m (clean up) |
m (→top: clean up, removed: {{Underlinked|date=October 2018}}) |
||
| (13 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Resident Evil: Apocalypse''}} |
||
{{Film tab|reception}} |
{{Film tab|reception}} |
||
| + | {{Film reviews |
||
| + | |RT = 21% <ref name="Rotten Tomatoes">{{Cite web|url=http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/resident_evil_extinction/ |title=Resident Evil: Apocalypse (2004)|publisher=Rotten Tomatoes|accessdate=2016-05-28}}</ref> |
||
| + | }} |
||
| + | '''''Resident Evil: Apocalypse''''' received largely negative reviews, currently appearing on Rotten Tomatoes with a 21% Fresh rating (26 positive reviews out of 124).<ref name="Rotten Tomatoes">http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/resident_evil_apocalypse/</ref> |
||
==Reception== |
==Reception== |
||
| − | + | Tim Cogshell from the ''Box Office Magazine'' stated that ''Apocalypse'' is ''"superior to the original film."'' Robert Dominguez, from ''New York Daily News'' stated that the film ''"should please the target audience."'' Walter Chaw from ''Film Freak Central'' states that ''Apocalypse'' is ''"An awful sequel to an awful film."'' |
|
| − | Film critic Victoria Alexander (from FilmsInReview.com) said “If you like tough chicks killing zombies, RE:A is for you,” although she nonetheless noted that “Screenwriter Paul W.S. Anderson |
+ | Film critic Victoria Alexander (from FilmsInReview.com) said “If you like tough chicks killing zombies, RE:A is for you,” although she nonetheless noted that “Screenwriter Paul W.S. Anderson doesn't bog down the film with philosophical subtext or explain the zombies,” which she acknowledges are probably not “questions ...suitable for the demographics targeted.”<ref name="Rotten Tomatoes"/> |
| − | Critic Sean Axmaker gave the film a grade of C+, and said that the |
+ | Critic Sean Axmaker gave the film a grade of C+, and said that the director's “ headlong pace that favors action over spectacle... helps distract from all but the most contrived and absurd turns of Anderson's slapdash script.” Critic Dragan Antulovbigger gave the film 5/10. He noted the more spectacular setting (made possible by the bigger budget than the initial film), “deadlier weapons...[an] increased number of explosions[, and an] increased body count.” He said that despite the “shallowness of the content” there was “interesting production design and energetic direction.”<ref name="Rotten Tomatoes"/> |
| − | Reviewer Roger Ebert gave the film one half of a star, calling it an “utterly meaningless waste of time”, “a dead zone, a film without interest, wit, imagination or even entertaining violence and special effects.” Chris Alexander of Rue Morgue Magazine said that “RE2 is a dreary, incoherent mess of a movie, failing on almost every conceivable level and having the dubious distinction of rendering hordes of shambling, screaming cannibalistic zombies boring.” Alexander stated that the director “Witt |
+ | Reviewer Roger Ebert gave the film one half of a star, calling it an “utterly meaningless waste of time”, “a dead zone, a film without interest, wit, imagination or even entertaining violence and special effects.” Chris Alexander of Rue Morgue Magazine said that “RE2 is a dreary, incoherent mess of a movie, failing on almost every conceivable level and having the dubious distinction of rendering hordes of shambling, screaming cannibalistic zombies boring.” Alexander stated that the director “Witt can't stage an action sequence,” said that the lead actress “looks bored,” called the score “useless” and said that the “effects are more like defects.”<ref name="Rotten Tomatoes"/> |
Film critic Rob Blackwelder called "Resident Evil: Apocalypse" “inept, unoriginal, [and] asinine”, and stated that it is “on the Worst of 2004 list.” Blackwelder criticized the film as a “braindead disaster” with “pathetic... leaden mindlessness,” with “impossibly stupid and nonsensical plot defects.” He stated that the film was “overflowing with off-the-shelf action-hack staples” and “tiresome stereotypes,” and directed with a lack of “narrative or cinematic sense.”<ref name="Rotten Tomatoes"/> |
Film critic Rob Blackwelder called "Resident Evil: Apocalypse" “inept, unoriginal, [and] asinine”, and stated that it is “on the Worst of 2004 list.” Blackwelder criticized the film as a “braindead disaster” with “pathetic... leaden mindlessness,” with “impossibly stupid and nonsensical plot defects.” He stated that the film was “overflowing with off-the-shelf action-hack staples” and “tiresome stereotypes,” and directed with a lack of “narrative or cinematic sense.”<ref name="Rotten Tomatoes"/> |
||
Walter Chaw of Film Freak Central, who gave the film half a star out of four, criticized the “shoddiness of the make-up” and the lack of “critical biographical/geographical details.” He states that the editing seems like it was “edited with a weed whacker.” Chaw notes that “an entire sequence” was “lifted whole from La Femme Nikita.” While Chaw admits to loving genre films, he states that films like this “lowe[r] the conversation even lower than it already is.” In all, Chaw says “no artistry[–] it ain't good.” Reviewer Anthony Del Valle calls the film “yawn of the dead,” and laments “how little the writer develops the idea, and how the director turns his back on every opportunity to creatively exploit the situation.<ref name="Rotten Tomatoes"/> |
Walter Chaw of Film Freak Central, who gave the film half a star out of four, criticized the “shoddiness of the make-up” and the lack of “critical biographical/geographical details.” He states that the editing seems like it was “edited with a weed whacker.” Chaw notes that “an entire sequence” was “lifted whole from La Femme Nikita.” While Chaw admits to loving genre films, he states that films like this “lowe[r] the conversation even lower than it already is.” In all, Chaw says “no artistry[–] it ain't good.” Reviewer Anthony Del Valle calls the film “yawn of the dead,” and laments “how little the writer develops the idea, and how the director turns his back on every opportunity to creatively exploit the situation.<ref name="Rotten Tomatoes"/> |
