IMDb-BEWERTUNG
3,3/10
1279
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuArchaeologist Nicholas Zavatero and his student find a vase with antique inscription on where Noah's Ark is hidden in the underlying monster called Tama. They decide to go looking, but thing... Alles lesenArchaeologist Nicholas Zavatero and his student find a vase with antique inscription on where Noah's Ark is hidden in the underlying monster called Tama. They decide to go looking, but things get out of control.Archaeologist Nicholas Zavatero and his student find a vase with antique inscription on where Noah's Ark is hidden in the underlying monster called Tama. They decide to go looking, but things get out of control.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
Tom Lister Jr.
- Sgt. Gentry
- (as Tommy Lister Jr.)
Vladimir Mihaylov
- Martinez
- (as Vlado Mihaylov)
Mike Straub
- Hutch
- (as Michael Straub)
Stefan Shterev
- Insurgent #1
- (as Stefan Shtereff)
Bashar Rahal
- Insurgent #2
- (as Bashar Rahad)
Hristo Mitzkov
- Belus' Lieutenant
- (as Hristo Motzkov)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Monster Ark actually did seem at least watchable(if nothing great) from the trailers. Its good points are the intriguing idea, the eerie score and the spirited performances of Renee O' Connor and Tim DeKay. Other than that, Monster Ark just didn't engage. And no, I am not just talking about the clunky special effects, looking both cheap in look and stiff in movement, and the lazy directing. I'm also talking about the editing, which is as far away from slick as you can come, the lifelessly paced and predictable story, the preachy, stilted dialogue and generally uninteresting and stereotypical characters. Amanda Crew and Bill Parks try their best, but I couldn't enjoy their efforts properly because they were saddled with the most stereotypical characters of the movie.
All in all, dull and unengaging with a couple of redeeming qualities here and there. 3/10 Bethany Cox
All in all, dull and unengaging with a couple of redeeming qualities here and there. 3/10 Bethany Cox
You know, I realize why casualties in Iraq are so bad. Apparently, Iraq is crawling with ancient monsters that have been let loose by meddling by the US military. Saddam was keeping the world safe from ancient monsters, but Bush has managed to screw that up.
This is the second Skiffy channel movie that was built around this premise. The first was "Manticore" with Star Trek Voyager's Robert Beltran. This has a biblical theme.
Well, my complaint with this one is similar to the my complaint with the other. If you are going to do a movie about the military, actually learn what you are talking about. If this is a mission that higher ups consider important, they'd send a lot more than a squad. A senior Non-commissioned officer is referred to as "Sergeant" or "Sergeant-Major" not "Major" or "Sir". The uniforms are completely wrong. (Big rank insignia on the sleeves of combat uniforms went out in the 1970's. It just tells the enemy who to shoot at.) In a combat situation, you don't go into a nice cluster that can be mowed down with a few shots. YOu also had a clearly overweight soldier, which would simply not happen in a combat zone.
My other complaint with the movie is that the whole character conflict comes between the bible-thumping translator (played by ex-Xena Life Parnter Renee O'Connor) and her atheist ex-husband archaeologist. Which begs the obvious question, if these two had such diametrically opposed views on faith and God, how could they have ever gotten married to start with? Not that it matters, their discussions on faith are so vapid and shallow they barely move the plot along.
This is the second Skiffy channel movie that was built around this premise. The first was "Manticore" with Star Trek Voyager's Robert Beltran. This has a biblical theme.
Well, my complaint with this one is similar to the my complaint with the other. If you are going to do a movie about the military, actually learn what you are talking about. If this is a mission that higher ups consider important, they'd send a lot more than a squad. A senior Non-commissioned officer is referred to as "Sergeant" or "Sergeant-Major" not "Major" or "Sir". The uniforms are completely wrong. (Big rank insignia on the sleeves of combat uniforms went out in the 1970's. It just tells the enemy who to shoot at.) In a combat situation, you don't go into a nice cluster that can be mowed down with a few shots. YOu also had a clearly overweight soldier, which would simply not happen in a combat zone.
