User reviews

Well, I was not expecting a Cannes Film Festival breakout, or Academy Award contender. To all those reviews that say the movie is cliched, predictable, just another Die Hard knock off... WTF were you expecting!? This movie delivered on the action, and the skyscraper was very, very cool! Yes the acting was not deep, but it was not bad either...The Rock looks great whatever he does, I mean come on people, Arnold and Stallone were not Shakespearean actors either!! I have seen literally hundreds of " Mediocre" action flicks, and this one ranks a point or two higher IMO. If you want to kick back and watch a mostly mindless, ridiculous, silly, and fun action movie, then you will enjoy this one.

It's not actually awful or even bad per se, but it's worse.. yes it's mediocrity defined! It's predictable, rather boring and all the best parts have been shown in the trailers. Dwayne Johnson is good, but can't save this. Sorry!

I like Dwayne Johnson but it seems he's becoming the Samoan Bruce Willis not because this movie feels like a Die Hard wannabe but because he'll do any movie no matter how bad the writing is and the writing for this film was awful as was how awkward Johnson looked doing stunts or even running.. Staying with the awkward theme there is zero chemistry between Johnson and Campbell and the same goes for Johnson and his former FBI team members because there was a complete lack of character building.. Also the entire back story was just plain.. I guess the director figured he'd rely on Johnson's name to carry this monstrosity.. IMDb has the budget for this rag at $125,000,000.00 if it were my money being spent I'd be asking someone where that money went because it didn't go towards writing, acting classes or character development.. So it must've went to Johnson and CGI.. I have a bit of advice and it goes to whoever thinks that you can get by on spending most of your budget on CGI.. IT DOES NOT WORK ANY LONGER AND YOU WOULD BE WISE TO SPEND MORE ON WRITING.. I give this movie the peoples elbow!!

Skyscraper's premise is pretty easy to put together, the poster for the movie almost encompasses it entirely. With a high rise building on fire, Will Sawyer (Dwayne Johnson) must save his wife Sarah (Neve Campbell) and his kids from a team of terrorists led by Kores Botha (Roland Moller). This isn't new, you've got the classics like Die Hard and this movie uses them as a foundation to build upon. Does it differentiate from those movies? I think it does but not always in a good way. There are times where the screenwriter (Rawson Marshall Thurber pulling both writing and directing duties) seems to be tipping his cap to the audience (the jokes around duct tape work the best) but as the movie slips farther and farther into cliche and implausibility, the more difficult I have extending that praise. How in on the joke was the creative team? I honestly don't know, I want to believe they were but some of the decisions the characters make contradict that line of thinking (this is a continual problem not just a one off).

Getting past whether the writer/director was aiming for this kind of film or if they stumbled into it, I have to credit the cast for making lemonade out of lemons. Dwayne Johnson is a bona fide movie star and he gives a decent performance. He tries as hard as he can, and he works in this more often than he doesn't. I thought Neve Campbell was pretty good, she had believable chemistry with Dwayne and she breathes life into what could be a stale character. Chin Han was solid, it was nice to see him in a bigger part and he does his job. Skyscraper doesn't do Noah Taylor or Roland Moller any favours in their respective roles as Mr. Pierce and Kores. I think Roland comes off a little better, but Noah is doomed by his higher profile and you can see where he's heading from moment one. I also felt bad for Pablo Schreiber as Ben, he's a great actor but he hasn't had the best of luck picking projects now that he's transitioning to movies.

Skyscraper has a sizeable budget and the quality of the visual effects benefits for the most part. There was never a point that I was put off by a bad piece of CGI or disappointed from a visual standpoint. The movie has a few nice cinematography moments (they make the most out of the hall of mirrors room cliché) and the fights were okay. Dwayne wasn't 100 percent consistent in acting like an amputee (he's really limping in some scenes, in others not so much) but the action is passable.

I do have plenty of complaints when it comes to Skyscraper, but I can't get deep into them without spoiling big moments in the film. Most of them centre around character motivations (is this really the easiest thing the terrorists could think of to get what they need?), character decisions (I admire Will's commitment to his family but considering what happens, why would he believe his family is still alive at the midpoint?) and really cheesy choices that undermine the thriller aspects of Skyscraper. They would have derailed the movie for me if I hadn't been having such a good time laughing and wondering where they would go next.

