for destroying both the Alien and Predator franchises. I must say that they have no clue and the director/writer is a true genius for having pulled this movie off. Notice that I did'nt say that this movie itself was great but it was a work of genius. So what is the movie like? It is by far one of the worst and most disgusting pieces of crap that will kill your interest in both the Alien and predator. But don't you get it? That's the point.

Paul Anderson obviously hates the fans of the franchises and has been hating them for a while now. He hates them beyond anything and they must be made to pay dearly and suffer. So in a brilliant plan, he manages to fraud the fools at Fox to give him the project. He did that despite the fact that his previous movies were laughable. Now isn't that just genius? Anderson has made a joke out of every single thing that made the concepts stand out. Your innocent curiosity will make you sit through his parody in hopes of some big twist but it never happens. Scene after Scene is one joke after another. How can anyone possibly imagine a bullet-time mode for an Alien attack? All this has been done very intentionally and nobody realises that. Once you've watched this movie, there's nothing you can do about it. You've lost and Anderson has won. His revenge on fans is complete. Hes also left room for a sequel by including a predalien birth at the end, further putting a big hole in future stories. He makes a ton of money too. Genius.

Oh, I should have said EVIL genius.

UNLESS YOU WANT YOUR INTEREST IN ALIENS AND PREDATORS KILLED OFF, DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.


Well, I saw this movie for the first time today. I know, its been out for two years. Well, I heard all the bad press, and I didn't want to ruin two of my favorite franchises with one simple movie. But, I was bored, and decided that today, will be my day.

So, I watched it. Wow. I hate that I waited so long to see this movie. I put it off for two years, I should have seen it in the cinema.

Imagine hearing that someone was going to cut the skin off of your face. Now, imagine that you could have had it done right as soon as you heard about it, or you where given the choice to put it off for a couple years. Now, imagine waiting that two years, knowing that it's going to happen. Every day you just get one step closer to the worst pain you have ever felt in your life. Then the day comes, and as it is happening, all you can think to yourself is you should have gotten it done the day you found out, instead of waiting. Cause the pain is so much worse now.

That is exactly the way this movie was for me. EXACTLY the way it was. Well, maybe not exactly. This was actually worse than that! The plot had so many holes in it, I thought it was that pair of socks you have that you wear everyday, and have worn them since 1994, because they are you're lucky socks. Sure, they smell a little, and there isn't much cloth yet, but I can't just throw them away! Not only was the plot terrible, lets talk about acting, because apparently, they did not discuss it before casting anyone for this debacle! Cookie cutter lines muttered by people who's names you don't even know until they are about to die, and someone just screams their name saying "God no! Please don't die! I've known you for five whole minutes! PLEASE GOD WHY! WHY TAKE....uhmm...Jonathon? FROM ME!!!! WHY!!!!!!!!!!" And lastly, let's get down to the real subject matter. Aliens fighting predators. Seriously, how do you screw that up? You could have the two picking their noses and it would work. They could hold battle raps and it would be an entertaining fight (GROWL!!! SNARL SNARL SNARL!!! GURGLE GURLGE!!! YO MOMMAS A HOE!).

THERE ARE TWO FIGHTS IN THIS MOVIE!!! TWO!!! What? How do you get two fights in a movie that has a runtime of one hour and forty minutes? Wait, that is including the 12 minutes of credits, isn't it....yeah it is. Okay, one hour, twenty-eight minutes. TWO FIGHTS?!?!?!? And those weren't even that entertaining. Seriously, I told my friend to give me five minutes, and I bet I could come up with a plot outline that makes more sense and is a million times more entertaining. It took me all of thirty seconds to have an entire plot line written, and here it is for your pleasure:

Alien Vs Predator (the none sucky version)

Movie opens with a predator fighting an alien.

Then, more aliens come, and the fight starts to get real intense.

Then more predators come, and the fight gets insane.

This fight lasts for an hour and a half.

Predators win. The End.

Role credits.

BAM! See, you KNOW that is more entertaining. Now, Paul Anderson has made one really good movie, and two movies that were okay. Yes, he is a step above Uwe Boll...but still. How do you take the awesomeness that this movie could have been, and make a crap-fest of it all? Yes, crap-fest was the best I could come up with. The thesaurus didn't have anything under crap fest...except flapdoodle....which I considered for a bit.

Anyway, this movie sucks more than any sucking thing has ever sucked. I give it 1 star.


Alien Vs. Predator has some cool scenes and some other entertaining moments but mostly the film is a disappointment. The fast-breeding creatures from the Aliens films take on the headhunting space colonizers from Predator in a battle for the earth, leaving a poor team of Antarctic archaeologist's and the rest of us lowly humans trapped in the middle. The plot does sound like it has potential and if it was rated R it could have been a lot better. The execution wasn't very good though since its just not very exciting. The death scenes are lame as you can't even see what's going on. Most of the action scenes are boring and that's a problem since that's one of the main reasons why a person may watch this film. The acting is terrible but its normal for this type of film. The most notable person in this film you might recognize is Sanaa Lathan but she of course doesn't add much to the film. The rest of the actors are of course bad and you have a better chance of laughing then being scared. The film is predictable because you know where its going and who's going to survive. The dialog is bad and funny but in a bad way, which is always a bad thing. Yet even with all this negativity I didn't completely hate it. Some of the action scenes were cool and its a pretty movie to look at, especially the creature special effects. Paul Anderson shouldn't be blamed as Fox wanted to edit the movie and make it earn more money. The films running time of 102 minutes feels a lot longer though. Rating 5/10 I had some fun watching this but this film is for hardcore fans only and even they will probably hate it.


