Underrated as Hell!
-
zender8584 — 14 years ago(July 30, 2011 05:06 PM)
Agree with that rating.
I admit that my expectations were low, and also admit that I'm a big fan of video games, first person shooters especially. I think there is a place for movies that are basically video games where you don't control the toons, but essentially watch the action unfold. The acting was not great, but adequate (c'mon Dr. Turk, how can you not like him?). Seeing a 360 get crushed like that was memorable too. If the word "realism" can be used in a context like this, I do like the fact that humans have no chance against a civilization that has figured out interstellar travel once it comes to a brawl.
I doubt I'll watch it again, and I definitely would not have seen it in a theater, but since I'm already paying for the Netflix subscription, I don't regret having streamed it. -
mam13143 — 14 years ago(August 04, 2011 06:45 PM)
Saw a lot of the bad reviews but sadly nothing on the thousand cable channels so watched it with IPad in hand. Not at all bad and certainly far better than all the sic-fi channel films. Thought the ending was a bit hokey but really well done and different. Don't know what people expect I thought spieberg's war of the worlds was inferior compared to this film (heresy I know). At least no dysfunctional family kids in this film. Hated some of the characters but enjoyed the movie.
-
chad-pace — 14 years ago(October 03, 2011 02:03 AM)
Why do people often like terrible movies better when they see them on DVD? They weren't hoping for a good experience so they got what they expected and were pleased. Likewise, people went in and expected a flop, so they got what they expected and were pleased.
-
fireyhope — 14 years ago(June 15, 2011 12:54 AM)
A GEM? wow, people truly have terrible tastes in movies.
The script was extremely lazy, I felt absolutely no love for any of the whiny bitchy characters in the entire movie. The movie if anything is just a typical Alien Invasion story told in such a boring fashion with characters who don't do beep until the very end. -
thebard2000 — 14 years ago(June 16, 2011 12:55 AM)
I can't believe how often people post the same thing about Skyline. They didn't care about the characters. LOL. WHO F-ING CARES ABOUT THE CHARACTERS.; They're alien feed. The FBI'd be sifting through alien droppings in order to identify the dead.
You people are missing the point of this movie. This movie, of course, and also the fact that it's a setup for something much bigger that will probably not even involved a bunch of human characters.
Because this is a directors vision put directly to the screen, instead of what usually happens someone has a n idea and then Hollywood dumbs it down and beep it all up, this is someones idea here that has actually made it to the screen relatively in tact. And people can't handle it because Will Smith isn't throwing out his one liners and their aren't any shots of the white house being blown up and the empire state building getting pwnd. -
fireyhope — 14 years ago(June 17, 2011 12:16 AM)
LOL what?
I didn't get the point of this movie? So the movie was about the Aliens? Not the main character? hahahaha wow.
No it's the fact that they practically did nothing half the time, and no I don't blame the producers these 2 directors are just beep AVP R was even worse than Skyline.
Sure it aint Will Smith but at-least Independence Day and will smith made a terrible movie Much more entertaining than a boring piece of trash this one was.
ID was at-least competent in making likable characters with great and fun action sequences unlike a huge Bore of a movie this was.
That being said so was Battle LA a by far much more superior movie compared to Skyline. -
thebard2000 — 14 years ago(June 17, 2011 01:09 AM)
Battle LA was ok. Nice emotional experience in a can with that sappy score they shoved up our ass. I did get teary eyed during that heart to heart between the misunderstood captain and his jocks. That scene lasted 40 minutes longer than it needed to but still I get the point. And the aliens were using weaponry that was about 11 years further advanced than what we currently use on earth. So street cred for that.
Skyline, being just the prequel to what they had originally been working on, is a really cool movie despite it's actors.
Think about it. The movie was made independently in-house, without any financial backing from a major studio. So, they weren't able to afford a big name cast, or top notch writers. So the acting and the dialogue is only as could as it can be with what they had.
But, seeing as how the characters and writing in Skyline aren't as important to the big picture (which skyline is just a part of) as the ending of skyline, and what is to follow, yes you and everyone else did miss the point. -
fireyhope — 14 years ago(June 17, 2011 04:27 AM)
And I have seen plenty of independent movies that are spades better than this piece of trash. And many other movies also fail because they make a movie too big for their own good.
Seeing as how CHARACTERS and WRITING in Skyline aren't important? wtf are you talking about? Missed the point? No lol I didn't miss the point, this movie was trying to be a serious movie with deep characters, writing.
And of course, that is what PEOPLE GO WATCH MOVIES FOR, this movie took itself entirely serious when it came down to writing and completely failed. if I wanted to go watch an action movie I would of went to go watch a good action movie, and even some of the best action movies don't need to be that deep but the characters are at-least likable and contain witty dialogue and appeal to the people who like the genre.
I've seen a lot of alien invasion movies and this is by far one of the worst big budget movies.
LoL what kind of MOVIE-goer are you? not a very good one.
And I've seen tons of independent movies that didn't have a big cast or known characters that are much better than this piece of crap.
And you know what? some independent movies are able to get celebrities even when it is LOW BUDGET.
Skyline did contain a few celebrities but they killed one off so early lol. Talk about using your star power to the full potential. This movie fails. -
king_of_bob — 14 years ago(August 31, 2011 08:22 AM)
The still shots were meant to indicate that the entire world was affected, not just LA. The movie definitely has a conclusion. Essentially, humanity loses.
Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa! -
dsherman-373-570035 — 13 years ago(May 18, 2012 04:02 PM)
I thought it was a load of tripe and should have been called, "People frantically running around a building, flailing their arms."
It started out good, but then it looked like the writers went to sleep as the majority of the movie became people running around a building. Not much of a plot there, and the characters in the film never developed. That was pretty much the sentiment of the audience I heard grumbling as they left the theater feeling cheated. -
BulletProofPoet — 14 years ago(June 17, 2011 10:14 AM)
I've heard little other than damning, scathing reviews of this movie. While it's geared towards the youth and/or somewhat simple-minded and was typical Hollywood folly, I rated it a 5.5/10. Which, on my rating scale means:
(Merely Okay) Very ordinary. They aren't completely worthless, but you can find numerous better choices.
Not quite deserving of the 4.5 rating it currently has on the IMDB.
Currently reading: The Hidden Reality - Brian Greene -
djagility — 14 years ago(June 17, 2011 04:05 PM)
The only category this movie is underrated in is that of 'worst movie of all time'. This film was steaming hot garbage, and I'm not one to hate on films really, I've seen plenty of rubbish but this film took the cake.
-
Pinky_the-Fluffy — 14 years ago(June 18, 2011 05:30 PM)
I saw it last night and I liked it. Thought the ending reeked of "sequel", and I hope so; otherwise, it's a rather abrupt ending. And the flash card thing; did they perhaps run over budget, and this is what they were left with?
Still liked it, though.
39vam vuijlbae
(v.2)
Dance with me you little toad