Jason Turno

I think everyone wanted a political art film but instead they got a revenge fantasy flick, which in my opinion isn't a bad thing,but I guess that was a problem for everyone else.

Oct 1 - 11:35 AM

George Haber

A great action movie in the Die Hard vein...and just as "realistic" (i.e., not at all). How the hell did the terrorists get all their weapons and all that knowledge about White House protocol? That "Hydra" gun looks like something that actually exists--a super machine gun that fires rocket-like shells (check out youtube).

Sep 18 - 02:37 AM

Jay Sanchez

In my opinion Gerard butler was the only good thing about this movie. The first 45 minutes was not only very fake but it was hard to even watch cuz of how disturbing and disrespectful it was to Americans. The rest of the movie was entertaining but just to predictable. White house down wasn't very good but it was still a fun movie to watch

Sep 10 - 06:58 PM

cj thomas

Nothing wrong with the movie, just a lot of morons on RT who have extremely bad taste. The movie was perfect. White House Down on the other hand, was the worst movie ive seen in 5 years

Aug 29 - 03:56 PM

Cary White

whats wrong? well, to start with they actually went through with producing it.I guess this proves that no matter how many great actors and actresses you have, you cant make a bad movie good.

Aug 26 - 11:53 PM

Rafael Rivera-Perez

1. The airplane scene came with no single explanation in how it got close to the White House Area, specially a modify airplane (how they got it into US area). The jets that came to intercept this big plane looks cheap cgi, I mean cheap.
2. Only the president as far I know and maybe some people close to him are the ones that get in the protected Bunker. Here everybody went into the bunker.
3. A huge group of terrorists almost like and army got into the grounds of the WHite House with any kind of weapons.
4. Where the F all these people that came on my point 3 went, only 15 or 20 you can see for most part of the movie. They enter inside the white house with a bunch of bazookas, I mean a bunch. LOL
5. The helicopter scene in the middle look very cheap
6. Morgan Freeman character was flat
7. The villain was terrible
8. People getting slash like pickles with total cruelty and no sense of drama.
9. Is fuc^&^ Anthoine Faqua a guy that made two of my favorite movies, KIng Arthur and Training Day.
10. The only good thing was Gerald and Aaron.

Aug 20 - 07:37 PM

Ash J. Gilmore

The visual effects were pretty bad....

Aug 14 - 01:37 AM

Sumesh Kassie

The Third Code!?
The Pale and nearly dead president walking out.
The remaining Navy Seal chopper flying away after the Hydra was destroyed.
The numerous continuity errors.
The casualness of the restaurant patrons as the plane flies inches past their window.
The always full handgun.
...
:(

Jul 24 - 05:35 AM

Manik Mohammad

things that weren't right:
1) the convoy accident in the beginning, the car's windscreen cracking even after being bulletproof tempered,
2) the Terrorists simply flying in to a no fly zone without a sweat, avoiding some hardcore US defense system,
3) agents getting chopped like onions, shit makes u feel like dammit our president is protected by some bunch of amateurs,
4) Butler admitting the terrorists are hardcore trained paramilitary commandos, but he gets to knuckle them out like mashed potatoes..
5) and not to forget the next generation weapon Hydra, what on earth was that amazing piece of shit..
...you could go on with endless faults in the movie..and ppl whoever compare this with die hard, pls don't disgrace the royalty of it..it's no where close to die hard.. just an action packed movie with a script seeming lake a Bollywood creation...

Jul 10 - 03:05 AM

Sarah Banks

This review really sums it up for me,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxcyB9bbPLo
A throwback to the 80's in my opinion

Apr 23 - 02:41 AM

Don Graham

Patriotic Americans will really like the movie. Liberals, hippies, and potheads won't. Nuf' said...

Apr 22 - 07:34 PM

hollis mills

it was no where near the greatness of ZDT, but it was a bit enjoyable.

Apr 8 - 04:47 PM

Ashley S.

I will preface this by saying, I am not the kind of person who enters a theater expecting every movie to be realistic. If that's what you're looking for, don't go; you will be disappointed. I thought it was great from beginning to end--action packed, there was rarely a dull moment. As far as everyone's political commentary goes, people need to get over themselves. This is a movie, people! I'm pretty darn positive it was not meant to be used as political propaganda, nor do I think it was racist. In fact, an American ex-secret service agent teamed with Kang to get them into the white house! I work in the aerospace industry, I cannot even begin to tell you how many times movies show the body of one plane and the interior of a completely different model. Most movies have plot holes and small errors! Movies are meant to entertain, go into it with that mindset and I think you'll have a great time!

Apr 8 - 08:35 AM

Montez Bush

Except ZDT is critically acclaimed because it was superbly made and acted...this movie is the opposite.

Mar 30 - 12:40 AM

Ausautas V.