Paul Anderson makes movies that start off incredibly well. Every time I see a Paul W. S. Anderson movie, I watch the first twenty minutes and think "Hey, this might actually be good!" He raises expectations, gets you excited, pulls out all of his best tricks... and then somewhere around 30 minutes in, it turns to garbage. If you think about it, all of his movies from Event Horizon to Resident Evil suffer from this malady. AVP is no exception.

In the opening scene, I watched an incredibly stylized alien-like silhouette turn into a satellite. And then it cut to a high tech lab, and then out to the desert, and then out to some glacier. As Paul Anderson assembled his team of protagonists, the movie had a distinct "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" or "Jurassic Park" vibe. In fact, now that I think about it, it had all the trappings of a Spielberg movie. The cherry on top of the sundae was when the wealthy tycoon Weyland, who was organizing the search party, turned out to be the actor who played "Bishop" in Aliens. I was on for the ride. I gripped my popcorn, I buckled in. I thought Paul Anderson had finally come into his own as a filmmaker... and he couldn't have picked a better time. Here was the unification of two of my favorite Science Fiction/Horror characters. If ever Paul Anderson was going to step up and be a real director, the time was now. I smiled, I squeezed my date's hand. This was gonna be great...

And then, it started to suck. Gradually at first, almost as if Anderson was thinking that if he just gave us a great opening we might forget about the fact that the rest of the movie was terrible. I figured things were going badly when the heroes enter a pyramid that they've found thousands (millions?) of feet beneath an arctic whaling station. Hokey, yes... but I'm still buying it. And then, our heroes venture inside this ancient edifice and are trapped inside the pyramid because they decided to take some Predator guns. You'd think these people never saw Raiders of the Lost Ark. I kept waiting for someone to bust out a bull whip. The only thing that was missing was the flying darts and the big boulder.

At this point in the movie, I got a really vivid mental picture of Paul Anderson standing in his living room, with DVD copies of Alien, Predator, Raiders of the Lost Ark and Cube laid out on the floor, and he's standing there taking a leak on all of them and laughing maniacally. I'm not kidding. That image flashed through my head.

Anyway, so when I finally shook myself out of it, there were people that were getting attacked by face-huggers that were bullet-timed a la the Matrix (and every other action movie since). I mentally added The Matrix to the DVDs on Paul's floor, covered with urine. These same people give birth to aliens a mere five minutes later. Suddenly the gestation period for aliens shortened by like three days. I think that might have made me angrier than anything. I just wanted to drive to Paul Anderson's house in the middle of the night, grab him and say, "There are rules to think about here, Paul. Not a lot of them, but you do need to respect the movies that came before. I understand that it makes your job a little tougher because you want to tell a story about an alien, and you need to have it bust out of somebody's chest pretty early in the story... but you're getting paid a lot of money to figure out a clever way of making it work."

But even so, I kept watching. I had come this far, I needed to see the title bout. I watched clunky Predators with ridiculous dreadlocks fight with equally clumsy Aliens. All I could think was, "Gee, I bet it's hot inside those suits." You could practically smell the latex. Still, there are some fun moments, so I keep watching.

And then the protagonist becomes best friends with a Predator and they go off to hunt Aliens together like Butch and Sundance. All of this comes at great expense as you are forced to watch our heroine playing a goofy game of charades with the Predator. When Predators start acting, you know you're in trouble.The end fight scene with the Alien Queen Mum is pretty good. I actually started to enjoy myself again in the last ten minutes of the movie. And then I remembered that I felt the same way about Resident Evil. That last shot with Milla in the city was great. It made me rethink my P.W.S. Anderson theory. Maybe he makes movies that begin and end really well, and then fills them with processed meat. If I ever choose to see another one of his movies, I'm going to walk out after twenty minutes, go get something to eat, and then come back for the last ten and see how I feel about it.


Paul WS Anderson has made a major achievement. He has made a film worse than "Alien Resurrection". AVP is a film for which I can think of a few people want Anderson shot for creating this rubbish. He tries to create tension by building up slowly but unlike Aliens where this worked , it just bores me stiff. He makes two massive mistakes with the film. Firstly the gore is gone in Great Britain this is the first "Alien" or "Predator" film not to be an 18, this shows as there is nothing worth even flinching at in the film.The second is that the film tampers with alien biology it actualty hurts. The only two major changes in almost twenty years were the addition of ridges on their heads in "Aliens" and the eggs being able to squirm in "Alien Ressurrection" Every other Aliens has the time between Alien embryo going in and chestburster coming out to be a day or so. Anderson turns this into mere minutes a shocking drop that makes me annoyed as a fan of the francise. I don't encourage illegal free downloads but that is the only way the purchace of this movie is a good price,a pathetic director at his most pathetic.


What an awful film, I saw this cheap low budget pile of Markytson crap in a sleazy hotel that just happened to have room service. At first I thought I was insane and then I saw that this was an actual move. Holy crap! I mean, crapping in your pants and then eating dish-water and throw up is better than this movie, it seriously gives Alien and Predator bad names. Oh, and who wins??? Let us see... (the following has been voted by the stink-bag country America, thank god I'm in France!!) HERE WE GO!

