This is what I get for not bothering to find out what a movie is about before deciding to record a movie shown on Channel 48. The title "Cell" seemed familiar for some reason and I concluded it would be an entertaining movie about technology. Well, it was, sort of.
Okay, Stephen King wrote the book, according to the opening credits. I don't read books, and I'm not a fan of horror though Stephen King movies are said to be better than the average horror film. I've seen some of them (some apparently really good), and a TV series he was even in. It was a big shock to find out how bad things got so quickly. And the movie's theme tells me King must hate cell phones and technology and wants to make them the villain.
But Samuel L. Jackson is there to save the day! Well, not really, but he is there and as long as he is around, everything will be all right, eventually, for at least someone. Not everyone will survive but it's not for Jackson's lack of trying. The important thing is that he is always entertaining and even has some funny lines. Yes, there is humor here. Example: A Black man with a crowbar about to face a Second Amendment extremist. Well, here, take a baseball bat instead. Oh, yeah, that improves things.
Stacy Keach has the other really good performance. Yes, I said the other. As the headmaster of an exclusive looking boys' school (or are there girls who fled or were "converted"?), he offers his theories for what is happening and even makes it sound positive. He is gracious to his guests.
I know the name John Cusack and have seen some of his movies. I just don't remember anything about what I have seen except that I remember him being good. I suppose he is serviceable here. I at least like the character and want him to get what he wants. Still, he seems to have created the movie's villain as a comic book artist. Is he imagining everything? Or did he cause it all? And one character I thought was the villain ... it's not him. Who it is ... well, that's awful.
Clark Sarullo (that's a woman's name) is pretty and has a brief good scene as Clay's wife, and Ethan Andrew Casto also has his brief scenes as the son. And scenes where we hear him if we don't see him.
In my opinion, the creepy creatures did quite well. Just extras looking and sounding weird? There were too many of them to audition them all, but perhaps they did and I thought the results were good. I found them plenty scary, but I find movies scary that some people don't. And then there are a couple of scenes where there are so many they must be CGI. Effective, I believe.
Towers, both cell and electric transmission, look really good. Several locations were chosen with a lot of transmission lines, with different tower designs. Didn't another King production use them?
There is one really fun scene in what I thought was a restaurant but I keep seeing it referred to as a bar. Much needed when things are so negative.
And, as one might expect, there is a survivalist. I guess Anthony Reynolds, whoever that is, was good in the role.
Whatever is happening, it is never really explained, and what happened is widespread. That's one of the scariest parts.
Immediately, there is a terrifying moral dilemma. All these weirdos must die! Is that really the case? Well, the decision must be made over and over.
The weather changes quickly. First it is snowing, then it is really snowing and everything is covered, and then it never snowed at all. Maybe more time passed and more distance was traveled than we realized. We only see what is essential. Some imdb reviews pointed out a lot of stuff was missing. Yeah, I guess so. What can you do in the time you are given?
It seemed like there couldn't be a happy ending. What I saw may have been one, but I saw a description of the movie where something very different happened. One imdb review said the reviewer checked behind the credits. Did I stop the recording too soon? I did stop where I thought the credits stopped. I've heard of movies continuing after that. I'd rather assume what I saw was the end.
Where was the sex? The v-chip rating had an S. Maybe that means the content was so bad they had to add as many letters as possible. I think it goes without saying kids shouldn't watch this until they're mature enough.
Was it any good? Not a classic, I'm sure. Not one of King's memorable movies.
Okay, Stephen King wrote the book, according to the opening credits. I don't read books, and I'm not a fan of horror though Stephen King movies are said to be better than the average horror film. I've seen some of them (some apparently really good), and a TV series he was even in. It was a big shock to find out how bad things got so quickly. And the movie's theme tells me King must hate cell phones and technology and wants to make them the villain.
But Samuel L. Jackson is there to save the day! Well, not really, but he is there and as long as he is around, everything will be all right, eventually, for at least someone. Not everyone will survive but it's not for Jackson's lack of trying. The important thing is that he is always entertaining and even has some funny lines. Yes, there is humor here. Example: A Black man with a crowbar about to face a Second Amendment extremist. Well, here, take a baseball bat instead. Oh, yeah, that improves things.
Stacy Keach has the other really good performance. Yes, I said the other. As the headmaster of an exclusive looking boys' school (or are there girls who fled or were "converted"?), he offers his theories for what is happening and even makes it sound positive. He is gracious to his guests.
I know the name John Cusack and have seen some of his movies. I just don't remember anything about what I have seen except that I remember him being good. I suppose he is serviceable here. I at least like the character and want him to get what he wants. Still, he seems to have created the movie's villain as a comic book artist. Is he imagining everything? Or did he cause it all? And one character I thought was the villain ... it's not him. Who it is ... well, that's awful.
Clark Sarullo (that's a woman's name) is pretty and has a brief good scene as Clay's wife, and Ethan Andrew Casto also has his brief scenes as the son. And scenes where we hear him if we don't see him.
In my opinion, the creepy creatures did quite well. Just extras looking and sounding weird? There were too many of them to audition them all, but perhaps they did and I thought the results were good. I found them plenty scary, but I find movies scary that some people don't. And then there are a couple of scenes where there are so many they must be CGI. Effective, I believe.
Towers, both cell and electric transmission, look really good. Several locations were chosen with a lot of transmission lines, with different tower designs. Didn't another King production use them?
There is one really fun scene in what I thought was a restaurant but I keep seeing it referred to as a bar. Much needed when things are so negative.
And, as one might expect, there is a survivalist. I guess Anthony Reynolds, whoever that is, was good in the role.
Whatever is happening, it is never really explained, and what happened is widespread. That's one of the scariest parts.
Immediately, there is a terrifying moral dilemma. All these weirdos must die! Is that really the case? Well, the decision must be made over and over.
The weather changes quickly. First it is snowing, then it is really snowing and everything is covered, and then it never snowed at all. Maybe more time passed and more distance was traveled than we realized. We only see what is essential. Some imdb reviews pointed out a lot of stuff was missing. Yeah, I guess so. What can you do in the time you are given?
It seemed like there couldn't be a happy ending. What I saw may have been one, but I saw a description of the movie where something very different happened. One imdb review said the reviewer checked behind the credits. Did I stop the recording too soon? I did stop where I thought the credits stopped. I've heard of movies continuing after that. I'd rather assume what I saw was the end.
Where was the sex? The v-chip rating had an S. Maybe that means the content was so bad they had to add as many letters as possible. I think it goes without saying kids shouldn't watch this until they're mature enough.
Was it any good? Not a classic, I'm sure. Not one of King's memorable movies.