||
| − | |||
==Box office== |
==Box office== |
||
| Line 19: | Line 23: | ||
The film's success has spawned yet other sequel, released in 2007 titled ''Extinction'', the official website of the third installment claimed it would be the last and final installment in the series, although a fourth film has been released in September 2010, with a fifth film, Retribution, released in 2012. |
The film's success has spawned yet other sequel, released in 2007 titled ''Extinction'', the official website of the third installment claimed it would be the last and final installment in the series, although a fourth film has been released in September 2010, with a fifth film, Retribution, released in 2012. |
||
| + | |||
| + | ==Awards== |
||
| + | ''Resident Evil: Apocalypse'' won Canada's 2004 Golden Screen Award, then the "Golden Reel", which is presented to the film with the highest box office in the country.<ref>[http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/en/article/golden-reel-award/ TheCanadianEncyclopedia entry on "Golden Reel Award".]</ref> It also won a Genie Awards for Best Sound Editing.{{Verify}} |
||
| + | |||
| + | ==Sources== |
||
| + | <references/> |
||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Film reception subpages]] |
||
Revision as of 12:31, 4 November 2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||
Resident Evil: Apocalypse received largely negative reviews, currently appearing on Rotten Tomatoes with a 21% Fresh rating (26 positive reviews out of 124).[1]
Reception
Tim Cogshell from the Box Office Magazine stated that Apocalypse is "superior to the original film." Robert Dominguez, from New York Daily News stated that the film "should please the target audience." Walter Chaw from Film Freak Central states that Apocalypse is "An awful sequel to an awful film."
Film critic Victoria Alexander (from FilmsInReview.com) said “If you like tough chicks killing zombies, RE:A is for you,” although she nonetheless noted that “Screenwriter Paul W.S. Anderson doesn't bog down the film with philosophical subtext or explain the zombies,” which she acknowledges are probably not “questions ...suitable for the demographics targeted.”[1]
Critic Sean Axmaker gave the film a grade of C+, and said that the director's “ headlong pace that favors action over spectacle... helps distract from all but the most contrived and absurd turns of Anderson's slapdash script.” Critic Dragan Antulovbigger gave the film 5/10. He noted the more spectacular setting (made possible by the bigger budget than the initial film), “deadlier weapons...[an] increased number of explosions[, and an] increased body count.” He said that despite the “shallowness of the content” there was “interesting production design and energetic direction.”[1]
Reviewer Roger Ebert gave the film one half of a star, calling it an “utterly meaningless waste of time”, “a dead zone, a film without interest, wit, imagination or even entertaining violence and special effects.” Chris Alexander of Rue Morgue Magazine said that “RE2 is a dreary, incoherent mess of a movie, failing on almost every conceivable level and having the dubious distinction of rendering hordes of shambling, screaming cannibalistic zombies boring.” Alexander stated that the director “Witt can't stage an action sequence,” said that the lead actress “looks bored,” called the score “useless” and said that the “effects are more like defects.”[1]
Film critic Rob Blackwelder called "Resident Evil: Apocalypse" “inept, unoriginal, [and] asinine”, and stated that it is “on the Worst of 2004 list.” Blackwelder criticized the film as a “braindead disaster” with “pathetic... leaden mindlessness,” with “impossibly stupid and nonsensical plot defects.” He stated that the film was “overflowing with off-the-shelf action-hack staples” and “tiresome stereotypes,” and directed with a lack of “narrative or cinematic sense.”[1]
Walter Chaw of Film Freak Central, who gave the film half a star out of four, criticized the “shoddiness of the make-up” and the lack of “critical biographical/geographical details.” He states that the editing seems like it was “edited with a weed whacker.” Chaw notes that “an entire sequence” was “lifted whole from La Femme Nikita.” While Chaw admits to loving genre films, he states that films like this “lowe[r] the conversation even lower than it already is.” In all, Chaw says “no artistry[–] it ain't good.” Reviewer Anthony Del Valle calls the film “yawn of the dead,” and laments “how little the writer develops the idea, and how the director turns his back on every opportunity to creatively exploit the situation.[1]
Box office
The film grossed $23,036,273 on its opening weekend (September 10–12, 2004). The film gained $51,201,453 domestically and $129,394,835 worldwide.[2]
The film's success has spawned yet other sequel, released in 2007 titled Extinction, the official website of the third installment claimed it would be the last and final installment in the series, although a fourth film has been released in September 2010, with a fifth film, Retribution, released in 2012.
Awards
Resident Evil: Apocalypse won Canada's 2004 Golden Screen Award, then the "Golden Reel", which is presented to the film with the highest box office in the country.[3] It also won a Genie Awards for Best Sound Editing.[citation needed]
Sources
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Resident Evil: Apocalypse (2004). Rotten Tomatoes. Retrieved on 2016-05-28.
Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "Rotten Tomatoes" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedboxofficemojo - ↑ TheCanadianEncyclopedia entry on "Golden Reel Award".