Predator: Gay-fighting, Jamican guy with dreadlocks and a silver mask, the shirt he is wearing shows his nipples and he has claws that slash people to DEATH. Sorry, but Arnold was too busy misguiding California to help with this movie. Lance Henrikson, an acting legend, co-stars opposite in this film and guess what? He gets his throat slit. >_< Damn, I hate it when they do that. Trivia: Lance was in Aliens (an actual GOOD movie by James Cameron) and Alien 3 (a bit of a fail, though) He eventually wins because it turns out he was a "good" guy helping (WTF?!) the humans?...(Then an alien bursts out of his chest and he DIES)

Alien: One of my favourite movies is ALIEN, and ALIENS and ALIEN 3, I like Pieere's ALIEN 4 but it was not as good as the first three films. They made the aliens here pretty bad-ass, more bad-ass then normal. It really sucked to see the Predator win because I was rooting for the Aliens. The Alien-queen is blown up, even though she's already been blown up FOUR F-CKING TIMES!!!! Well, the aliens do some nice killings but the gore is way cheesy.

Overall: A HORRIBLE movie, bad bad bad. The tagline should have been: WHOEVER WINS, FOX GETS RICHER


As we all know, Alien is one of the greatest Sci-Fi/Horror films ever to make it to the big screen, if not THE greatest. Its sequel, Aliens, turns the original classic into a roller- coaster ride that has became a classic in itself. Also a masterpiece, Predator has won a special place in my heart for the ingenuity of its antagonist, the Predator. In the sequel, you see the skulls of all sorts of other alien species the Predator has hunted, one of which happens to be the Alien. You're confronted with a wonderful idea: What if a movie was made involving the Predators hunting the Aliens? What an amazing idea! There's no way you could screw it up! Naturally, Hollywood found a way to screw it up.

It begins with a group of annoying people collected from all around the world. They have all answered a call by Bishop? The android? Anyhow, Bishop has discovered a pyramid located deep underground in Antarctica, and he wants a team to drill down to it oh, crap, where have I heard this before?

Fortunately for us, the Predators have been watching the movie from space, and they'd rather go for a little swim in the Aliens' acid-blood than sit through an Armageddon remake. To spare the entire world the torture, they fire a beam from space and make a hole leading right to the pyramid. See, they're not such bad guys after all!

Ah, crap. We go back to that stupid expedition team. They're exploring the pyramid and debating what civilization built it. It's half an hour into the movie. I check the DVD box. Hmm Alien. Predator. Vs. Maybe they labeled it wrong? This is looking suspiciously like National Treasure.

Uh-oh! They have disturbed the pyramid and the Predators are going in after them!  maybe this is Predator 3? The pyramid shifts and the Alien eggs appear. Finally, a little Alien! But where are the Predators fighting them? Maybe the title should be "Alien & Predator vs. Humans", or perhaps "Movie vs. Patience?"

Well, about ¾ of the way through, what remains of the expedition team (thankfully, only three) are running away from the Predator. One gets killed, and then the remaining two manage to escape when an Alien tackles the Predator. Whooo! Alien vs. Predator! Finally, it's over. Well, that didn't last very long.

After a few scenes which don't really matter, the female lead makes friends with the Predator. Wow, didn't see that coming. She kills the Alien rather than the Predator killing it. They go on to find the nest and reenact the ending of Aliens. The Predator dies, and a group of more Predators go on to reenact the ending of Predator 2. The end!


Okay, I'll confess that the only reason I registered at this site is to tell people how bad this movie really is.

AVP is embarrassing, the whole thing gives you the impression of an empty commercial exploitation on the well-known monsters images.

Anyone who comes to this kinda of review sites and gives this movie a 10 out of 10 is either a Fox films employee or related to the film crew somehow. Don't fall for it.

The whole idea of teen Predators hunting Aliens to become "real warriors" is idiotic. How can you compare a high tech civilization that is able to travel space to Indians? Okay, maybe It is possible they would have the same kind of ritual, after all why can't highly developed species have their rituals...

I was intrigued about how the first time a Predator blew itself up on top of the Pyramid it did not damage the construction at all.... Of course, the second time that another Predator did that, the whole thing fell apart.

It is laughable the friendship among the hero-chick and the teen Predator. I could almost see them holding hands and running away in the end of the movie. It turns out that the Predator developed feelings for her. I wonder why the Predators first came down from the sky shooting the hell out of the other guys who stayed in the abandoned whailing facility, no questions asked. Still wondering...

I didn't like the "new" Alien life cycle. The face-hugger burst out as an alien in 40 seconds. This is truly ridiculous. Anderson did not even take the time to watch the original Alien movie.

On top of that, the cast is composed by a bunch obscure nobodies in shallow roles. Even if they were any good, the lines they received would just have made them look as bad as they did.

As an Alien and Predator fan I felt I was disrespected. If you are too, you will know what I am talking about


>>>>>***SPOILERS GALORE----I JUST SAW THE MOVIE*****<<<<<

After just watching the movie...I have this to say.

