Written May 06, 2016
I really liked this movie. It didn't take too long to get to the point and the action was amazing. Not the best movie I've ever seen but definitely worth it.
Written December 06, 2016
Borrows all the memorable scenes from the original, but, other than special effects, doesn't add anything new or unique. If you're going to remake a successful film, a borderline cult classic, why bother if you can't come up with anything fresh?
As with the original, logic & sense don't have much of a place. The motivation for the villain, Cohaagen, is preposterous, and the threatened "invasion" would be undone if one character would just stop posing for the camera and think.
The one small upside for me was Kate Beckinsale. Her Terminator-esque/assassin take on the role originally performed by Sharon Stone, has its moments, but not enough to turn my thumb up.
Still, if you can enjoy the eye-candy (depending on you bent—Beckinsale, Biels, or Farrell), it's not a complete waste of time.
A borderline No/So-So.
Written August 06, 2012
The special effects was profound, but the acting was not all that dynamic. In the first version, Arnold and the other characters were phenomenal, in spite of the lack of effects in the present version.
Written February 25, 2017
The plot was not there. You did not care about the characters at all. I wanted Colin Farrell and Jessica Biehl to just go away.How do you make a remake and then not at least make some of the movie interesting so it could stand on its own. What was with the Underworld cast reunion, Len Weisman (director), his wife, Kate Beckinsale and Bill Nighy. All cast and crew from Underworld... Wink, wink, sadly wink.
If you want a movie that makes you feel like you have a good time with a sci-fi action flick this is NOT the movie you want to go and see.
Written August 03, 2012
Does not stray from the original too much. The leading ladies definitely steal the show. If you enjoyed Blade Runner, IRobot and 5thElement, you will enjoy the movie alot.