My other complaint with the movie is that the whole character conflict comes between the bible-thumping translator (played by ex-Xena Life Parnter Renee O'Connor) and her atheist ex-husband archaeologist. Which begs the obvious question, if these two had such diametrically opposed views on faith and God, how could they have ever gotten married to start with? Not that it matters, their discussions on faith are so vapid and shallow they barely move the plot along.
Hell, I'm getting addicted to these Sci-fi original productions showing on cable, but boy there are some stinkers amongst the charmers and sadly 'Monster Ark' is a dud. The premise actually sounded tolerant, but what came of it was not. After a somewhat imaginative opening, it becomes your stock-like monster on the rampage yarn leaving a small group of people to stop the problem. Its biblical horror set in a war-torn Iraq. When I mean biblical, it's the context of the film, and the sub-plot between the two main leads and that of religious faith. One who questions it and the other who does not. Where love and redemption wins out
lovely. And to set in Iraq
what an inspired choice
meh.
Archaeologist Nicholas Zavaterro along with his grad students discover a vase with an ancient manuscript informing them of the whereabouts of Noah's first ark that imprisoned a monster known as the darkness. Zavaterro, his grad students and his ex-wife/archaeologist head to Iraq to where it is. Along with some babysitting American Soldiers they discover the ark and find a crate which they obviously open and unleash the darkness.
Actually outlining the premise is really starting to bore, and when the darkness is released it's an unconvincing monster (an awful looking design leftovers from a video game?) in clunky CGI breaking out total chaos. Rather unexciting chaos though. Jittery editing and shaky camera-work is plain tiring, as it sloppily moves. But the damaging aspect is the very dodgy script with its preachy/forceful messages it was like a bad tooth ache. A towering Tommy 'Tiny' Lister's Sergeant character gave me a good laugh though, as he truly chew up his lines (enthusiastically) and then spits them out. Renée O'Connor was an itch that wouldn't go away and Tim DeKay is typically modest. Amanda Crew is wasted in a low-key role as one of the students. One thing, why does everybody have to yell out their lines? Declan O'Brien's direction is slick, but feels empty and goes for clichéd devices. Claude Foisy's eerily rippling score on the other hand was perfectly balanced and infused in to the film.
Lame, tacky and a drag. Simple as that.
Archaeologist Nicholas Zavaterro along with his grad students discover a vase with an ancient manuscript informing them of the whereabouts of Noah's first ark that imprisoned a monster known as the darkness. Zavaterro, his grad students and his ex-wife/archaeologist head to Iraq to where it is. Along with some babysitting American Soldiers they discover the ark and find a crate which they obviously open and unleash the darkness.
Actually outlining the premise is really starting to bore, and when the darkness is released it's an unconvincing monster (an awful looking design leftovers from a video game?) in clunky CGI breaking out total chaos. Rather unexciting chaos though. Jittery editing and shaky camera-work is plain tiring, as it sloppily moves. But the damaging aspect is the very dodgy script with its preachy/forceful messages it was like a bad tooth ache. A towering Tommy 'Tiny' Lister's Sergeant character gave me a good laugh though, as he truly chew up his lines (enthusiastically) and then spits them out. Renée O'Connor was an itch that wouldn't go away and Tim DeKay is typically modest. Amanda Crew is wasted in a low-key role as one of the students. One thing, why does everybody have to yell out their lines? Declan O'Brien's direction is slick, but feels empty and goes for clichéd devices. Claude Foisy's eerily rippling score on the other hand was perfectly balanced and infused in to the film.
Lame, tacky and a drag. Simple as that.
When you're mentally editing a film nine minutes in, you know you're in trouble. Redundant scenes, pointless arguing instead of good dialogue...these things can be forgiven if they are rare occurrences and the story is good enough to carry it through. Unfortunately that isn't the case here, and the directionless scenes and dreadful writing continues to the end.