I am a huge fan of the Alien series, and a pretty big fan of Predator. For an indicator of how long I have been a fan of the series, I will tell you first off that I saw Aliens when it came out on video tape in the late 80s and saw Alien 3 in theaters, I obviously saw Alien after its mid-70's release, and it scared me like few movies have ever been able to do since. I saw Predator later, and very much regard it as a good movie, in that it told a well thought-out story, had excellent characters, and an original plot, not to mention a great villain.

I believe a making a good movie means telling a good story, and telling it well. This movie has neither a good story, or, as it seems, a good story teller. What made Alien and Aliens stand out as excellent movies was the fact that Ridley Scott and James Cameron are superb story tellers, which means they make movies that resonate with the audience. The characters in the movie(AVP) are, at best, instantly forgettable, and the dialogue is stupid, unoriginal, and gives no indication any of the characters have a personality. Anderson makes a very feeble attempt to get you to care a little about Lex and Sebastian by giving them each(and a few other characters) painfully boring monologues about "My dad died on a mountain, blah blah here, cliché line here, meaningless dribble there", and letting them have(a few) more than 4 lines to read. What happened to good movies with memorable characters, good plot, and good dialogue? Are those times past us now? Since when does a single monologue pass as character development?

I have no idea of the names of any of the other characters whatsoever, except Charles Bishop Weyland. Which brings me to that point. Lance's character was horribly dry, unemotional, and when he dies, I didn't care, or even notice really. Not only that, the movie tells you nothing of his character, except you assume he is rich beyond all comprehension, and he does something with robots. Which to me, seems like just a passing, muttered excuse to have Lance Hendrickson in the movie. There is nothing even remotely clever about his wasted role, and no discernible relation to Bishop the android is made, only assumed, and definitely not explored or even attempted to explore. It also completely disregards the fact that in Alien 3, the man claimed he was the designer of the Bishop android...so...it just makes no sense, and it just kind of tries to spoon feed you that for some reason, this is the real creator, and not the guy in Alien 3, and doesn't ever even try to tell you why its right.

There are many many many wasted scenes, but one that particularly comes to mind is the sacrificial chamber scene. The scientists seemed to already know they were in danger when the eggs arose, although they should not have had any clue whatsoever about what the eggs were. They showed no curiosity, and immediately drew weapons, then were easily facehugged, and quickly spawned aliens, faster than in any earlier Alien film, literally within minutes of being impregnated there was an embryo bursting from the victims chest...which begs the question, why the hell would you bring weapons to a remote location in Antarctica, and not bring exploration or excavation equipment of any kind? I don't think automatic rifles(with laser sights) and 45 cal. automatic pistols are common equipment for an archaeological expedition. Makes no sense...and some of you may end up accusing me of nitpicking, and you're damn right, I expected a brilliant movie to rank with the works of James Cameron, Ridley Scott and John McTiernan because that's what was promised, and yes those movies are what I judge this one by. There was not a single scene in any of those movies that was blatantly unexplained, or was not logical in terms of the story. There was so very much that was illogical and wrong with this movie.

As for the Predators...of the three, two were brutally slaughtered very quickly, it seemed as if they had no chance at all. The Predator in the original movie was a fast, agile hunter that used clever tactics and stealth to quickly bring down an entire special forces unit, one at a time, in the heavy jungles of South America, by hand, alone. There were 3 of them in this movie, and it seems that the single predator in the first movie could have killed, not only all of the people in this movie by itself, but all three of the Predators in this movie by itself. These predators were slow, easily sneaked up upon, and had no seeming idea of what was going on, but just seemed to kill because that's what they felt like doing...or...something. In the original Predator, it was coming AFTER Arnold and his team, and there wasn't anything they could do about it. In this movie, the Predators just kinda...well...acted like guys in suits. The Original Predator could leap 20 feet in the air from tree to tree, these could kinda wobble around and run kinda. The Original Predator was like a ghost, these were just dead. And things just went from cheesy to outright goofy when Lex and the 'hero' Predator(who, without hesitation, murdered about 4 people a few minutes earlier) became friends and teamed up against the Queen...I thought they might even kiss at one point. And they even had a slo-mo running from danger scene reminiscent of...any movie where a big dude and his hot chick co-star triumphantly defeat whatever it was they're supposed to defeat, and are running from an inevitable explosion.

I basically take this movie as an insult, a spit in the face, of all serious fans like myself. The end is obviously open for a sequel...I say, bring back Ridley Scott or James Cameron for the love of all that is holy...because they are the only ones that could save this franchise now. I only wish they could have had a triumphant end, and not silly garbage like this.

RIP


Paul Anderson's vision of a movie does not go hand-in-hand with originality of an idea. Mortal Kombat was pretty good (hated the PG-13 rating though). Resident Evil was just okay (rated R but just didn't have the feel). Now, we get Aliens Vs. Predator. Ever since watching the Alien and Predator films from the 80s and 90s, I was expecting something like this. Also reading the Dark Horse comics of these two rival foes was exciting. But, this movie did not live up to the standards of the previous films or the comics. I admit though, some elements did take place, but couldn't make up for the movie as a whole. So, what do we get? A simmered down version of our two favorites slapped with a PG-13?!! Fox should be ashamed. The movie had a cheap, rushed feel to it. Both franchises weren't done justice. Where are the marines? What happened to the fight on the other planet? This movie needed more time and possibly another director (James Cameron or Ridley Scott perhaps).

