seularts
This a great adaptation from the original movie with the same name from 1971. Thou many people debate if this is a good movie or not, I would say 100% yes. Many question spawn out of the plot, but this is the beauty of the movie, it makes thing unpredictable and puts the question mark right in the middle of the story: how, when, where. The stream of the events are a bit fuzzy, but if you see this movie twice you get the subliminal idea of how everything worked out to the very end.There are many cons to the movie, but considering that the CGI is 90% well made and the characters have at least a human attitude and a brain to care for an intelligent dialog, I would say this could be rated a B+ type of movie. Things could have been improved regarding the scenes in this movie and the chain of events to make a bit more clear, but keep in mind that there is no exact science and by working with trial and error you get a nice enough result.In my opinion if they remake the movie, it will look much better next time, thou repetition can be kind of lame. But if they attempt this, I would highly recommend that they do not add the fat Latino bimbo at the end of the movie, including dumb people in the script just makes the movie look bad.This is a movie worth watching, at least for the nice special effects, if not for the interesting story then!
deborah1000
I was very glad that I had both disks from Netflix because I couldn't wait to start disk 2. The effects were very good, sometimes excellent. There were scenes where they used CGI that I would not have guessed were CGI. I really liked the lab with its "future but not too distant future" look. The plot is compelling. The creators intentionally went beyond the book to speculate on where the virus came from, why it was sent (if it was sent), etc. I *love* this kind of speculation; it's one of main reasons why I'm a sci fi fan. I agree that cutting back on exterior scenes and the presence of some minor characters would not have detracted from the film. For a person who finds it hard to get around movie effects and the role of women in shows dating from the 60s and 70s, there's no question as to which version I enjoyed more.
james
I would have given this entertaining movie 8 stars instead of 10, but I'm giving it 10 stars to "balance out" the reviewers who are giving it 1 star just because the scientists include minorities and a gay man. By the way, out of 3 hours, there is 7 seconds where we learn that one scientist is gay and then it is never mentioned again. And apparently some reviewers are shocked, SHOCKED that a Latino or an Asian-American or an African-American or a gay person could be a scientist. Of course, that says nothing about minorities, but says volumes about the intelligence of the bigoted reviewers. That said, the movie, while very entertaining, is about an hour too long. They could have left out the "CNN-type" reporter (played by a straight actor who used to play a gay character on a sitcom-----Oh No!!! Another "gay" connection! Horrors!). Almost all of his scenes were unnecessary and cutting those scenes would have made the movie better and only 2 hours.
quincymd
This is not even a remake of 1971 original film. I was preparing to see a good movie when I saw the title, but after 5 minutes I grabbed the Remote control and switched the TV off. There is no real connection with the original film. I am hoping IMDb creates a voting scale including Zero and negative values to rate these "productions" (should be read "destructions") with misleading titles.If I were the writer of the original novel, I would certainly ask not to be named in the creditsOverall Rating: By far, the WORST ever seen (mathematically the value would be tending to minus infinite)Reccomendations: Check release date before planning to see this title If it reads 1971 it's OK, if it is 2008, do not waste your time.
AD
