Resident Evil Apocalypse reviews?

FWIW Ebert gave it .5 stars. I was kind of interested but now I'll probably wait.

Not only that, but he ended the review with a great zinger:




I hated the first one, even though a lot of people considered it a guilty pleasure. I'm going to avoid this sequel and stick with the games.

FWIW, Ebert gave the first film only one star. He's probably right about this one though.

Hey, if this flick has some nice zombie action, I'm going to see it. I'm a sucker for zombie movies.

Then how about just going to see "Shaun of the Dead" when it comes out on 9/24? At least it's trying to be funny.

Just got back from seeing this.

It's not a great movie, but it's also not as bad as Ebert made it out to be (and I usually agree with him). The film suffers from two things: it's as shallow as a kiddie pool and lacks the ultra-violence associated with zombie flicks. On the plus side, I like that the zombies aren't the only antagonists: there are also killer dogs, monstrous "bio-weapons" with prehensile tongues, and a lumbering juggernaut of a mutant that serves as a one-Frankenstein army. And of course, the omniscient and evil Umbrella Corporation is behind it all. Who better to hate than slimey corporate villains?

Alice, the returning heroine from Resident Evil, is back, mutated by the T-virus into a superhuman ass-kicking machine. She's joined by a tough female cop, a wise-cracking civilian, and a little girl who, though we haven't seen her before, will seem familiar. They're all trapped when the Umbrella Corporation cordons off Raccoon City in an attempt to contain the T-virus. In order to escape, they have to battle their way through hordes of the undead as well as other predatory manifestations of the dreaded virus. Meanwhile the Umbrella Corporation is enacting its ultimate solution...

There's so much going on here that I think the film would have benefitted from a longer running time. There are too many elements compressed into too short a time frame (though the film is open-ended, paving the way for another sequel).

I'm one of those who consider the first film a guilty pleasure, and Resident Evil: Apocalypse, while broadening the scope of the original, doesn't quite match up. It's fun and generally well-done, but it's all a bit bland.

out of

OK...I love the games dearly and liked the first movie quite a bit...but please explain to me how the games are any better than the movies? Every thing I've heard about the movie was in the games, although certain things may be happening in a different order or to different characters.

Entire plot lines and characters are being neglected and having to take the backseat to a bland heroine like Alice. The movies are drastically different than the games.

I am a huge fan of the video game series. The first film has never truly been worthy of the series in my opinion but it works on some levels. So when I heard that at least a few characters from the games were going to be included in the plot for the sequel I was excited. But what a disaster it turned out to be...

As a video game adaptation it fails miserably, as an action film it succeeds to some extent. But what could have been, that's all I kept thinking. They filmmed this in the summer of 2003, plenty of time to fix things but I guess not. Anderson must have banged this script out in record time. I don't want to list the problems with this film because it would take up too much space (and I don't want to classified as an AICN talk-backer for going into such exhaustive detail) but the bottom line is that it is a very average film and a terrible sequel. However newcomer Siena Guillory steals the show as Jill Valentine.

out of

My take

http://www.canadamovies.net/canada/reviews.php?reviewid=81

I liked this movie. I'll write my review later tonight. I used my free ticket to this movie (that came in the RESIDENT EVIL Deluxe Edition DVD). Did anyone catch the little gag during the end credits?

Perhaps the film relies on familiarity of the video games, but I don't play this game, and thus, the film suffers from woeful inadequate character introduction and development for me. But if you get the first 40 minutes out of the way, it's high on mindless action and it's a loud, loud movie (HT bassheads will enjoy the soundtrack when the film hits DVD).

I give it 2 stars or a grade of C.

There were so many things wrong with this movie I don't even know where to begin. Yes I liked the first one, and yes I'm a fan of the games. Let's start with the good things: The setting in this movie looked alot like Raccoon City in the 2nd game, which I give them props for, the outfits were nice and looks like they paid alot of attention to detail from the games, it was nice to see characters from the games (Jill, STARS, Nemesis) that's all for the good things.
The rest of the movie was horrible, first we are treated to 10 minutes of a rehashing of the first movie, which I guess is good for people who have never seen it but a bore for people who have. The characters are not at all developed and some of the scenes are really stupid.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
The rest of the movie is nothing but action filmed with a shaky camera, with the story taking a back seat. Alot of things needed to be better explained pertaining to Alice
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Also did anyone else see the part that they totally ripped from the Resident Evil Code Veronica game? It was cool to see, but the game did it so much better. Overall I was very disappointed, and glad that I saw it for free courtesy of the DVD ticket, otherwise I would have been very upset. Paul W.S. Anderson should never work in Hollywood again.

out of

Hey Chris, I thought the exact same. Here is one major plothole I noticed.

