You know, you could just watch 1408 instead.
At the end of the movie, "Cell" left me thinking,. "Well, what was the point of that?" The concept with the Raggedy Man and all that was barely developed, there was little to no character development, we didn't care whether any of these people lived or died and according to people who have read the book, there was a lot more to the book that just got left out. So the director was content to just make a poor-to-mediocre film instead of a good-to-great one? I don't get it. Also, there was nothing particularly riveting about the characters or the dialogue that required the expertise of John Cusack and Sam Jackson. As someone here pointed out, any B-list actor could have played these parts. I know these days, you can attach a name like Stephen King to a project, poop out any old shit and it'll draw some money, but Jesus, where is the pride in making quality films?
Very poor, despite the presence of John Cusack and Samuel L. Jackson.
'Cell' is basically 'Land of the Dead' without the proper zombies, at least that's what this 2016 flick kept reminding me of. That George A. Romero film is good, this Tod Williams release is not. It's a mess throughout and lacks any tension, freshness or uniqueness.
Cusack and Jackson should be a good pairing, yet I don't even recall anything from their respective performances just minutes after watching. Both are capable of a lot better than this, especially Jackson. No-one sticks out behind that duo, though it's neat to see 'Prison Break' actor Stacy Keach involved.
One to avoid, I'd say.
Truly disappointing. Cell is one of my favorite books and I wanted a movie for years. I was so excited when this came out and was so let down when I watched it. They changed so much and left so much out, it barely felt like a shadow of what the book was. Just a real disappointment.
I really loved the novel, but this is just utter, well ... erm... right. you know what I mean.
I was looking forward to it, but I wish I didn't watch it. Some King novels are better left on paper.
Just one thing to say: complete waste of time! seriously I thought "John Cusack, Samuel L. Jackson, this should at least be good". don't watch it
I love a Stephen king story, good to see cusack and Jackson in another film based on kings books. My signal on this was a 6/10
this is the best movie i've ever seen. i'm going to throw my phone away. technology is so evil. john cusack is daddy
This movie might have been successful had it been made several years ago, around the time the book was published (which I enjoyed). It doesn't do anything new or original with the premise or plot that hasn't already been done (and done better by others). It's hard to stand out in a zombie-filled world of media and this one doesn't.
Liked the book when it came out and I'm sure at the time the film was to be made by Eli Roth, which would surely have been better than what we got? Really poor, I know Kings endings are often a bit crap but what they did with it here is just rubbish. Brilliant cast (although it's been awhile since Cusack was good) but they don't seem to care about anything, most seem to want their grisly deaths so they can cash the check and get out of there.
This movie was a hot mess. Listen, Cell is one of my favorite Stephen King books and books often don't translate well to film. I was prepared for that. But even for an adaptation, this one was especially disappointing. One of the scariest things about the "phoners" in the book was the hive mind -- and there was very little mention of that in the movie. That's an essential part of the story. Not to mention that while I love both John Cusack and Samuel L. Jackson, they both seemed bored with their roles and I can't say I blame them. The screenplay didn't flesh out their characters at all, leaving them dull and wooden. Any no-name actors could've played Clay and Tom, written the way they were. I'd been so excited years back when I heard Cell would be made into a movie. Then there was nothing for a good long while and I could've sworn I'd heard the project had been scrapped. Then all of a sudden I was seeing trailers for it and I was excited again. What a letdown it turned out to be.
Terrible terrible. Got to be john cusack's worst film ever.
Real scary shit this movie.
Cell = The Stand + The Tommyknockers + some zombies. King is cannibalizing himself. Since he adapted the screenplay from his own novel, he bears much of the blame for this derivative film.
Almost so bad it's good. Almost.
Cell is a movie adaptation of Stephen King's novel, but it's not one of his best works. The film feels like a subpar remake of Resident Evil with a predictable and unremarkable plot. The characters are not well developed, and the acting is mediocre at best. Despite some impressive visual effects, the movie fails to deliver on the suspense and horror that are expected of a Stephen King adaptation.
What was going to be a fairly decent adaptation of the book falls short and only covers approximately half of it. If you'd like to watch a hastily ended first half of the book, well, this is a great adaptation. Otherwise disappointing.
