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.

Watching it right now on Rai2, dubbed in Italian.

At first I thought it was some kinda B movie despite the big names (maybe Samuel L. Jackson and John Cusack have taken the path of Nicolas Cage?) and the level of production. Then, to my surprise, I discovered this was a Stephen King adaptation, and not the brainchild of some wannabe King.

Something's extremely off. Hard to put a finger on it at first look, but the director seems to have forgotten to set a particular mood and pace for the material in hand. This is so rushed it fails to be taken seriously. Even less credible an outcome than Zombie parodies.

And to top it: I believe it requires some kind of special talent to have Samuel L. Jackson as a lead in a movie and still not even manage to make the outcome even moderately entertaining.

I may not even make it till the end.

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.

First... I did not know anything about this awesome, and I can't say that enough, awesome book becoming a movie. I have had to read this book at least 10 times over the last few years and some of my most favorite life quotes came from this book. So when I saw this as a movie and John as the main role I knew it was going to be amazing. I mean if I could cast the main character myself it would be John.

BUT... Well, if the director had made a movie out of the book, it would have been amazing. If the movie had any of the most notable and required pieces of the plot it would have been amazing. If the director had even read anything to do with the book, even the dust jacket, it would have been amazing. But he didn't, he didn't, he didn't.

SO... The movie sucked. I don't like to use that type of "language" when reviewing anything, but there is no other choices here. Everything about the movie was wrong and I gave it a lot of room, a lot of space to make errors and not flow the same. Because ultimately you want to be surprised by the movie. You ultimately want the director to make it his own just a little bit, put his spin on something and have it shine even more. And I did, I watched the movie to the very end. Checked behind the credits and everything. And now I wish I would have gone on for the rest of my life without knowing this movie existed.

IF... Now one might think by my review that had you not read the book, you might have liked it but sadly that is not true. This is not only the worst adaptation of a book ever, but it is also just poorly put together, scripted, acted, and there is no redeemable quality anywhere.

Such as... The sound effects were horrible, the video tried to be dark and creepy, but it was just bland. There was very little action or scare factor other than some BOO moments from the "zombies type people." If you didn't see something coming from a mile away it is because it made no sense. The ending was a little baffling on how horrible it was. I mean I am actually trying to think of one thing. Just one that I can say and would take this movie from a 1 star to at least a 1.5 star. But I can't. I can't think of a single thing that I can look back on and say that was cool/nice/awesome/not terrible.

Lastly... So I will leave you with this. I am actually praying that I reach you before you watched this movie. I am hoping one of your not nice friends didn't play a prank on you and made you pay for this movie. It is my desire that this review has reached you before you have wasted one single heartbeat within the vicinity of this horrible, horrible film mistake. And I thank you for reading my review and I am sorry to those that I did not reach in time.

Joshua Kyte

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