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Let me preface: I didn't see the first one in the theaters. I bought my first Playstation because of how great I heard this game was, and the movie just didn't look like it was going to fit the game mold. Seeing the previews for Apocalypse, I thought it looked pretty interesting, so I bought the first one the other day to get the movie cash. Overall, thought the first one had it's moments, so was looking forward to the second. OK, that said....

I don't use such strong descriptions for movies often, but this movie was a steaming pile of $#!T. To me, it was that bad. Starting with the story, which was completely laughable -- the characters overall, were horrible -- the scenarios Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) were ridiculous -- the makeup and special effects, and let's be honest, the original was obviously on a budget, didn't even come close. Nemesis looked like an absolute joke, a big dude wearing an entirely too stiff rubber suit and carrying rocket launchers.... yeah, this movie was really, really bad.

The thing that really surprised me was that the first one was mildly intelligent, had an interesting story with a little mystery going on. Everything that I liked about the first one was missing in this one.

This was a truly awful movie. Even in terms of zombie movies, this was an awful movie. Yes, it wasn't even a good zombie movie, go back to what I said about the special effects -- the director seemed to think if he blurred the zombies movements that it would make them seem scarrier... and save a load of money on makeup.

Man, this movie was really bad. Coming from a guy who absolutely loved the first 2 games, liked the first movie pretty well, and absolutely loves zombie movies.

Doug

My mixed review is up.

This sequel made me appreciate Paul Anderson more than ever before. I think if he were behind the camera for this one it would have turned out better.

I saw Resident Evil: Apocalypse today. The movie was OK but, not great or that memorable. I didn't expect going in to see this film that I would experience a classic of the genre so I wasn't let down that much when the credits rolled after the movie concluded. It helped that I lowered my expectations beforehand. Overall I came away with a mixed reaction tilting slightly towards negative.

What made me laugh was how obvious it was that this movie was shot in Toronto which is the city I reside in. It didn't ruin the movie for me but, in a way I found it kind of weird because I ended up pointing out all of the places I have visited in the past to myself while watching so it was a little distracting.

The Toronto Skyline was visible throughout and nobody even bothered or considered to remove the CN Tower, Bank of Montreal building, Sheridan hotel, or anything. It was funny that the filmmakers did not want to try and hide this one bit through computer enhancements or cinematography tricks or editing throughout the whole movie. There was not that much of a clear distinction or difference at times during the duration of the movie between the look of Raccoon city and the real city of Toronto. When Milla Jovovich's character ran down the side of that tall and oddly designed building attached to a thick cord I found this amusing because Toronto city hall was used in the stunt.

I wonder why the producers of this film decided not to go to any great lengths to remove some of these landmarks. Maybe they were just lazy or it could have been deliberate I don't know but, since I live in the city it took me out of the movie.

Man, what the hell happened to this movie? The first one was great and had an ending that made you look forward to the sequel, but this one just made absolutely no sense. None of the plot made ANY sense at all. I don't understand how someone could have accepted this script.

The only good thing to come of this movie will be the surround sound track when it's on dvd. For the very first time in my theater, I actually noticed discrete surround and discrete rear effects in addition to a large helping of bass. I definitely won't pick this one up new, but getting it 3 for $20 at Hollywood sounds ok.

This movie was a special kind of horrible that best can be described as a mixure of DOA cliches and ham-fisted borrowing from other films.

The Umbrella Corporation, yea, they're just the coportation from Aliens and when they rescue the litter girl, I practically exspected her to say, "They come out mostly at night, mostly."...oh, and Alice is just a retread of Ripley from Alien 2 and Alien 4, they even put her in a tube just like the ones from Alien: Ressurection when the movie kept going.

This film is like the T-Virus: it was dead but kept moving like a zombie, clunkily and horribly.

Oh, and when a Nuclear power plant has a melt down, it does not act like a atom bomb, yes it explodes, but it is the radation that will kill people...the people writing this film have zero creativity and didn't even bother to with three minutes of research on what happens during a nuclear plant accident. I'm surprized they even metioned Chernobyl, they obviously didn't actually know what happened at Chernobyl.

Doing a two second check:
"The Chernobyl accident killed more than 30 people immediately, and as a result of the high radiation levels in the surrounding 20-mile radius, 135,00 people had to be evacuated."

Doesn't quite match the excuse in the film finale, eh?

Apparently the people who wrote this film don't even know how to use Google.

That is merely one example of the ever-present laziness that skanks up this whole film.

Someone earlier called this film a stinking pile of feces, that is being too kind.

Mike Epps supporting role as the "comic" relief was terrible also. The worst kind of annoying stereotype that I was hoping was behind us.

I didn't mind the rest of the movie though.

The first half of the movie was quite terrible, but once they hit the school, I think it got marketedly better.

I'm not a big fan of the original film (although I did like the game series), but I'd have to concede that it was better than this one. The film shares the same low-gore quotient of the first one (only marginally uses its R rating) but still managed a few good moments here and there.

Probably not worth having to slog through the first half, but the last half was fair enough to not be outraged by it.