I didn't give this movie a high rating, but I was genuinely surprised with how much fun I had with Skyscraper. Did I feel bad for giggling at the implausibility of the plot? A little... the theatre was 1/2 full but the friend I saw this with had the same reaction. Expectations are key when deciding to watch this movie. If you've seen some movies like Skyscraper, the plot twists are going to be obvious, the sentimentality is going to make your eyes roll (even if the actors and actresses are selling out to make it work), and there are going to be some head shaking moments that will try your patience. But I give the cast, the visual effects department and the screenwriter a pat on the back for doing their best and taking what could be a trainwreck into an enjoyable 1hr and 45minutes at the theatre. If you're looking for a turn-your-brain-off style action/thriller with high production values and a talented group of actors, this movie could scratch that type of itch.

"Skyscraper" Or: "The Rock does Die Hard" Genre: Action/Heist

Like it or not, Dwayne Johnson is the biggest action star (and I'm not just talking about is 275lb frame) out there right now. When you go to watch one of his movies, you can expect over the top action and not a whole lot of feelings. I'm still kind of surprised that in "San Andreas" he didn't just close the fault back up with his biceps or stop the earthquake with his pecs. This being the era of The Rock, we see Johnson in at least 2 or 3 movies a year...Skyscraper being the 3rd I've seen in 2018. While I wait with teeth grinding anticipation for the "Big Trouble in Little China" reboot, let's get the Lowedown on Skyscraper with an aspect breakdown.

Cast=7 Dwayne Johnson is worth three points for his biceps alone...I know I went to the theater just cause I knew he's in it. Neve Campbell returns to the silver screen as the wife and earns two points...then Chin Han and Byron Mann earn one point each. This was enough to earn seven points out of the gate. Acting=7 The acting was actually pretty good across the board...I would probably award five points if Neve Campbell wasn't in this movie. Campbell still has the chops and really stole the show from an acting standpoint. I will have to add a couple points just for her...so that would make seven points here too. Plot=8 A security expert must infiltrate a burning skyscraper, 225 stories above ground, when his family are trapped inside by criminals. Ok...it's really "Die Hard" only with a bigger building and a bigger hero. Did that make it better? Not by a long shot...but it was a simple concept that allows for little need for character development. Eight points for plot...yay! Ending=8 The biggest thing I want in an ending is closure. But from an action movie, I want the most epic action at the end than the rest of the film. I definitely got the action and the closure...the foreshadowing made the ending predictable, so I can't give full points. Let's say eight points for the ending... Story=5 I was not a fan of the story...they left a lot of hole just to try to explain what Johnson did and why the bad guys were in the building. There was a bit too much character development for Johnson, but not enough for Campbell and her role was just as important. Throwing a five at the building for the story. Favorite Quote: "If you can't fix it with duct tape... you ain't using enough duct tape."

Genre: Action Violent=9 It's an action movie and that means I WANT VIOLENCE!!! I can't award full points for this, as it's PG-13. It's like putting a noise suppressor on a Harley...it kind of defeats the purpose. But I guess the purpose was to make as much money as possible in the Theater. As such, nine points will go to this movie for the epic sky crane jump. Pace=7 An Action movie, unlike Drama, needs to have a great pace. The acting and the story can't keep you, so it has to be the explosions and car chases. The pace was good...a little lag in the beginning with the character development, but once the fit hits the shan (see how I switched that?) the pace is really good. Seven points for Slitherin. F/X=10 For an Action movie...I want great CGI sure, but I want some real stunt work. I realize you have to do some things with a computer and a green screen...I also want some work with a stunt crew and the actors doing some of their own stuff. This was the one great thing about the film! The fire F/X was great and the stunts in and out of the building were nice. Ten points will be added to the score...

Sub-Genre: Heist Heist=5 Sorry if this is a spoiler, but of course you have to know the bad guys are after something right? If they are trying to take something as the main plot, then this is a heist movie. I just wasn't feeling what they were trying to do. I can't say it was good or bad, so I'll go with meh here...Five points. Chemistry=6 In a heist movie, I want chemistry with the robbers. A definite leader and a team of specialists to perform a certain task is what I want to see. While there is a leader, the rest of the team is not fully realized. Despite them being armed. At no point did I feel like they could beat The Rock...six points. My Score: 7.2 "Skyscraper" does not hold it's weight as a heist movie, but it's pretty solid as a straight up action flick. It manages to one-up Die Hard in height alone...it's taller but it will never be bigger. It's the same thing I told my kids when they became taller than me in junior high school. If you didn't get to see this in the theater...just hang in there for the video release.

Since no human adversary is any match for The Rock, as he has shown us in past movies, he must now take on non-human adversaries. This time, he's taking on a building. But not just any building. He's taking on a skyscraper-the most formidable and the most phallic of all buildings.