It's a pity, because the story is a good and interesting one, and O'Connor and DeKay have more than proved their talent over the years. They are let down by a bad script (so bad that at times their frustration is almost palpable), and direction which makes no attempt to compensate for or deal with the poor quality script. Surely opportunities for rewrites, even the odd scene, presented themselves?
If I didn't know any better, I would assume that the script is either a) a first draft, or b) a rush job. Maybe both. Or maybe the whole thing was written and directed by people with little experience who desperately needed a mentor throughout the process, and didn't have one.
The result is quite awful. The only people who might get anything positive out of this film are hardcore fans of the two leads who are prepared to forgive *anything* to see their faves on screen, or film students who would like to see a very good example of bad writing, especially bad dialogue.
That said, I gave it 3/10: one for the story (despite its poor execution), one for making the effort, and one for O'Connor and DeKay.
It's a pity, because the story is a good and interesting one, and O'Connor and DeKay have more than proved their talent over the years. They are let down by a bad script (so bad that at times their frustration is almost palpable), and direction which makes no attempt to compensate for or deal with the poor quality script. Surely opportunities for rewrites, even the odd scene, presented themselves?
If I didn't know any better, I would assume that the script is either a) a first draft, or b) a rush job. Maybe both. Or maybe the whole thing was written and directed by people with little experience who desperately needed a mentor throughout the process, and didn't have one.
The result is quite awful. The only people who might get anything positive out of this film are hardcore fans of the two leads who are prepared to forgive *anything* to see their faves on screen, or film students who would like to see a very good example of bad writing, especially bad dialogue.
That said, I gave it 3/10: one for the story (despite its poor execution), one for making the effort, and one for O'Connor and DeKay.
Despite the presence of several veteran actors, Monster Ark amounts to little more than below-average horror shlock. The premise is mildly interesting - the recovery of an ancient manuscript suggesting that the Biblical Noah performed a prior task for God; constructing a previous Ark to serve as a prison for a monster unleashed by the Darkness (they don't go much into what exactly the Darkness was, because this is not a "thinking" movie). Needless to say, the monster is freed by the notably self-absorbed archaeologists to wreak havoc. All of this amounts to little more than a vehicle for a bad CGI-generated monster (who apparently has steak knives for forearms) to leap around hacking at people. It is also impervious to any man-made weapon, but often flees, anyway. Luckily, there is an ancient brotherhood created to protect us from this thing... though they seem pretty useless as far as the plot goes. The script deals with the numerous religious concepts raised by the usual half-hearted science-vs-religion lines, but nobody seems overly sorry about the fact that their mindless ambition has unloosed a killing machine - and possibly even the apocalypse- on an unsuspecting world. But this is supposed to be a horror film (not at all scary) with some action (not very exciting). But what do you expect from a film that supposedly takes place in Iraq but is shot in Bulgaria? Sure, there's a war on, but... A few brights spots - "Tiny" Lister stomping around snarling and shooting guns in an unintentionally funny role as a U.S. Army major, and the only two characters I didn't find annoying, Professor Nick's two students: lovely Amanda Crew and amusing Bill Parks (filling the token roles of young hottie and sarcastic nerd, respectively). It would have been more entertaining (and, oddly, more believable) as one of those teen-slasher films. Instead we get a ridiculous CGI creature leaping around the "desert" while a pack of idiots figures out what to do about it. It's nice to know Xena's side-kick can still get work, but do yourself a favor and pass on this one.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesDr. Greenway describes a papyrus document as a palimpsest, a manuscript or document that has had its original writing erased and something new written over it. Under special conditions the original writing can be read.
- PatzerZavaterro mentions that the mysterious "brotherhood" trying to stop them are "...direct descendants of the family of Noah." However, if one interprets the flood myth literally, every human being is a descendant of Noah because his is the only family that supposedly survived.
- VerbindungenReferences Jäger des verlorenen Schatzes (1981)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen