Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

phantm1 This video was nothing more than a cheap rip-off of Orson Scott Card's Enders Game. I was surprised how uncreative it was. Read Enders Game, then watch the movie, you will see how this was nothing more than someones attempt to capitalize off another persons ideas. Shameful. I read Fall of Reach a few years back and found it entertaining but again I was saddened at how closely it resembled Orson Scott Card and Heinlein. I was hoping for original ideas, plots, and characters but this was the wrong place to look for it. It is sad how people will spend thousands of dollars on producing a show yet they spend nothing on making sure that show has quality original content. Stick to the video game, and ignore the sad plagiarizing back-story.

Blueyzj While I agree with some that the graphics are not important, a lot of emotion was left out of this story because of that lack of graphics. There is also blame for this on the voice acting, but perhaps the actors themselves realized there wasn't much to go on. Look, I for one am not one of those "the book was better" people, but in this case they forgot key points from the book altogether. If you wish to understand, read this excerpt from the book that talks about a cave drill in chapter 8 page 67. http://s3.amazonaws.com/szmanuals/dda956e6212b5299176ca2678f51bad8. In just this one excerpt it shows the emotion that was missing, the level of teamwork that was missing, and just how impressive they were after the augmentation. Watch it if you like, I give them a soft 4 for effort, but this movie was seriously lacking in all areas. If you have the imagination, stick with the book.

Robert Hall First off, let me start off by saying that I've read the book, off of which this movie is supposedly based, cover to cover, multiple times over. If you're a fan of the book, you're going to be very disappointed.This movie is deplorably bad. The voice acting is absolutely terrible. Dr. Halsey is voiced by the same voice actress who voiced Cortana, which is appropriate based on the books. In addition, the voice actor who voiced the chief - Steve Downes - has a few lines. This is where the good stuff ends. The rest of the voice acting is absolutely terrible. Sometimes their tone is off, sometimes the children sound like they're shouting - for literally no reason at all. You truly never realize the importance of talented voices in an animated film until you don't have them.Moving on, the writing is terrible, too. Heath Corson, a screenwriter with nothing to his name besides a web series, a couple shorts, and a handful of superhero cartoons, bears the blame for this monstrosity. Anything of value from the book has been stripped away from the script, including its namesake - the fall of Reach. That's right, the climactic end of the book is nowhere to be found. The dialog from the book - which was powerful in its own right - is practically nonexistent. The parts of the story which do exist are only partially correct, seemingly re-imagined for brevity instead of drama. Kellogg's should sue this guy, because the dialog in this movie makes them all sound like Fruit Loops.But maybe bad writing and poor voice acting could be saved by good cinematography. That is, if there were any. The space combat, all three minutes of it that exist, is the diamond in this proverbial pile of dung. The 3D animation in this movie could've been great if they'd used any of the technology created in the last two decades. Instead, we get stiff, poorly animated characters who rival marionettes controlled by a triple amputee. Their mouth movements have zero effect on their face, their body movements are glitchy and copy-pasted to the little chief and all his companions. The camera angles are atrocious. The action is sloppy and mundane. There's zero tension in any scene throughout the entire movie. Nothing looks natural. It's visual heresy.The worst part of this movie is that they had the audacity to say "based on a book by Eric Nylund", because that's an outright lie. If you paid a cent to watch this, you should be furious. I had the opportunity to watch it free of charge, and I still feel ripped off. Your move, 343.

timskillman (Note - this review has some spoilers)The Halo movies aren't usually that bad so I thought this one might have 'improved' from the last. However, I've seen better animation and rendering in a late 90's video game than this movie!From the start you watch 6 year old kids getting beaten up - it's just plain unpleasant and unnecessary. John (who becomes Master Chief) is totally unbelievable - almost schizophrenic in his character; one minute he can be slaughtering those who annoy him and then suddenly become the most caring soldier on the block.The 'story' slightly reminds me of Enders Game with John being a very pale-in-comparison 'Ender'. But there's just nothing to like about him or any of the characters. The whole movie consists of short cut- scenes based on the sacrifice of kids as they grow up. It's just plain morose from beginning to end.I haven't watched such a shallow, wooden, stiff, badly animated cartoon such as this for a long time. I usually love sci-fi but you'd have to be a dyed-in-the-wool, die-hard, Halo lover to give this movie any rating above 1!I seriously wasted my money on this one.