Watchability seven-ish, disappointment four-ish, I've rated it six so people knwo it's watchable at least.
If it's 3AM and you're still wide awake looking for something to watch, try Cell.
You may have to watch it in sessions.
I was so disappointed from this.
Because of reasons I can't explain, the book is one of my favorite stand alone stories. Every time I read it (first time was in 2006 and 4 times in total I think, and in 2 different languages) it managed to suck me in its world.
The movie, putting the first 10 minutes aside, was absolutely the opposite. Maybe it's because I had high hopes. But as a book adaptation, it was really meh.
Yeah, they had some "easter eggs" from the book like the the black and blonde girls, the glass sphere, the knife block with the drawings breifcase, the cat, the phoner covered with pumpkin and the guys on the motorcycle, but that surely wasn't enough.
The acting was 'meh', the script was 'meh', characters arcs was really 'meh'. But the ending. Dammit. Was so stupid, it looked as if they ran out of badget and someone said "well, we can't do what's in the book, so let's just make everyone run in a freakin' circle and then do a really sh¡tty 90's slow-mo so everything will make even less sense at the end.
And to add more 'meh' - the wannabe horror film about zombies and violence and blood got PG13 rating for some reason so Samuel L. Jackson can't drop any F-bombs. Shame.
(Edit: so I checked and it's rated R (>ლ) WTAF dudes?)
This is, without a doubt, one of the worst films I have seen in years. I agree, the first 5 mins in the airport is quite good and got my attention, but it went very quickly down hill from there. I almost feel 'pity' for Cusack and Jackson, as they must be in such dire need of the cash for them to put their names to this most awful of films. it is a blot on any GOOD 'A' list actors filmography. terrible you have been warned.
If you've read the book, skip the movie. While there was some sort of character development in the book, there wasn't any here. The book did have some boring bits, but the movie made it completely boring. Barely made it through the entire movie. I was expecting so much more from the "Raggedy Man", and it came out to be quite underwhelming.
Adaptation of Stephen King's novel "Cell"
By far the worst movie I have seen this year, a serious waste of time. Just staring at a switched off TV would have been more fun than this. I kept on hoping it would get better, but it doesn't, shame I watched it until the end.
Great movie from the mind of Stephen King.
Starts well, then go not bad, but the end is to kill the director slowly, or better skip the final minute
C'mon it's not that bad. Dont take visual effects too seriously, they are bad and that's it. If you take a closer look, the entire movie is enveloped in darkness until the end... but when the explosion kicks in, sun shines throughout the screen and everything gets so bright! They are even heading to Canada! Answer couldn't be more simpler: It was always a dream of John, we don't know how it all started we just saw a glimpse of this apocalyptic "universe".
As a Stephen King fan I have to admit that Cell was one of his lesser works, a bonkers zombie story with a message - we live in a society of zombies with people addicted to their cell phones and Facebook. The film is as crazy as the book though it does deviate a little from the source material. Its always good to see Cusack and Jackman, so whilst this isn't the greatest horror movie in the world it is still worth watching. Read the book too to fill in some of the film's gaps.
what the f--k?! first off I love steven king movies but this got one of the most ambiguous endings ever in any movie I've seen!,like who the hell was the Raggedy man? was Clay dreaming all along? & did he save his son at the end of the movie? if he did why was he marching with the flock? but why also was he walking with his son along the railway tracks? did he kill himself & his son when he blew up the ice cream van its just questions questions questions mr king!!!!! i read an article that you liked to leave the ending open to interpretation but i don't want to interpret the endings to movies thats the job of the writer isn't it Mr. King
I liked the cast but this movie is as bad of an adaptation as Desperation by the end. I expected that the movie was going somewhere good but nope. The end of the book is supposed to be just as bad pretty much.
So why couldn't they have adapted a better Stephen King story that hasn't been adapted yet ? UR had a silly plot itself but was a book I couldn't put down. Plus it actually goes somewhere.
Cell was pretty pointless and silly.
Shout by Ellie <3BlockedParent2017-03-02T20:10:36Z
Started off so well the first 5 minutes were so gripping, but then it went a bit dull and lifeless from then on. Still worth a watch though, makes you think twice about using your mobile phone!