Angels Fallen: Warriors of Peace

Although the acting isn't the best, it's not bad either in my honest opinion. The rest in this movie however is of a very low level. The flimsy story and especially the consistency is just awful.

Talking about the consistency: You jump from one scene to another scene without a good transfer or reason why. It just didn't make much sense to me, like they cut a lot of materials.

The CGI isn't even the worst, but the fight scenes are just ..... very bad, every move takes a second and just moves so slow.

Some positive words then: Denise Richards was fun to see again :)

Everybody has his own opinion, but if you ask me, you can easily skip this movie.

I really don't have much to say, only that they got addicted playing with Efx as they are with Meth! As for Cuba? SMH!!! Went from Radio, Medal of Honor to this? Diddy do it? His performance on Boyz n the Hood wasn't that up to par, but was better than this... This!!! It damaged me, my eyes, ears, soul! The monsters look like paper mache or claymation.. I wouldn't have brought it out! Diddy Free Cuba! I'd rather watch Great Space Coaster or Reading Rainbow. Whoever directed this is not a good master at his craft! Only thought in yo mind, O" I got Cuba in it, he's gonna make me money. Well you got lucky but tricked the world, next movie won't be believable. Please make a better movie next time.

"Angels Fallen: Warriors of Peace" attempts to reimagine the supernatural warfare theme introduced in the 2010 film "Legion," but falls short in several key areas. Both movies center around celestial beings fighting to prevent the apocalypse, with a mix of action, horror, and biblical elements. However, "Legion" delivers a more cohesive narrative, driven by a stronger script and better-developed characters.

In "Angels Fallen: Warriors of Peace," the plot feels derivative and lacks the tension that made "Legion" memorable. The characters in "Legion," particularly Michael and Gabriel, are more compelling, with their moral dilemmas adding depth to the story. In contrast, the characters in "Angels Fallen" are somewhat flat, relying heavily on action sequences to carry the film rather than meaningful character development.

While "Angels Fallen" boasts impressive special effects and ambitious fight scenes, they often overshadow the story rather than enhance it. The film's pacing is also uneven, with moments of intense action followed by lulls that disrupt the flow. In comparison, "Legion" maintains a consistent pace, blending action and suspense more effectively.

The dialogue in "Angels Fallen" sometimes feels forced and lacks the gravitas needed for a film of this genre. "Legion," on the other hand, benefits from sharper writing that balances the supernatural elements with human drama, making it a more engaging and emotionally resonant experience.

Ultimately, while "Angels Fallen: Warriors of Peace" may appeal to fans of supernatural action films, it doesn't quite live up to the standard set by "Legion." If you're looking for a more compelling story with stronger characters and a better execution of similar themes, "Legion" is the superior choice.

This is The Room levels of bad. So many cringe things happen that I started laughing at the acting and the editing.

Denisse Richards looks like she got a truck full of lip filler.

Cuba Gooding Jr is fat and his lines were just terrible.

You can really watch this with some friends and just have a blast over some pizza and how impressively bad this movie is.

I've said all I want but I have 200 more characters to fill. The main character had one expression on his face the whole time. The special effects were so bad they were funny. The demons they fight were honestly hilarious looking. Randy Couture's cameo has no consequences and no reason for existing.

Oh, and the villain can't fight, no matter how hard they tried to make him look like he could.

When will I learn to check how many people have contributed to the average IMDB rating? I saw 6.5, which is comfortably above my tolerance threshold. I had also seen two pretty glowing reviews (in retrospect, I'm thinking possibly relatives of people involved in the making of the film?), so I dove. Three minutes in, however, I went back to see only 25 (at that time) people had rated it. More friends and family of cast and crew, I guess.

Sure the script was laughable, but the performances were wretched! The dialogue is painful, the main characters stare off vacantly much of the time (perhaps the actors were wishing they were anywhere but on the set), and the special effects weren't very....special. I don't think it's worth going into any more detail than that. Take your chances if you must, but I recommend a hard pass-unless you like that campy, it's so bad it's good, kind of thing.