I'm not going to comment on the acting that much because this isn't a movie where dialog is superior to anything else in the movie. The two that really stood out were Sanaa Lathan and Big Boss Hogg Lance Henriksen (still going!!). Sanaa has strong standings to become a great actress. I wish her success in the future. Some of the dialog in the movie was laughably cheesy and unnecessary. Raoul Bova did alright too, but the rest of the cast was just there for the Alien and Predator killing satisfaction.

The CG effects in the movie were good and didn't throw the movie off at all. As a matter of fact, CG and some of the fight sequences saved the movie from being a big disgrace to the fans. The predator cloaking was great, and their weapons look more updated from the previous two predator movies. The editing was horrible though. Every time an Alien or one of the predators kill the scene was cut, and I mean CUT!! For those who haven't seen the movie, you will understand why a R rating needed to take place. A fight scene that took place in a chamber, between a predator and an alien, was badly edited. The camera was too shaky, and the lighting was displaced. Also, the slow motion BS is annoying. Besides the flaws, some satisfaction came out of the sequences.

Important: The predator should have been portrayed as being more agile and versatile in combat. The aliens should never get the upper hand unless the predator is outnumbered or wounded (READ THE DARK HORSE COMICS OR WATCH THE PREVIOUS MOVIES!!).

Overall, this is soaked down to just a decent popcorn flick. I hope that the dvd will acquire a R rating and add more valuable scenes to the movie. The theatrical version just doesn't cut. I wanted to see this more than Spider-Man!! Paul Anderson and company (FOX!! AARGH!!) let me down and also losing respect from me. Hope the sequel takes another turn (also possibly another director) and gives the fans a movie that we deserve.

Final Judgement: **/****


Yeah, so you think its going to be a bunch of predators and a bunch of aliens whoopin each others asses... well its not.... its 3 predators.... and you don't see them or the aliens until after the first hour of humans walking around this temple confused and lost with pointless dialogue and this "I'm going to touch stuff that I don't know what it does yet" frame of mind...

when the 3 predators finally show up.. your thinking YES... carnage is coming... the reason I came to see this movie.... well... I'm sorry... the first predator dies instantly to an alien... the 2nd puts about about a 20 second fight before dying to another alien... then after that awe inspiring 21 seconds of alien vs predator action, it goes back to the humans being lost and stupid again for an additional 20 minutes... then you are rewarded with another 20 seconds, where it shows the remaining predator kill an alien... but its not the uber fight you think its going to be... it takes all of .5 seconds for him to slice through the head with ninja like reflexes... im glad at least one of the predators wasn't a total weakling right????? RIGHT????

NO WAIT!! I know you didn't want one to be really powerful...so don't worry... the last surviving human, a lady that is way too gungho about being a guide in ice wasteland BEFRIENDS the last surviving predator... it would seem that predators are nice guys after all.... he cuts off an aliens head and tail and gives them to her... tail for a spear, and head to fit over her entire left arm for some sort of shield...... I'm GLAD THEIR F****** BLOOD Isn't ACID YOU F****** MORONS... Oh yeah... Did I mention the blood is only acid when they need to show how scary the aliens are... If your actually going to fight one you don't have to worry about it... Also, the aliens acid blood apparently has a different effect on different types of materials... for instance, when the predator gets hit with the acid, his body armor is instantly corroded... when the female star's sweater gets hit, its no big deal... soo mental note... wear cashmere when battling any aliens...

Anyway... You think once the human and the predator team up, and you think it couldn't possibly get any worse, you can FINALLY see some AVP action??? Well, no, sorry boys and girls... the predator just starts his little arm bomb and throws it on the ground and him and girl run to safety together... Wow, that was easy huh... Why bother spawning hundreds of aliens to battle if your entire crew is full of losers who can't fight, and your just going to nuke the entire site anyway... bleh...

but its not over yet! no!!!! they aren't butchering this movie bad enough.... they need to have this <insert 5 pages of swearing> love scene between the predator and the girl?? WHAT IN GODS NAME? I fully expected them to light candles, put on some barry white, and start making out on the spot...*sigh* ...But thats not all! The queen alien shows up, after this huge atomic blast goes off ...

I'm glad that after setting off a blast of this size, at around 2000 feet below the ice... that this stupid queen alien thats for some reason 5x the size it was in aliens, can somehow survive when the entire area was vaporized, and climb up a 2000 foot vertical cliff... argh....

I can't tell you what happens after this... because I walked out at this point... Yes... I walked out of a FREE movie... It was the premiere... and I walked out of it... I wanted my free ticket back to go hopefully give myself enough paper cuts that I could commit suicide right there at the box office...


I just watched this movie on Starz and was riveted when I saw Shatner in it. His best scene came when David Janssen brought him back on horseback "dead" after a rain storm / landslide or something killed him. Did you see how still he lay on that horseback?

Not a whimper or a word out of 'im. God, he plays a dead man so well ! This movie was a complete waste of film. They should have just burned it in the brush fire toward the end of the movie. Horrible !

Acting sucked all around. Only the beautiful eyes of Joanna Pettet kept me watching. Beam me out of here ! The Western movie will never be the same.


