Critical Consensus: A Weak "Sentinel," So-So "Dreamz" Are Made Of This, "Silent Hill" Not Screened
This week at the movies we've got a Secret Service agent on a mission ("The Sentinel"), an "American Idol"- skewering political satire ("American Dreamz") and a very creepy town ("Silent Hill"). What do the critics have to say?

A Secret Service agent is determined to save the president from an assassination attempt. It's a setup that has worked successfully before ("In the Line of Fire"), but critics say "The Sentinel" isn't sharp enough to make good on its premise. Michael Douglas stars as the agent who falls into a web of intrigue, and Kiefer Sutherland, who's getting pretty good at foiling conspiracies, plays his protege. Critics say the film is slick, but a bit too convoluted to really work. At 26 percent on the Tomatometer, this "Sentinel" is not very well-fortified.

What is "American Dreamz?" Is it a comedy? A satire? An ambitious attempt to capture the zeitgeist of our politically divided, entertainment-craving times? More to the point, is Paul Weitz's latest any good? In parts, the critics say, but not as a whole. "American Dreamz" tells the story of a recently re-elected, now intellectually curious president (Dennis Quaid) who makes a guest appearance on a popular TV singing competition where would-be songbirds and would-be terrorists convene. The critics say "American Dreamz" is a bit too ambitious for its own good, and lacks the sharp bite to really work as satire. At 38 percent on the Tomatometer, this one may not be the stuff that "Dreamz" are made of.

We're guessing that the people behind "Silent Hill" would consider the little girl on the poster to be the perfect movie critic for one reason: she's got no mouth. And there isn't anything for the critics to say, because, like a bunch of other movies this year (all of which have turned out to be critical duds), "Silent Hill" was not screened for the scribes. Kids, you know what that means: Guess the Tomatometer! And while you're at it, get a glimpse of the film in the Rotten Tomatoes' "Silent Hill" photo gallery.
Recent Michael Douglas Movies:
--------------------------------------
37% -- The In-Laws (2003)
29% -- It Runs in the Family (2003)
23% -- Don't Say a Word (2001)
32% -- One Night at McCool's (2001)
83% -- Wonder Boys (2000)
Recent Paul Weitz Movies:
--------------------------------
82% -- In Good Company (2004)
94% -- About a Boy (2002)
17% -- Down to Earth (2001)
60% -- American Pie (1999)

A Secret Service agent is determined to save the president from an assassination attempt. It's a setup that has worked successfully before ("In the Line of Fire"), but critics say "The Sentinel" isn't sharp enough to make good on its premise. Michael Douglas stars as the agent who falls into a web of intrigue, and Kiefer Sutherland, who's getting pretty good at foiling conspiracies, plays his protege. Critics say the film is slick, but a bit too convoluted to really work. At 26 percent on the Tomatometer, this "Sentinel" is not very well-fortified.

What is "American Dreamz?" Is it a comedy? A satire? An ambitious attempt to capture the zeitgeist of our politically divided, entertainment-craving times? More to the point, is Paul Weitz's latest any good? In parts, the critics say, but not as a whole. "American Dreamz" tells the story of a recently re-elected, now intellectually curious president (Dennis Quaid) who makes a guest appearance on a popular TV singing competition where would-be songbirds and would-be terrorists convene. The critics say "American Dreamz" is a bit too ambitious for its own good, and lacks the sharp bite to really work as satire. At 38 percent on the Tomatometer, this one may not be the stuff that "Dreamz" are made of.

