Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Supelice Dreadfully Boring

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

VAndolini After seeing the original with Christopher Lee, never in my wildest nightmares did I think such a remake could even make it out of the editing room. This is not just bad, it is murder of the first degree of a wonderful earlier version. Sure the story is fanciful, but the original at least MOVED, the actors had PRESENCE, the ending was shocking not hysterical. How the mighty Cage has fallen. I really do love Cage as an actor - I think he is talented. But what in the name of all that is holy is responsible for his bumbling, shrieking, over acting, drooling performance here? Did he owe Lucifer something? This is BAD. REALLY, REALLY, REALLY BAD. So bad I almost died laughing at the absurdity of the the trainwreck on the screen. Good God Nicolas, come on!!! Take some time off and remember the days where your talent actually won you a well deserved Oscar. Please do not EVER utter these phrases on screen: "How did it get burned? How did it get burneddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd?" and the immortal "Not he beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees!!!!" Finally, what the hell is Ellen Burstyn doing in this, one of the finest actresses of all time? Did she kill scads of bees and had to atone for it by appearing in this mess?

Ilikehorrormovies I have to admit this movie so bad that it's good. I wish I gave it a 10 but I have to keep it real though. I think this movie is a shot for shot remake but the difference is that it's a women colt I think. The script is lazy, the writing is weak, the story is poorly told, and the acting is SOOOOOOOOO funny! Is it the worse remake of all time? No. Did they tried their best? Yes they did. This is my review on The Wicker Man (2006), one more thing. OH NO! NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES!!! AGHHHHHH!!! ALL OVER MY EYES!!! MY EYES!!! AGHHHH!!! AGHHHH!!!

Douglas Skinner This movie starts out interestingly but becomes very tedious as soon as one recognizes that the woman the protagonist (played by Mr. Cage) has come to a remote island to save isn't very interesting--or worth saving for that matter. Plus, upon arrival, the feminist community he encounters is absurd, even in fantasy terms. There is nothing endearing about it and, frankly, most sensible males would have immediately debarked upon encountering the sour-faced and well, to put it nicely, ample Sister Beech.But our hero decides to pursue the case. (The screen writers were evidently uneasy about tenacity with which Malus stays on the case so, midstream, we learn from Sister Woodward that the child in question is really his daughter conceived what I inferred was a single coupling.) After some reconnaissance of the local flora and a couple of clandestine meetings with "Sister" Woodward our hero finally meets the "queen bee", Sister Summersisle, of the colony and tries to confront her concerning the whereabouts and fate of a young girl with the absurd name of Rowan. (But it was evident that all the women were named after trees, so there you have it!) Sister Summersisle's responses are meretricious and patronizing and the viewer knows she's gonna get him in the end. The incongruity between the flower-child paganism of the female inhabitants with their likeness to bees and trees and the miserable emasculation of the men is disturbing but somehow it doesn't come off right; because it is almost believable! It's just the kind of queendom that formed the fantasies of the feminist coeds I encountered in my college days in the late 60s. As it was then it just makes you (me anyway, as a guy) frustrated and talking to the screen, asking Malus why he doesn't jack up these male bozos for being so wimpy; at least enough to find out whether their servility is based on weak character or some mysterious rewiring of the human male along the lines of a bee drone. (I asked the same questions almost 50 years ago!)Now I admit that police officer Malus is kind of an, to use that word so endearing to modern feminists, a**hole but he is sincere in his response to the call to help. Does this warrant his final incendiary end, with the gleeful complicity of an cute little girl (who scarcely knows what she's doing)? Probably yes because, as the movie makes clear, his macho is the dilithium power source of the cult and so must be harnessed. You see, unlike the feminists and very much like the bees, they've learned how to utilize maleness. Ultimate simplicity, no wrangling, no male unemployment so destructive to an ordered society (and it is!), no physical contest naturally favoring men, just emasculation for lesser beings and an auto da fe for those occasional potent types who are selected in advance to "mate" with the queen (we learn towards the end that Malus' and Woodward's consummation was no accident as she is the daughter of the queen bee). And I'm reasonably confident that this is the movie's ultimate and intended message. So guys, beware!

geddyneilalex28 Wow. My wife and I just sat through this nonsense on Netflix. My lovely wife loves Mr. Cage, but, oh my what a piece of dung. More than anything, this film makes no sense! What the heck were they thinking? Nic won an Oscar for crying out loud, and he is reduced to this mess. One positive is his, what must be intentional, over acting. He really takes it over the top in this one. He has plenty of company in this train wreck however, as everyone has taken the script to 11. Movies like this always have my wonder how folks get mixed up in movies this bad. I mean, Cage is taking anything and everything for a while now to get the IRS off his back, but who read this thing as was like, oh yeah this looks awesome. I don't have to worry about spoilers because I can't give any. I have no idea what this film is about, do yourself a solid and stay away.