The Invisible Man
The Way Back
Blow the Man Down
Better Call Saul
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
Got more questions about news letters?
Already have an account? Log in here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We encourage our community to report abusive content and/ or spam. Our team will review flagged items and determine whether or not they meet our community guidelines.
Please choose best explanation for why you are flagging this review.
Thank you for your submission. This post has been submitted for our review.
Sincerely, The Rotten Tomatoes Team
There's a monster on the loose in the sub-basement of the Field Museum in Chicago. Is there going to be people wandering around alone in dark hallways in what should be a well lit museum whispering "is anybody there?" Yep. Going to be shots so dark that you can't see what happens? You bet. What about gore, will there be any gore? C'mon, you know it. Quick editing to move things along? Yes. What about victims you want to see gored? Naturally. All in all, not a bad monster film.
Standard monster on the loose fare with a clever enough plot and good enough acting to be enjoyable.
Underappreciated 90s science fiction/horror. It may not be a masterpiece but it gets the job done.
Awesome little monster movie. I have no idea how this wasn't bigger when it came out. It's a cool concept, with a different kind of monster in a claustrophobic setting. Impressive effects for when it came out.
The Relic. The Ciler the better, and this is pretty silly.
Look. It isn't exactly Jaws or Aliens. But It is way better then most horror flicks of recent days. And remember so many of the critics are reviewing it 20 years after it came out and basing their comments like 'it is totally derivative' and the fact they are seeing it after 20 years of B movies have made this type of movie insanely cliche. But at the time it was a serious risk, and the reviews at the time it came out were not nearly as bad as they are twenty years later.
If all you are is some snob who thinks by predicting the end of a story that makes you smart or something, then you don't know storytelling. All stories follow predictable structures, even Aliens and Jaws.
Yes some of it is clichc, especially now. No it isn't some modern day film where the trend is to out psycho each other out and try to present something as demented as possible.
If you are into horrors for entertainment rides, not gore fests it isn't that bad a movie, There are enough ideas that were original at the time to make it work.
Of course in today's anti science world, where climate change is taken with the same seriousness as pro wrestling, than for some, any science in a movie, means they hate it It doesn't mean the science possible, but neither was the science possible in Jaws, or Aliens, but it is at least based on some ideas of science.
Most people now are totally into Arks and likely will give this movie a bad review simple because it talks about DNA and evolution. That seems to be about the same number of people who think climate change is fake. Go figure.
Watch it again on BBC IPLAYER I most have watch it about 10 times in my lifetime.
Removing Pendergast from the movie was the first mistake. The second was keeping the pacing too slow for such a darkly filmed movie.
A dreadful movie. Cashing in on the success of the X-FILES and making a sub-par ripoff of an X-FILE with better special effects.
Pretty straight forward monster movie.....of sorts. Nothing too flashy but I enjoyed it. The book is also pretty solid.