In this short, under an hour feature, all we have is the narrative, which, although risque in 1915, seems tame today. There are no production values, directorial technique or performances that are in any way above the merely adequate. What is most interesting is the ending where the racial intolerance of the age manifests itself with a courtroom rising to lynch the Asian who has branded the white woman for failing to keep up her end of their bargain. Society may tolerate him as a plaything, but he must never think he is one of them. Don't bother seeking this out unless the racial bigotry theme interests you.


I can't say I hated this film. In fact, in a lot of areas, it was pretty good. You have Garry Shandling, who is a veteran comedian who does a pretty good job playing a likable guy in this movie, and he plays very well off of Annette Benning. However, there were too many weaknesses in this movie to recommend.

For one, the plot of the film almost fit better into a late night Cinemax (or Skin-a-max) movie. In fact, late one night when I had nothing to do, I actually caught a movie where two women in bikinis were sent down to Earth for the sole purpose of having sex with humans. So to see middle-aged, A-listers tackle this kind of flimsy plot gives the movie a bit more strength, but fails in a lot of areas to actually be the kind of laugh-out-loud movie that "The 40 Year Old Virgin" was, for example.

Of course, "The 40 Year Old Virgin" came out five years after this movie did, but it was a bigger hit (and was far less forgettable) because it was smart and had a surprising amount of heart to it. The laughter in that movie came out of compassion for the main character, who was put into many realistic scenarios. Making a funny movie about an alien whose primary mission is to fornicate takes away any kind of heart the movie could have, and no laughter based on familiarity follows. For further proof, compare the scenes in both movies where the main character displays his cluelessness about condoms. The one from "The 40 Year Old Virgin" is much funnier.

Needless to say, realistic scenarios also went right out the window. I just saw this movie and thought, "There is no way people would actually react that way". For instance, no one in the movie thought it was as weird as they should have for the Shandling and Benning characters to get married after just one date. Plus, the baby they ended up having was born in only three months (I think), and the doctors in the movie just mentioned that fact so matter-of-factly, as if these things happen all the time. It would seem to me that in real life, more doctors would be brought in from all over the world to witness this medical miracle, not to mention the baby would be subject to various medical examinations.

Of course, the "artifical" penis that hums served as the running gag of the movie, although it really wasn't all that funny to begin with. But with it came so many plot holes. Among them, Shandling character was able to copulate infinitely, yet it didn't seem like he himself had any sort of orgasm. I'm going to leave the plot holes at that. If you see the movie, you'll know what I mean.

But there were some strengths in this movie. For instance, Greg Kinnear played a really shallow S.O.B., and he played it so well. John Goodman really can't go wrong in a movie, especially as a P.I. Ben Kingsley was also good as the planetary leader who ultimately becomes the villain. Kingsley added a nice dramatic touch. Benning proved that she can do comedy just as well as drama, and she was overall great in this movie. And Linda Fiorentino was just sexy beyond belief. She can play a great seductress.

So is this movie forgettable? Not really. There are some moments of brilliance, but the story could have been better and could have used some more realistic elements regarding human reactions. Coming from veteran director Mike Nichols, this movie almost seemed a bit lazy compared to "The Graduate" and "The Birdcage".


When I saw that Mike Nichols was making another picture, I was automatically interested. After making motion pictures like The Graduate and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, he had slipped severely, making only a couple decent films since. So, naively, I went to What Planet Are You From to find out if he could stem the tide of failures.

And, triumphantly, I left the motion picture with an answer: no, no, no.

If What Planet Are You From? succeeds at anything (and that's a big IF), it does succeed at having a surprisingly talented cast and crew, for what otherwise represents a made for USA motion picture. Starring Garry Shandling, Annette Bening, Greg Kinnear, and Ben Kingsley, I expected something decent, at least from the last three. But, they all disappointed me.

The story of What Planet Are You From is a one-gag premise: Garry Shandling plays an alien who has been sent to earth to impregnate a woman, thereby allowing his alien race to reproduce and slowly take over Earth. That ends up being the entire story. Never any twists, never anything clever that the beginning of the film indicated.

The film opens with thousands of the aliens being taught what human women are like, providing the only legitimate laugh of the entire film. Then, Shandling is sent to earth, bumbles around, meeting the sleazy Greg Kinnear, who takes him to AA meetings to meet women. He meets Annette Bening, who seems to be phoning in her performance as a recovering alcoholic/real estate agent. She insists on marrying before having sex, and so the alien marries her. All through this point, every time the alien had tried to reproduce, his mechanical genitals made a whirring noise. Apparently, this passed for humor, because Nichols depended on this noise for about 30 minutes of the film.

Then, they marry, they try to have children, are frustrated, and eventually she gives birth. Then, the baby is kidnaped by Kingsley (the leader of Shandling's planet), and the alien returns to steal it back, setting up a trite ending and giving the audience a merciful stay of execution.

The film is a massive disappointment from everyone involved, and I give it 1/2 out of 5 stars.


I couldn't wait for this movie to end (the other two people I was with liked it better so I couldn't leave). In the words of Jay Sherman: "It stinks". It has a few funny moments. Most of the humor is cheap sexual humor - watch any TV sitcom and you'll get the same results. Save your money at the theatre and the video store - if you're looking for funny from this Shandling flick, try Albert Brooks or Woody Allen instead.


