Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

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.

Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Michael Ledo The people trapped inside of building having to escape by figuring out puzzles has become overdone. Frankly I am a bit burned out by it all, I stopped watching Saw movies at IV because it got so bad and so far from the original, although not as bad as Halloween 3, which had nothing to do with the first two movies other than the fact it was Halloween.What is different about this movie which made it tolerable to watch was that it concentrated on the technicians who were operating the cube rather than the blood and guts aspect of people getting killed in imaginative fashion, although it does have some of that.The bad guy with the fake eye was almost cartoonish. If you sat through the other two movies and liked them, you know you are going to watch this one anyway, so why are you reading the reviews?No sex or nudity.

gavin6942 A young man whose job is to watch over the Cube endeavors to rescue an innocent woman trapped in one of its rooms.Ernie Barbarash is a film producer, perhaps best known as co-producer of the films "American Psycho 2" and "Cube 2: Hypercube". He also directed the Canadian horror thriller "They Wait". With "Cube Zero", he really comes into his own, both writing and directing. Some say it is the best since the original. And given how sloppy part two was, that is probably right.While not terrible, I was not overly thrilled with the idea of this being a prequel. It does bring the cube back to its beginning, which I like better than the tesseract version. But it also seems to re-write what we thought we knew.

david-sarkies I guess I preferred it when we didn't know who had built the cube or why they built it and that you never actually saw what was going on outside. However as another has suggested, even though we learn a bit more about what is going on, we are still left with a lot of unanswered questions. However, I guess the problem with sequels, as they all turn out to be, is that they can never capture the essence of the original.According to this film, if you wish to take this film as being connected to the original and not some poor attempt at trying to cash in on the success of the original, is that the cube is a government prison facility where people 'sign' consent forms so that they have the opportunity for freedom, as long as they can solve the puzzle and escape. The puzzle, in a sense, is actually designed to test weapons, though this doesn't really sit well with the original concept.I guess I liked the original concept better, particularly since in the original the characters' memories were not wiped, despite not knowing why they were there. The suggestion is that they were criminals, however one does wonder whether those in the original were actually criminals because in reality only one of them was actually a criminal. The others seemed to simply be there as a part of the puzzle, though we do wonder a bit about Quentin, due to his anger.I also liked the concept in the original about how they said that the facility may have at one stage had a purpose, but with the fluid nature of bureaucracy, the original purpose simply got lost in the files of paperwork and that the facility was simply completed because they had started it and as such they had to finish it, and once it was finished, they had to put people in there because, well, it had to be used. This, to me, seems to reflect much more on the absurdity of the modern industrial complex than what we have in this film, where the philosophical disappears to simply try to create a thriller that falls flat on its face.Further, with the suggestion that each of the characters in the original have the names of famous prisons also adds to the strange concepts that arise there, where as here, the further we move away from the brilliance of the original towards what is in effect an attempt to cash in on a popular concept, the nature of the names and of the characters cease to be of importance and simply come out as more faceless entities that seem to populate our Hollywood movies.

popepeacock Uh....Why make this movie? the guy with the Eye.....OK, THE EYE issue...wtf?? Why do we have a "CHARACTER" actor in this film? Why do we have a sincerely...bizarre laughable, corn ball acted persona??? why is this.....actor hired for this film, his portrayal was goofy, not menacing, not scary, just corn ball strange.WTF??? Btw: the majority of this film was cheap and cheesy THE ONLY good portion was the guy turning into the autistic character seen in the first cube concept in the 90's...