Cell (2016) Movie Reviews

Cell (2016) Movie Reviews

Sad attempt at low budget zombie flick

I have never been so happy to finish a movie. I kept waiting for this to end. Even at 98 minutes, my patience was running out. This was not only the worst movie of 2016 but possibly the worst movie ever made. I hated nearly everything about it. The characters were so unlikeable and the acting was so wooden. 

The plot is so unoriginal. It's basically The Walking Dead except The Walking Dead is a character-driven thrill ride whereas Cell is a low budget borefest. It begins with a father at an airport and he is talking to his son on his phone, he puts his phone away and all of a sudden, everyone around him starts foaming at the mouth and turn into zombies. He escapes and meets Tom mccourt, a very annoying and cliché'd character. Together, the both of them form a strong friendship.

I lost interest in this film about 20 minutes in, because i knew exactly how it was going to turn out. I wont give away any spoilers but it's exactly what you think will happen. The script was so predictable. It tries so hard at character development but it ends up cliché'd and annoying. There is no plot twists or any level of shock that would make you care enough to actually be shocked. 

I am a fan of Stephen King's work, but i have not read Cell. I would imagine the book is a lot better than the movie. 95% of the time, that is the case with most book to movie adaptations.

Overall, this was a sad attempt at the low budget zombie flick as the special effects were poor and the make up on the "zombies" was pathetic. The ending was okay and it was for this reason i gave it a 3 out of 10. I would not recommend this movie to anyone, even if you are a fan of Stephen king, do not go and see this movie but instead, spend your money on something more worth your time.

Intense start but lazy end

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.