Konterr Brilliant and touching

Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Clarissa Mora The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

sagbelly I have not read the book, so I am not comparing this film to the book. It was just garbage, there were 3 endings, what was that all about. What triggered this event, why was every dreaming the same dream. Maybe I just did not get it, or perhaps I was distracted by the bloody pigeon that has fallen down the chimney. Damn racket!

Michael Ledo In this film, the zombie apocalypse is initiated by a cell phone, turning people in cell phone zombies a slightly worse condition than their present state. Clay (John Cusack) is the victim of a dead cell phone battery and manages to survive. He is a graphic novelist, a skill set needed to rebuild the world. Traveling along with him is Tom, a Vietnam vet and Subway conductor.Since they are on the East Coast, Catalina Island is not an option. They plan on going to check on Clay's family, picking up and losing people along the way. From there they plan on going to Kashwak, Maine, because Stephen King is familiar with it.There is an ending, but you don't get the closure you are seeking.Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity.

kwalin-80688 Cell (2016) was a great throwback type of horror flick. Entrenched in zombie visuals, add some King macro-universe building and mixed up enough so that typical 'virus outbreak' elements feel comfortably familiar. Picture a mix between I am Legend (or the original Omega Man), The Happening, and Dawn of the Dead. With that image in mind, you have a good representation of the film you're going into. If you have an hour and a half of time and want some good run-away-from-the-horde imagery, this should hit those buttons. As of 2017, the reviews on this movie were surprisingly negative, and I'm not entirely sure why.*MINOR SPOILER ZONE* Contains ravenous 28 days later zombies mixed with I Am Legend style bipeds. Classic Stephen King dialogue & story.PLOT- Cell, based on Stephen King's novel, and a screenplay which he contributed on, opens with a mass event wherein every cell phone owner receives a call at the same time that turns them into ferocious drones. Graphic artist, Clayton Riddell, is at an airport when the event takes place, wanting to see his son who is X-miles away.**MAJOR SPOILER FROM HERE DOWN** The action brings us to meet our core actors within the first 20-30 minutes. The dialogue feels well paced, and there's some classic hokey banter between Samuel Jackson (Tom) & John Cusack (Clay). Isabelle Fuhrman is perfect in bringing some of Alice's personality from the page.Once the film establishes its main cast, the movie can get rolling with its ties to the post-apocalypse event. There's a lot of travelling on foot between towns with barren New England-esque visuals.From here, if you haven't read the novel prior to this review or seeing the film, the plot starts gaining momentum as Clay searches for his family, Tom & Alice know they're better as a group so they tag along. Plus, everyone seems chummy so there's really no motivation the gang to split up. The on-screen chemistry is great between the main trio.They encounter other survivors, each mini-plot had a generally effective setup and pay off.The end has a little bit of a gut punch; at least it did for me. In fact, the movie did a good job of making you wonder how things were going to line up with the novel.THOUGHTS- The feeling of hopelessness, which I find important for making an effectively spooky zombie/apocalypse film, is all over this movie. The characters do the best they can with the situation, but they're still human characters. And mass murder/killing loved ones has repercussions.The script and source material shine through in all of the right ways, and the actors genuinely seem involved in the production.The ending felt like it was giving reference to a more cosmic/macabre style ending that The Mist story had. I would be interested to hear the author's thoughts on changing the climax in the way that they did.There are one or two other side characters that could have been given more depth, but I feel like they may have run low on time & budget.

zipster-81345 When I read this book I constantly thought to myself, "This would make a very cool movie." But, before I saw the movie, I knew that for every Shining there is a Children of the Corn, and for every Misery there is a Cujo, or for every Shawshank there's a Lawnmower Man. So I had to approach the this film, of a King book I loved, with extreme caution. Why? Because I am not sure if it was even released theatrically and of course the reviews were almost ALL negative. But still, I thought maybe there would be something good about it, something redeeming that would make me enjoy it regardless of the bad reviews. After all, Stephen King wrote the screenplay and Cusack was an Executive Producer, so surely they aren't going to attach their names and hard work to something downright HORRIBLE. Well....THEY DID!!! This movie was bad on every conceivable level; writing, acting, special effects, editing and ESPECIALLY directing. It just SUCKED. There's no need to get into plot details or anything of that nature. The main point of this review is to warn you that if you watch this you will truly waste your precious time. Life isn't long enough to waste an hour an a half on this type of movie. Shame on all involved with this film for producing it. You all did a disservice, especially Mr. King, to the book by making it into THIS movie. As is so often listed in reviews, I only gave it a rating of 1 because they don't offer 0. This movie defines what a bad Stephen King film adaptation is. I would STRONGLY advise any and all against watching this movie.