If it sounds ridiculous, that's because it is. The story is largely ridiculous, and although The Rock never actually fights the building (because it's a building), the danger that the building poses is a much greater threat than any posed by the actual villains of this film.

The villains are lame, cardboard cutout characters. They're evil because they're evil-no explanation given, no effort. So, I consider the skyscraper the main adversary in this film since its sheer height and the raging fire it contains threatens The Rock's family. I won't mention The Rock's character's name because I never once thought of him as anyone other than The Rock. The only thing here distinguishing him from the characters he plays in other movies, is his love for duct tape. This is a very pro-duct tape movie.

In this movie, The Rock is awesome because The Rock is always awesome. Speaking of awesome, I have to give it up for Neve Campbell. I should have known from the many times I watched the 'Scream' movies, but Neve Campbell is one tough cookie. She takes down her share of bad guys along the way, fearlessly and intelligently defending her kids. Well done.

Rooting for The Rock (and any of his friends or family) is one of my favorite things to do at the movies. It's amazing that The Rock has been so built up in the minds of viewers as an indestructible force that writers now have to manufacture weaknesses for him in movies, such as an artificial leg. It's as if the audience would believe all the challenges of this movie would be too easy for him if he had both his natural legs.

While there are a million and one plot holes, that's definitely not something you're supposed to look for in this movie. Certain movies are not meant to be dissected, and one involving a man jumping from one tall structure across the sky into a much taller structure that's on fire, is certainly one of them.

In addition to the film's inherent silliness, it also attempted several awkward jokes within the first few minutes, all of which whiffed. Characters followed up with "I'm kidding." That's usually a reliable indicator that the joke bombed terribly.

Despite all the flaws, I still had a good time watching this. The Rock is charismatic enough to carry any action movie to a reasonable level of watchability. Thanks to him, this one is reasonably watchable.

"Skyscraper" is an action-disaster movie with a sort of combination of "The Towering Inferno" and "Die Hard". The screenplay does not develop the characters well but it is breathless with funny action scenes. It also good to see Neve Campbell performing a supporting character but with important participation despite the absolute lack of chemistry with Dwayne Johnson. The plot is absurd but it is a good to see an action film with this type of exaggeration. The extinguishing effect of CO2 is based on the principle of lowering the oxygen content in the air to a value at which the combustion process cannot be sustained. Therefore it is hilarious to see the characters surviving after the release of CO2. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Arranha-Céu: Coragem Sem Limite" ("Skyscraper: Courage without Limit")

Usually I like movies with "The Rock" - but this is lame. It has some good ideas but it is not thrilling. Noticeable: The biggist tower of Hongkong is burning and I saw no single fireman in the whole movie. That's Hollywood.

Pretty much all action movies are the same. This is pretty much the same movie as Rampage (which also had Dwayne Johnson in it) and that only came out a couple of months ago. Is this a good movie? Not really, but it's fairly entertaining. It's exactly what you expect to be. High-octane, action-packed, funny and actually pretty enjoyable for the most part. I wouldn't go out of your to see it, but you won't be disappointed either, as long as you check your expectations first. It's not art, but it's not trash either.

I was hoping 'Skyscraper' would be in the vein of 'Die Hard', a bad-ass, original and epic action movie where anything felt on the cards as a possibility. Instead it was pretty much the opposite of all of those things. 'The Rock' was given almost no opportunity to show off his undeniable charm. The script just hampered him in every way and left him as nothing more than a muscly guy who could do impressive stunts. But trust me, 'The Rock' is the least of the problems this film has.

The biggest gripe I have is just how dull it is. The film actually starts off with a pretty menacing villain and some violent and brutal killings. At this stage I had hope for the film, but all of that ended pretty abruptly and from that point onwards every bad guy in the film was unbelievably incompetent. The whole story arc plays out in about as cliche of a fashion as you could ever imagine. It's all very underwhelming and disappointing.

As for positives they are hard to come by. Some of the visuals are impressive and 'The Rock' does his best to keep things watchable despite being given absolutely no help. Otherwise though I would say this is a complete misfire and not worth anyone's time or money.

I was born in early 80s, so, you can say that I grew up with this kind of movies. Late 80s and early 90s were all about them. Strong men kicking the bad guys' butts while surviving the impossible situations. Very often that formula also included families. Die Hard, Commando... you know the stuff. Unfortunately, even though we still have a lot of action movies around, this exact kind of them somehow became obsolete. Those big muscular guys just aren't that popular anymore. People want Benedict Cumberbatch, not Arnold Schwarzenegger, while kids want to be like Iron Man, not like Rambo. Well, different heroes for different times, I guess, but still, I missed the old school way. The strong family guy saving his family from the bad guys... there's just nothing like it. And guess what? That's exactly what this movie is.