My biggest problem with this film is Garry Shandling. One has to ask why they cast him in the lead role. He is not handsome, endearing or charming at all. To be honest he is annoying and a mediocre actor at best. I had to wonder why Annette Bening's character even looked twice at him. The film is interesting in an odd way. It is truly original. But it loses steam and could have been much better with a better screenplay and a better lead actor. It's a shame.


I'm a big fan of Garry Shandling, both his old TV show and the more recent "Larry Sanders Show". Granted, the information on this movie was not promising, but with Shandling writing and acting, I thought it would have to be at least somewhat funny. Well, wrong-o! The laughs and clever moments in this movie could have been condensed into a 3-minute sketch.


Seeing the preview, I had high hopes for the film. It seemed like an idea which came out of a good, but out-of-date, pitch. The script was not there. The pitch would have been "It's 3rd rock from the sun meets My Stepmother is an alien with a twist of Gerry Shandling." However, it did not pull it off. It had some funny moments in it, but they were few, and mainly in the beginning of the movie.

Another problem with the movie is that its running gag is tedious, and gets boring. How often can you laugh at a penis that hums when excited. Its funny at first, but by the end it is old. John Goodman also has a hard time making the half-good jokes work. His last comment has off timing, and barely makes me laugh. Plus, the movie was just too long for its humor. It would have worked better if Shandling had just made this into a one-hour HBO special or something to that effect. There were these stretches of emotion that just ran on, and I got bored of them.

This potentially funny situation has been done before and better by other shows and movies, like the ones mentioned above. See most of the other movies which are out right now because this one has to be the worst of them all...with the exception of Pitch Black. It has its funny moments at times, but they run dry long before the movie is over.

2/10


I fully agree with lukasbrunner's review below.

Such a great story, such a mountain.really deserved something better.

As for historical accuracy? Rainer and Angerer were neither "bad Nazis", nor hostile to Hinterstoisser and Kurz: Actually they had decided to join forces before they started the climb.

The Nazis never pushed those guys into attempting the North face, nor supported them: If they had government support ,they wouldn't have to stay in tents, and travel to Switzerlandby bicycle!

Actually,Hinterstoisser and Kurz's commanding officer tried to stop them, but they chose to pretend they had never received the cable forbidding them to climb.

If you want to see what really happened, and who these people really were, watch Joe Simpson's "Touching the Void"


Poor film, poor story. Listening to Steve Coogan do an American accent was cringe-worthy. About 1 minute into the film I knew it was going to be a stinker, but I persisted to the end...and was not rewarded for my persistence. The twists were obvious, the humour was poor and very much un-coogan.

I agree that most reviews of this film seem to be written to boost its popularity.

I picked this film up for £2, and it proved you get what you pay for. I'd never heard of it before buying it, and I wish I'd not bothered!

If you like Steve Coogan, you'll dislike The Alibi! Don't bother. Pick up some old Alan Partridge instead, much funnier.


The Alibi feels like a premise in search of a plot: Steve Coogan's an ex-con man who's spotted a gap in the market and now provides alibis for cheating husbands and wives only to find himself in the frame for murder when one of his clients accidentally kills a woman. With a similar plot engine to Coogan's earlier The Parole Officer  man suspected of a crime he didn't commit has to use his clients to save him  it's the kind of US film Peter Sellers might have made during the early 70s lull in his career and which you'd expect to see on an airplane. But while it highlights Coogan's weaknesses as a conventional leading man and is very short on laughs without have a smart enough payoff to compensate, it's brisk and harmless enough. But James Brolin really should lay off the Peter Falk impersonations in future.


There's a reason some films go "straight to video" instead of even making a brief attempt at theatrical release. This Steve Coogan mess is a perfect example. Let me save you ninety precious minutes of your life..skip this disaster.

Steve Coogan, Rebecca Ramos, James Marsden, John Leguizamo, Debi Mazar, James Brolin, Sam Elliott, Henry Rollins... A Great cast totally wasted on a dull, by-the-numbers plot. You have to wonder how such talented people signed on to such a weak project. One can only guess.

It's obvious most of the other comments are on solely to boost the rating of this atrocity. SKIP IT!


"Journey into Fear" is one of those 'what if' films...in this case, one wonders, "What if Orson Welles had not been taken off this film by the studio? Would he have been able to make it another masterpiece on a par with "Citizen Kane" or "Magnificent Ambersons" (despite its studio-tacked on ending)? The opening shot of "Journey into Fear" is riveting, pure Welles, and promises of great things to come...but they never do, until perhaps the final ten minutes of the motion picture. Great tracking shot in the opening, fine premise set up with the film's first (and principal) villain, then the scene cuts to Joseph Cotten, Edward Sloan, and Ruth Warrick, and suddenly it is like the driest stage play one can imagine. What happened? Joseph Cotten has played many memorable roles, but he was not know as a writer, and the screenplay of "Journey into Fear" is paper-thin. Welles' performance is somewhat interesting, and his camera-work in the opening, closing, and a few fleeting moments in between are brilliant, but it is not enough to carry this film. For completists only.


Surprisingly bad considering the involvement of such great actors. Like an alternate universe Citizen Kane. In Journey Into Fear we see many of the same actors, but none of what made Kane great. Joseph Cotton appears annoyingly useless, instead of his usual sympathetic everyman of films like The Third Man. The plot plods along with strange contrivances. The relationship between Cotton and his wife does not sit well and ends with the worst scene in the movie. The only thing to fear in the movie is Everett Sloane's twitchy performance and the insane getup of Mr Welles. The bad guys are quite useless. Cotton is barely there. In short - It's not terrific!