We're guessing that the people behind "Silent Hill" would consider the little girl on the poster to be the perfect movie critic for one reason: she's got no mouth. And there isn't anything for the critics to say, because, like a bunch of other movies this year (all of which have turned out to be critical duds), "Silent Hill" was not screened for the scribes. Kids, you know what that means: Guess the Tomatometer! And while you're at it, get a glimpse of the film in the Rotten Tomatoes' "Silent Hill" photo gallery.
Recent Michael Douglas Movies:
--------------------------------------
37% -- The In-Laws (2003)
29% -- It Runs in the Family (2003)
23% -- Don't Say a Word (2001)
32% -- One Night at McCool's (2001)
83% -- Wonder Boys (2000)
Recent Paul Weitz Movies:
--------------------------------
82% -- In Good Company (2004)
94% -- About a Boy (2002)
17% -- Down to Earth (2001)
60% -- American Pie (1999)
Related Items
|
Eternity writes: on Apr 20 2006 05:39 PM Silent Hill- 52% Online sites will still dig it. (Reply to this) |
|
Parkcow writes: on Apr 20 2006 05:46 PM [b]Silent Hill-11%[/b] It will do better than a few of the recent horror flops, but only just. (Reply to this) |
|
mizzoucritic writes: on Apr 20 2006 06:30 PM Hmm.... Silent Hill: 28% A few critics are going to like the atmosphere, but most of 'em are going to trash it. (Reply to this) |
|
Decade_e_a writes: on Apr 20 2006 08:02 PM i say 63%. its so true to the original.... i need to think it'll be good... i loved the game! (Reply to this) |
|
Dayyve writes: on Apr 20 2006 08:46 PM 19% The games are great fun in all their horror-cheeziness but the scene in the commercial where the little girl goes "I am the gatekeeper" or something makes me cringe for that is cheezier than anything in the games! (Reply to this) |
|
bsideleau writes: on Apr 20 2006 09:42 PM [b]29%[/b] 29% for Silent Hill........it's gonna bomb with critics.....once one major publication has bashed the hell out of it, the others are more than likely to do the same. The only positive reviews will come from video game fans and independent websites....which is by no means a bad thing, but the masses won't buy into it. (Reply to this) |
|
renny2077 writes: on Apr 20 2006 10:54 PM Screened for critics or not...I'll still watch this movie. I'm dying for a good horror flick. Hope Silent Hill doesn't screw up the story. (Reply to this) |
|
killthemall4444 writes: on Apr 21 2006 07:07 AM Mainstream critics will roast Silent Hill alive. But a small majority will like it. 31% (Reply to this) |
|
halose7en writes: on Apr 21 2006 07:37 AM Silent Hill? Meh. 13% (Reply to this) |
|
Saint Fu writes: on Apr 21 2006 08:05 AM [b]Horror Channel Review of Silent I' 4.5/5 (Reply to this) |
|
WuTangScatt writes: on Apr 21 2006 08:54 AM The reviews have been somewhat positive so far. I'm guessing 50-60%. Seems to be a pretty polarizing movie considering there's one review up that gave it a D and another two that give it 4.5 out of 5 stars. (Reply to this) |
|
writes: on Apr 21 2006 09:53 AM I expect to personally enjoy the movie, but in all fairness also expect the mass public and greater majority of the critics to dislike it. Not that they will dislike the movie itself necessarily, but they will not understand the plot, which is the same problem that the game had with gamers, which is a big reason why Resident Evil the game sold so much better than Silent Hill the game, because it was much more accessible, even though it was not as good of a story nor was it as good of a horror game. I predict 40-60% I won't be surprised if it gets 20-30% I will be pleasantly surprised if it scores around 70% (Reply to this) |
|
Racer Z writes: on Apr 21 2006 11:22 AM I think critics are going to trash it regardless of how decent the film might actually be simply because they weren't invited to early screenings. Critics are a lot like children that way and tend to hold a grudge (pun intended). "Well, if you don't invite me to your movie, then I'm going to write bad things about it!" Ah, the mating call of the movie critic. (Reply to this) |
|
IMAmoose24 writes: on Apr 21 2006 11:56 AM 43% is my best guess. I hope im wrong because i am too also dying for a great horror flick for once. (Reply to this) |
|
Banana Kid writes: on Apr 21 2006 11:58 AM 57% or 58%. Fans will like it, but most others won't. (Reply to this) |
|
dylan21484nj writes: on Apr 21 2006 11:31 PM just saw Silent Hill tonight. it looked great (twisted and sick as fuck with tons of blood, gore, and production design that will haunt your nightmares), but the story will confuse a lot of people, some bad dialogue here and there, an explanation narrative toward the end that brings the movie to a screeching halt, and the "husband subplot" was totally unneeded. (Reply to this) |
|
kfarschman writes: on Apr 22 2006 12:41 PM In reply to this comment (#834080) that sound effect on her voice was only in the trailers, not the movie. More proof that advertising agents are the lamest people in the world that think they know what is "cool" or "hip". I would punch every advertising agent in the face. I liked Silent Hill, there were pointless stupid things in it though. Cybill's uniform, Rose fleeing from Cybill and getting in a high speed chase with her daughter in the car on a dark road for no reason. Sean Bean's charater and story that followed him is the definition of pointless. The cult or more accurately the cult leader was way over the top and cheesy. The flashback exposition at the end told by the girl was a little like watching the part of a Bond movie where the bad guy explains everthing for no reason to Bond. (Reply to this) |
|
lovelykeira writes: on Apr 22 2006 02:19 PM There's a reason Silent Hill wasn't screened it's not very good. I would have to say that it's my least favorite film of the year so far that I've seen D+. 17% (Reply to this) |
|
RoadDogXVIII writes: on Apr 22 2006 04:23 PM The reason why they threw in Sean Bean's character was because they needed a male character for the script. (Reply to this) |
|
pmm_lord_raven writes: on Apr 22 2006 06:29 PM In reply to this comment (#834094) Actually the whole point of the male character was to set up silent hill 2. Seems much better to set up a sequel now than to construe something half baked like so many others. The dialogue scene was needed to inform rose who her daughter was and why they were there, unlike in bond this was to ease her mind some and show the pawn her next move. The cult leader was too over the top though. (Reply to this) |
| You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register. |










