Cell

This variation of the zombie apocalypse borrows from films like 28 Weeks Later or Kaufman's Invasion of the Body Snatchers. That is to say, it relies more on psychological tension than on graphic violence (but still contains some graphic violence.) The first act is pretty good, intense, sharp, adopting a fast pace that dispenses us of the genre's clichés. That won't last as it will turn into standard fare. Finally, in the 3rd act, the writer completely drops the ball and doesn't even bother ending his story properly. He just takes the easiest way out and deserves some boos for it.

Bad storytelling is enough to make a movie bad and a rating low. Here however, I balance it with the impressive beginning and the excellent visuals. Also worth mentioning is Samuel L. Jackson who, for the first time in 20 years, portrays a human being instead of his perpetual annoying caricature.

"Quite a problem these cell phones have caused." Clay Riddell (Cusack) has just landed and is talking to his wife about getting together with his kid again. When his phone dies he begins to look for change when all of a sudden he hears screaming and everyone in the airport falls to the ground. What happens next is unthinkable and now, in a type of post apocalyptic world Clay and a small group of survivors try to make it back to his family, before it's too late. I had no idea what to expect from this movie. I liked the fact that it was a Stephen King book, though I never read it, and the idea of technology leading to some sort of downfall is scary in its possibility. All of the excitement started to slowly fade away when the movie fell into what it really was… another zombie movie. The symbolism of cell phones turning people into zombies wasn't lost on me and the movie did have a message in that sense, but it essentially became just another generic zombie movie. Overall, not terrible and this is worth seeing, but I just feel it could have been so much more than another in the line of zombie movies. I give this a B-.

Over the many year's movies have existed there's been a large number of questions raised by movies with answers non-forthcoming. These are questions that have been at the forefront of many a coffee date discussion, movie club forum or family dinner. Questions like who exactly is/was the "thing" (The Thing), is it a dream or reality (Inception), what was in the briefcase (Pulp Fiction) and now with this long completed and finally just released Stephen King adaptation we can add why exactly was John Cusack's in danger graphic novelist Clay Riddell so keen to pop on his beanie in the midst of a do or die cell phone lead apocalypse?

It's a question we may sadly never have answered and probably the only thing that will stick with you once Tod William's (where has the director who made The Door in the Floor gone?) film reaches its credit sequence, as this adaptation of one of King's least regarded books is one of those films just waiting to join the likes of The Wicker Man remake as a film that's just so bizarre and random it's hard to know who did and why they decided this was a film the public wanted.

In all its random glory however, if I was being totally honest, after all the negative press and jokes being made at its expense, Cell is not nearly as bad as it could've been when watched with the right mindset.

A seriously daft idea that induces a large amount of unintended laughter, Cell has its fair share of "what the" moments and it's a little sad seeing the likes of John Cusack (although he seems to have sold his movie soul some time ago now) and Samuel L. Jackson act through some insanely bizarre situations; I truly can't even begin to explain a scene involving a field of sleeping cell phone zombies, the film actually has some decent scenes and ideas that make this a B grade experience you can sit back and laugh at or with and an experience best watched with a room full of friends all up to witness a film that should never have made it to the cold light of day.

Through the history of movies we've been treated to King adaptation gold, from experiences like The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, The Shining and The Mist, Cell is certainly not one of those and is certainly not a film of cinematic virtue but it's an experience that deserves to be seen as even if you hate every minute of this oddball ride its likely you've never seen anything like it before and if you solve the beanie mystery, please let me know.

2 troll lol lol's out of 5

I remember reading this book and thinking what an amazing Movie it would make. With the right cast and script I knew this could be a winner. I waited for someone to make it and finally they did.

We were getting John Cusack and Samuel L Jackson. How could they not make an amazing movie.

I waited eagerly to view this long anticipated adventure and thought the day would never arrive when I could get the chance to see it.

Then I did.

Firstly it has very little in common with the book I read. the book is very clever and draws you into the story. The movie is not clever and the story is thrown at us.

In The book we care about all the characters. In the movie we don't.

I have to admit I walked out before the end. I just couldn't take anymore.

Why oh why did they not just stick to the books narrative.

I know you have to cut corners but they didn't cut corners, they invented new corners that had nothing to do with the story.

I love Stephen King and have read all of his books but I'm tired of seeing them butchered by Movie makers who just don't understand the story.

Save your money. Don't even bother renting this movie.

Watch TV instead.

When I first read Cell many years ago, I instantly thought it could be transferred to an amazing movie. (And funnily enough, even cast the same actors in my eyes for both Clay and Tom.)

However, the final product for the big screen was such a let down.. Though the scenes they took from the book were fairly accurate, they cut out at least 40% of the content. (Most of which is integral to the story telling and explaining what has actually happened.. The Raggedy Man / Red Hoodie Guy being one major oversight.)

I feel like if you hadn't read the book to begin with, you'll probably find yourself getting lost too easily.. There was a severe lack of pacing simply jumping from scene to scene and some changes which in my opinion were for the worst.

Overall I did still enjoy the movie, has a fairly unique concept and some very disturbing imagery, but had I have not read the book prior I don't think it'd be getting anywhere near 6/10 from me.

SUMMARY: GO READ THE BOOK INSTEAD, AN ABSOLUTELY AMAZING READ.