A Victorian period drama with quasi erotic bits!

Poorly acted, bland and boring and for much of the time very predictable for me.

The main characters are pretty lame and are acted much the same.

Mark Rylance, as William Adamson, seems to have perfected an expression of blank emotion (or maybe it's just boredom).

Patsy Kensit's character exists to simply have a different frock on in EVERY scene she's in or get her kit off.

Douglas Henshall provides the 'evil' character & is actually quite good, he doesn't overdo it so it never reaches the pantomime stage, however Annette Badland has no trouble in reaching these dizzy heights as Lady Alabaster (PK's characters mother).

Kristin Scott Thomas plays a subdued second female lead and, like Henshall, comes away with some credit

One has to assume it's not the actors fault as the director, Philip Haas, surely got what he asked for.

How on earth this got the Evening Standard award for Best British film in 1995 beggars belief (it MUST have been a BAD year).


Tepid. What a waste of a good title. The production has more in common with television than film. Instead of exploring in a challenging and sensual way the themes implied by the title, the movie timidly rehashes conversations we've all had about metamorphosis. Chalk one up for the marketers, who created warm and enticing packaging for a film that is emotionally distant at best. I don't think the fault lies with the material - in terms of pure plot, the story itself is quite satisfying. But the filmmakers are so incompetent that you feel like you're in high school English class listening to someone mumble through a Shakespeare recitation. Presentation is everything, but they give nearly nothing. Feels like the whole thing was shot by the second unit. The costumes are beautiful.

Kristin Scott Thomas (a major reason I rented this) is underused, though as effective as they allowed her to be.


This is by far the worst movie I can ever recall seeing. It beats out grade Z movies because of its "deep arthouse movie" pretensions. I saw "Angels and Insects" for free, so I actually enjoyed laughing at it with my friends. Particularly the as-subtle-as-a-jackhammer "imagery" [Oh I get it! They're like bees because they dress in yellow and black stripped ballgowns!] and the hilarious poor acting ["when I touch myself...in the night..."]. If you want an intelligent movie, look elsewhere.


I had to watch this film for a class about Mid-Victorian Britain...with my professors and my class...and I was shocked at the story; Not just how awful the acting was, but that the script was actually bought and given a green light for production. The costumes were stylized and the design was nominated for an Oscar...how that was possible, I don't even know. The only thing redeemable about the film is Kristen Scott Thomas. Mark Rylance and Patsy Kensit give two of the worst performances I have ever seen in my entire life. Rylance's pitch and tone of voice never changes and Kensit was overly dramatic to the point of being comical. I would only see this movie if you want to laugh. But even at that, you're going to be wasting money...even energy by renting this movie. Stay away...


This is one of those few movies that is just so dreadful I couldn't stand to watch more than half of it. The acting by the main character and dialog is atrocious! Avoid at all cost! Save your money and stare at a blank wall for 2 hrs - it'll be more entertaining!


Angels and Insects is a thoughtful adult tale predicated on an anagram of the word "Insect." It benefits from a provocative story, interesting collection of characters, the charm of a period setting, and several philosophical and social musings, all worthy of consideration. The casting is generally admirable, as is the carefully selected country house setting. Unfortunately, all of this is brought to ruin by Philip Haas' inept directing. Haas is unable to elicit a single convincing reading from any of his characters, each one single dimensional and unsympathetic. Haas does not believe his audience capable of following the subtle story, so every symbol set in florescence, every theme overstated and restated ad nauseam, every moment of foreshadowing underlined and forced. This heavy handed approach is exacerbated by Paul Brown's ridiculously overwrought costumes, which try frantically to convey the image of humans as insects. Worst of all, Alexander Balanescu contributes a genuinely ugly and distracting musical score, which could ruin a far better film. For example, in an early scene when Adamson returns to Britain and is feted at a private ball, instead of using authentic music to nail the period effect and introduce all the elegant and subtle feelings that run beneath the Victorian surface, Balanescu concocts a drone that is an explicit imitation of locusts. This scene, which could be such a foil to the dance in the Amazon that precedes it, is utterly dreadful. If it is artistically useful to scream that humans and bugs are the same, Haas' approach might have worked. For the viewer who prefers to construct his own meanings and contexts, he will deplore that something intelligent has been debased to middle school stupidity. Perhaps those who admired "The Piano" (another film that frantically worried the view would not Get The Message, constantly harassed by garbage music) would also like this film. This viewer regretted that a marvelous story, worthy of a master filmmaker's hand, was wasted, as it is unlikely that anyone will ever attempt a remake. Pity.


Glossy costume drama that is inert for two thirds of the movie. A lot of this has to do with Mark Rylance speaking so softly and hesitantly that one wants to tell him to get on with it. But the main problem is that Patsy Kensit is way over her head with this one. The only time I thought she was really acting was when she panicked when she was getting covered with moths (and methinks that she was really panicking). Also, Kristin Scott Thomas' Matty, instead of coming across as a champion of liberated women everywhere was merely reduced to a know-it-all that I tired of pretty quickly. The film's only saving grace was the references to insects, which was rather interesting. Other than that, a rather boring historical picture with some shocking subject matter to make it relevant.