Not sure if it was the acting or the script making me cringe (Hello, Secretary Ruth). Not sure if acting could have fixed some of those scenes. I was disturbed that they were going to turn the world upside down to save the president. That's what shadow governments are for.

Wouldn't Kang's plan have wiped out the human race? Wondering how an unknown flunky got this multi-million dollar attack together.

It was refreshing to have somewhat "bad" guys for villains, not misunderstood victims we're expected to sympathize with. These racism accusations are silly. Villains still not as clear cut as Die Hard though; those villains are irredeemable trash.

The One Man Army is standard. That shouldn't surprise anyone. Has anyone seen a "plausible" movie like this? How much money did it make?

If you like this type of movie, I think this one gets by. A few people clapped. A little clunky. I was a bit disappointed. I would recommend Air Force One above this.

Mar 29 - 09:28 PM

Dee Dorazio

It must be me..and my being a more logical person that i have problems with movies like this and recently 'the call' i did not have a problem with the theory of some country taking over the USA and white house..but the theory that this single security guy a one man demolition hero here to save the day.. all himself..no troops in mass storming the place ..it was quiet as a mouse outside of the whitehouse and tons of dead bodies outside of him. Then also what a wimp of a president, the USA is going down and we're on the edge of nuclear annilation and it only take a couple threats for the prez to ok them to cough up the codes to the nukes. In 911 we were ready to take a commerical airline down with much less country wide threat. But yeah if you going to a movie and just want to not think into it..and just enjoy the shoot 'em up and blasts and some thrills in the story line..its worth going..but heck what's with the cheap thrillers..i could think up a better story line than this..and if they were going in this direction.. i think Bruce Willis and a more ball-sy president would have made better cast.

Mar 28 - 04:40 PM

lu wo

Nothing was wrong with it.. it was a solid flick.

Mar 25 - 10:05 PM

Jack Gonyer

The Diehard equal

Mar 25 - 06:33 PM

Dylan Jones

There is no problem with this movie. The only problem are the people on this site who just can't get over the fact that movies like this are made purely for entertainment, not to send some message to the world saying, "yeah, fuck with us, we dare you." No, it's just entertainment.

Mar 25 - 12:15 PM

DawnM Simons

The movie was a fun, wild ride that was highly entertaining. I saw it with my son and husband and we all left the theater with a smile. There was applause at the end. Laughs, gasps and exclamations of surprise during the film. Well worth the ticket.

Mar 24 - 08:32 AM

Anthony Estephane

Here's my take on the problem:
The story feels like a cut-and-paste from Die-Hard.

Mar 19 - 10:45 AM

Jay Mckim

What's wrong with this film is like asking question at old 30's and 40's film where American Indian and Asian were portrayed in Hollywood film. Remember old Western film, American Indians were portrayed as an enemy attacking "peaceful" white race. Same lying and deception found here. Hollywood has not changed their chemistry of promoting racism, deception and propaganda. This film has a propaganda side, not just a film where North Korean happened to be an enemy. There unconvincing, unrealistic reason why Hollywood used North Korea as an enemy as how they used American Indian in old Western film. Both films shared same commonality and that is White race is peaceful race and non-white race is an aggressor enemy, and it basically bowl down to the Hollywood so
bias, racist (against Asian males), and prejudice organization.

Mar 15 - 11:41 PM

Frederick Lam

Zero Dark Thirty was going to have an accurate account of how our U.S. military did their surprise raid on Bin Laden's hideout. But the director and screen writer had to make changes due to under classified and National Security reasons. Olympus Has Fallen is too hilariously ridiculous (where Hollywood is going) for action films carbon copying to be like a video game. The original Die Hard was more relevant next to Under Siege and The Rock.

Mar 14 - 01:32 PM

Will Colley

EVERYTHING. Visuals are sub-video game, story is FULL of holes (okay it's an action movie but way to many scene make no sense at all), characters are very shallow (you never get invested in anyone nor car to), and dialogue is canned (as if someone Googled the top lines from all the biggest action movies and forced them into the script somehow). It's bad. Compared to the latest DieHard (which was the worst of the series)... it makes the Diehard a LOCK for the best picture Oscar.

Mar 13 - 10:15 PM

Davida Rochelle

Remember when it was the renegade "Commies" that were the "bad guys" and then it was the outlaws from the Mid East? Now it's the Koreans, and South Koreans are not shown in a very positive light either.

Mar 13 - 08:20 PM

Chase Nyland

Ultimately, the problems that I have with this movie are that the visuals appear to be below par and it seems too goofy to be headlined with a cast consisting of Freeman, Eckhart, and Butler.

The propaganda side of the argument was explained by Corey Morrell in the "Garbage" thread. I fully agree with what he was saying, however, not with this movie. I feel that this movie may unintentionally spark some blind partiotism with its premise, but I don't think it was designed to be any sort of propaganda. I feel that Zero Dark Thirty was one of the films that Corey was describing because it is absolutely 100% propaganda.

Mar 12 - 02:03 PM