My wife doesn’t groove to scary movies much. So when she said she heard a favorable review of “The Cell” and might be interested in seeing it I was surprised.
On the one hand, if it’s good, I want to jump at the chance of seeing a movie that BOTH of us actually want to see. On the other hand, if the movie is a bust, I’ll ruin chances of seeing flicks I like with my wife for the next 6 months (she won’t trust anything I pick).
So what’s the Straight Dope guys and gals?
I loved it. But then again, it’s got to be really, really bad for me not to like a scifi type of movie. Ebert rated it as one of the best pictures of 2000, and I have to agree with him. Beautiful cinematography, good story, no stupid plot twists, etc. But you have to like that sort of movie. It’s a bit scary, and at least one scene is gory. I’d see it again in a heartbeat.
There are a few plot points that are a bit silly or obvious, but overall I’d say it was good. If you’re a fan of the “look” of a movie then you’ll like it.
“The Cell” sucked harder than Madonna in the NBA locker room. Great costuming and FX, but a pedestrian and incoherent story line and Jennifer Lopez makes Keanu Reeves look like Lawrence Olivier. I can’t believe Roger Ebert gave it four stars.
:mad:
The movie was eye candy. Great costuming, FX, soundtrack, the works. But the plot was loose and dirty, and the acting was mediocre to poor (Jennifer Lopez, obviously). It’s worth it to see it late at night with friends. Perhaps it will push the CGI envelope a little farther, but it is a pretty forgettable movie. I was expecting so much more.
MR
I have a deep and abiding love for Vince Vaughn so I am reluctant to say anything negative about a movie he’s in, but 4 stars? WTF? The movie oscillated between absurdity and more absurdity. It was visually ambitious and emotionally vacuous. An explanation of that ridiculous mind-melding machine wasn’t even attempted, and plot points were left hanging. Was anyone expecting to hear more about Vince Vaughn’s troubled childhood? How about when he left the lab without being checked out first and complained about pain in his abdomen? I sort of thought they might want to follow up on some of the plot seeds they planted, but they were too busy grossing us out AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. I thought it was pretty mediocre, but the guys I was with loved it.
Funny you should mention Vince Vaughn, because I thought he sucked more than Jennifer Lopez. Her character had an annoying personality (IMHO), and I can’t think of many actresses who would have done better without getting the same responses from people. The movie was BEAUTIFUL (especially the open scene), and many of the plot loopholes people have been talking about can be argued either way (which means they are not so bad or glaring). I highly recommend it 
Haven’t seen it. Don’t plan to go. Jennifer Lopez gives me hives.
Is she still dating Puff Daddy? I hope so…it definitely increases her chances of getting hosed in a random drive-by.
IMHO The movie sucked. I fell asleep in the middle of the movie. The CGI was great but the movie was lacking.
I liked it a lot.
The Good:
As others have mentioned, the movie has great visuals. It’s some of the sweetest eye-candy I’ve seen.
The movie is relatively unique, i.e. it’s not quite a horror movie, nor an action movie, nor a thriller. Although outlandish, the premise is at least very interesting.
Seeing Jennifer Lopez in that tight-fitting suit.
The Bad:
Many of the visuals seem rather pointless and arbitrary. It’s like the movie is screaming, “Woo woo! Look at me! Look at me!”
The plot, while not bad by Hollywood’s current standards (or lack thereof), could have been improved considerably in coherence and detail.
The movie tries too hard to get under your skin. Yes, some parts are kinda creepy, but they would have been more creepy with liberal use of subtlety.
Seeing Jennifer Lopez try to act.
I feel like the only person in the world who doesn’t care who is acting when I see a movie. Everybody always says “ooh, Keanu Reeves” “ooh Jennifer Lopez.” What’s the big deal? Maybe the reason I don’t get it is that I haven’t seen a lot of these actors’ previous works, but when I watch a movie, I concentrate on the character, not the actor.
And I loved The Cell. It has 1 or 2 weakpoints, but it’s now one of my favorite movies.
KJ, I think there are two reasons why people harp on which actors are in the parts.
(1) They have a crush on the actor or actress. These people are happy to see anything that person is in just to see that person. It doesn’t matter what the movie is, what it’s about, or how the person does. That person is in it, must go see it.
(2) The actor in question does a poor job of being convincing. Some actors are great - put them in any role and they disappear into the role. You forget about the actor and think of the character. Kevin Spacey comes to mind as someone who’s put in good roles that he vanishes into. Other actors don’t so much as act the character as act themselves in the role. Kevin Costner has been accused of this. John Wayne was accused of this. These are people who pull off one type of character well, because it’s the only character they can be. Keanu Reeves is greatly accused of this. He did excellent in “Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure”, but has been hammered for sounding like the same surfer type in other roles. I don’t think he’s as bad as others think, but have heard about this. Like in The Matrix - which from what I can tell had some similar plot elements, thus the comparison in this thread.