And I'm not even surprised that it was produced by Dwayne Johnson and has him playing the leading role. There's something old school about the good ol' Rock and I always felt like he's keeping the old school spirit alive on the big screen. And now he did just that - his own version of Die Hard. With baddies, family in trouble and muscular guy to save the day. I can't even add anything to it. It's just that - an old school action movie. Lack of originality? Sure, can't argue with that. There's nothing original here. Well, the skyscraper itself looks great, the movie feels really exciting in modern 3D and sure, Dwayne Johnson's character has only one leg, which works as a nice modern touch and will make this movie even better for certain kind of viewers, since it can really give them a lot of inspiration, but aside from that there's nothing really new here. You saw Die Hard, you can say that you've seen this movie too. But let's not forget two things. First of all, we live in times when they just don't make this kind of movies anymore. And second - such movies don't even need to be original. They need to be exciting and inspiring. And Skyscraper have all of it. It's very enjoyable and can give you and your family a lot of good mood. Which means that it did its work perfectly. Maybe it's not one of those "must see" movies, but if you missed this kind of movies as much as I did, I'd say don't miss it. That awesome warm feeling that old action movies had... this one sure has it.

The rock will be in literally anything to get another paycheck to prove he is the highest paid actor in Hollywood, skyscraper is yet again another example of this, with Dwayne Johnson putting in another forgettable performance along with forgettable villains and supporting cast. Skyscraper brings nothing new to the table besides ridiculously cheesy ways to use a prosthetic leg in generic action fights. Skyscraper tries to jut be a dumb fun action movie but fails at even being fun, just boring and bland.

I read the reviews before I went expecting a horrible movie. Don't listen to those reviews, it was awesome. Is it winning an Academy Award? No. Is it entertaining as heck? Absolutely.

The movie has a lot of cliches of the genre and an antirealism feeling. Dwayne Johnson is very good as always in roles like this and it's ok if you want to see something generic with a lot of action and explosions etc.

Overall, I expected to see a lot of action. This, after all is an action movie, entirely revolving around its visuals and stunts, rather than acting. What did the movie deliver? Action. And, if I may say, some quite thrilling scenes that kept me on the edge of my seat to see what happened next, and the audience behind me certainly gave some gasps at some points during the film, as there are many scenes in which he is suspended hundreds of feet over the massive city of Hong Kong.

The movie delivers for what it is.

This movie was billed as an action/thriller. Period. And it delivered just that. I honestly don't understand how people give it a bad rating. If it was that bad to them, why did they even stay and watch it through? Every movie isn't made to win an Oscar (not that that makes something good anyway) nor does it need to have some feminist, LBGTQ, save the planet, hug a tree, anti-American, liberal agenda. Some movies are for entertainment. Most of the crap coming out of Hollywood nowadays have to have some deep thinking motive or be a comic book hero story. This movie is entertaining, fun, and it kept my wife, son, and myself on the edge of our seats from about 10 minutes in until the end. What's wrong with that? NOTHING!!!! Sometimes it's just fun to watch a movie and root for the good guys and be against the bad guys. I enjoyed it and highly recommend it. Don't read all the bad reviews and be dissuaded. Grab some popcorn, something cold to drink, and enjoy it for what it is, a fun action thriller.

It's not the Avengers, but it's still fun to watch. It's worth the money and time. Don't expect to much from it, it's just yet another movie of the Rock.

I'm going to start by saying it was a good idea about the skyscraper, how the producers do the design of it... But we have to be serious in some of the scene ... how can he jump from the crane to the building and then in other scen he can't jump like 7ft The little boy almost doesn't appear in all the movie... He says like 10 lines and that's it In the first scenes they try to make real the fact of breath the smoke in putting the wet towels but in the last part after being like 4 hours in that building they look like they're breathing pure oxygen like they were in a forest

Not the Rock's best film but by no means his worst. Sure, it follows the Die Hard formula but they have redone it for the younger generation and it works.

This is what you'd expect from a DJ film; plot holes, bad acting from all but him, very predictable and bad cgi. Yet it is the most fun you can have whilst watching a film and DJ gives a very consistently over dramatic and fun performance. Don't expect anything of it other than simplicity and fun.