I thought it was an entertaining "BALLS TO THE WALLS" film myself. Can hardly wait for the dvd.

I saw it on saturday. I got mixed feelings about this one.

The setup was nice...group of people trying to get out of a whole CITY alive, while having to fend off zombies, lickers, dead dogs and Nemesis. It could've been very interesting (if done well).

The execution, on the other hand was bad, really bad.

The first movie was good, most of the scenes made sense and you actually felt a bit scared of what would come next.

With this sequel, all of that goes out the window. Lots of mindless action pieces. Like Alice appearing out of nowhere in the church, crashing through the window and killing the lickers. Or the group of survivors walking through a friggin' CEMETERY!

The first one made sense in the sense that the characters reacted in a realistic manner. The characters in the sequel behaved in a very ilogical manner.

I guess I was expecting this movie to be a little more intelligent but it was just dumb fun. I was entertained, I give it that. But it just didn't meet my expectations.

PS: This movie is LOUD! I can't remember ever wishing the theater would lower the volume just a little bit.

And what about that scene in the cemetary!?!

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

I saw this movie and not being much of a RE fan I guess helped me like it a tad bit more.


But I agree, how did the dead contract the T-Virus? The only thing my cousin and I came up with were the WORMS inside had the virus LOL and made the corpse move LOL...


Aside from that, I found myself REALLY REALLY wanting to know more about ALICE at the end. Another thing. Project Nemesis, why did no one ever thing of shooting him in the HEAD? I hate that. Its obvious he's not going down when you shoot him in the chest, get his freaking FACE!!!

Finally managed to see this one today. I agree that it is not a great movie. However, it is a good action flick. Much, much better than that POS of AvP. That was the worst movie I have seen in many years. Completely devoid of any rational thought... but I digress. RE:A has many short comings, but action is not one of them. I felt that the hectic photography lend itself very well to this fast paced movie. I was quite entertained throughout. I'm looking forward to its sequel, as well as picking up its DVD when it hits the shelves.

Resurrecting the thread. Just rented Resident Evil: Apocalypse. I loved the first one.

Indeed on rewatching the original Resident Evil the other day (to prep for the sequel!) I realized just how much it moved me: on rewatching the original, every scene moved more quickly than I'd remembered it. I suspect that effect has to do with how much detail your brain is recording -- my theory is that if you are really interested in a film then you record so much that in a subjective sense even a fast paced film like RE seems epic.

Anyway, the sequel wasn't so epic.

I tried to quiet my internal monologue the moment I noticed that the film seemed to lack the style of the first one, but before I could silence it I observed that they seemed to be introducing another female lead character without good cause.

I realized the cause appeared to be simply because back when it came time to write the script, they were probably worried they wouldn't be able to get Milla back for the sequel, so they wrote up a storyline that didn't need Alice. But they did get Milla back (and for good cause: she's the balls). So they ended up with two female leads, and the film remained fractured from that initial mistake onward. The filmmakers, having been unable to determine who to focus on, ended up with a film in which there was no one to relate to.

When "generic seven foot tall comic-book supervillain" showed up it was clear that this film was firmly aiming for "Let's Suck!".

The film played out like a cross between Escape from New York and an episode from the subpar seventh season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

I can't forgive the filmmakers for making Milla's character so unhuman. I don't mean in a DNA way, I mean in making her so difficult to connect with. She was the spirit of the first film but for this second one she was just some generic muscle. It's a shame really.

I expected, naively I guess, that a sequel to a highly praised film like RE (it was praised, wasn't it? It deserved to be!) would mean that they'd make a sequel as good or better. I was not prepared for the old school "let's ride on the coattails of the first film by making a low budget film that sucks, and hope no one notices the drop in quality!" I feel betrayed. I bet the actors (MJ) feel betrayed. This film series could be redeemed by a third film, but only if they bring in someone like Ridley Scott to do the honors.

I just want to add a quick follow up to my harsh review of RE:A.

The disc may be worth picking up (at least renting) if only for the commentary track by Milla and her male co-star. They are totally cracking up through the whole film, it is a real pleasure to listen to -- and thankfully distracts from the film itself. Indeed you can just close your eyes and listen along if you want to avoid seeing the film again.

Their humor is intentional.

But there's also an unintentional bit of humor about this commentary track. It comes in the form of the way another commentary was edited into it. There are some seperately recorded comments from the actresss who played Jill Valentine. They cut to that one now and then, revealing a stark contrast: whereas Milla and her guy are in hysterics over the film, the actress who played Jill is super-serious and intent upon the craft of her character. The DVD producers should not have attempted to blend these two seperately-recorded commentaries together, as the tones could not be more radically different. One set of folks are comparing the sounds of being hungry for a sandwhich with the sounds zombies make, and in the other Jill Valentine is waxing philosophical on the Craft. Oddly neither set of folks come off as silly, but it is a silly contrast!