User reviews

I bought this with a bunch of other Sci-Fi movies that Anchor Bay had released under the "Alternate Realities" line-up. I initially thought this was a cheesy 80's movie which closely resembled Jason and the Argonauts and Clash of the Titans. Much to my disappointment this movie was more recent and from the opening scene my hopes for some good ol sci-fi cheese reminiscent of the 80s were quickly dashed.

The costumes seemed too bright thrown together. I felt as if at any moment I would look down and see one of them wearing sneakers. The actors throughout the film seemed out of place and much too "modern" as it were. The first characters we come across just seem to not be properly prepped for their rolls.. where was the makeup department on that one?

I didn't believe any of the actors portrayals in any of their rolls. Eric Roberts was just awful.. It felt like he checked out before filming ever began. Stapleton's character Marcus wasn't much better. Although he seemed to get progressively less crappy as the movie went on I can't say I was able to believe his role whatsoever. Mike Straub who played Gordian was by far the best throughout the film. He seemed to be the only actor taking his role seriously. The soldiers of Rome were pitiful as well. There weren't enough of them so their attempt at a Phalanx (the shield maneuver like in 300) fell short. They all looked like random kids they pulled off the street and once again it felt as if none of them played their roles with any kind of serious intention.

The visual effects were atrocious. For a movie that was made in 2008 the lacklustre CGI quality is quite disheartening. I have worked on a few low budget films and the CGI weren't astounding but the CGI in this film makes the projects I've worked on look like Avatar! For a movie like this that did have some production value (supposedly) you think they would strive to make it look a lot better than they did. Epic failure across the board in the CGI department.

This movie def. screams Cheese! Unfortunately it's not the good kind of cheesy that you enjoy watching again and laughing at, no it's the kind of cheesy that you are just happy to be done with once the movie has ended. I would feel embarrassed to have my name associated with this movie in any form. had a little more time, planning and research into the story been done I'm sure they would have had at least something that they wouldn't spend the rest of their lives trying to forget was ever made.

Yes, I said it's dumb. The quality of the acting is bad. The Cyclops is CG'ed and looks pretty badly done. A real live actor in a cyclops costume would fair better than the efforts of the CG team. The costumes look like they came from the local fabric store sales rack. Pretty low budget flick. OK for the younger kids, but there is a lot of fake blood and killing to be had. If they play video games, this will fall right into that category. The writing is pretty elementary. The use of cheap actor's to play secondary rolls is quite obvious. Some of the camera shots, POV, are poorly done. The use of a steady cam might have helped with some of the scenes in the courtyard shots. The better part of this being made for TV, will be the commercials between the program. Not for the intelligent viewer.

First and foremost: the Cyclops wasn't a Roman legend, it was Greek! (Check any decent production of Homer's "Odyssey".)

Eric Roberts was the best-known name in the cast, and therefore the first name mentioned in all the promo advertising. However, with what little screen-time Mr Roberts got, even he could not have saved this turkey. They wrote the Emperor Tiberius' character as if they'd never heard anything about the real man beyond his name. They had Tiberius completely under the sway of his evil counselor.

The CGI Cyclops effect was cartoonish not monstrous! (I've seen better amateur efforts!) It has to be seen to be (dis-)believed. — And it's really not worth the trouble.

All in all, I found it not only a waste of my time but a waste of the electricity it took to power my TV.

I have to admire the film-makers' ability to get paid for this.

dreck (noun: trash - worthless trashy stuff, especially low-quality merchandise.)

How Eric Roberts can go from portraying Sal Maroni in The Dark Knight to this is beyond me. The production value, low budget or not, is horrific. The costumes look like they were stolen from a nearby Halloween shop and the CGI looks like an art student got drunk and submitted some stock CG to SciFi.

That, and the gross butchering of Roman culture. The Emperor of the the most powerful empire in history clearly only hires the dumbest and most inept soldier for the city guard elite. These guys make the Star Trek "Red shirts" look like Leonida's 300.

To sum up: Take Gladiator, add a crappy subplot about a Cyclops to make it more SciFi worthy, and then give the staff 1 good actor surrounded by many, many bad ones and a budget of a 5 grade video project, without mommy's help.

I shudder to think about the future of the SciFi channel after Battlestar Galactica is done. Whether you like it or not, you must admit, after viewing terrible stuff like this, it's all they have left.

The rise of cyclops is the fall of Rome, says the box. And that pretty much sums up this picture. The Roman Empire captures the cyclops with intentions of using him in the Colosseum for their own amusement. But when they wrong one of their top guards and turn him into a gladiator, the guard and the cyclops form a very unusual alliance against the emperor. Beware the eye of cyclops, Caesar! "Dude, that looks like the worst film ever," is what my editor says to me when I show him the latest movie on my desk for review. Well, luckily for me, that's not quite true. The film is somewhat silly and the special effects are pretty much the worst thing you'll find anywhere in the world (even Brazil). I've ranted time and again about why I hate CG, so I won't do it here... the evidence speaks for itself. But, if you ignore the effects (which is difficult with cyclops getting so much screen time) it's not a bad film. Just don't ask why the cyclops wears underwear and who makes them.

If you're a fan of "Gladiator" and bad horror movies, this is for you. I don't know how accurate this one is -- probably not very -- but the costumes and fight scenes are decent, and even better if you're drinking Scotch whiskey. If you're me, you're always drinking Scotch whiskey (except now... I'm in a bar drinking a rail whiskey and coke). The portrayal of slaves and prostitutes is cheesy, but you'll have that.

Why is this film not "the worst film ever"? Easy -- it's entertaining. Horror fans have a habit of lovingly ripping on their viewing choices. Don't believe me? Go to a horror film opening night or to one of Chicago's specialty theaters, like the Portage or Music Box. If the fans are yelling out bad jokes, that means they love it. And I think my commentary was more or less non-stop during "Cyclops". So, I was entertained, and unlike most of the films I see, I'd gladly see this one again.

Perhaps this tarnishes Roger Corman's good name. Let's just blame Julie Corman and assume Roger was asleep when this was produced. But either way, it's better than you think. Not modern classic good, not you must have it in your collection good... but if you need a rental for some light-hearted horror fans -- especially ones who drink -- this is a great choice for that Friday or Saturday night marathon.

Needless to say, expectations were low for this no-budget Sci Fi flick. From atrocious acting and middles-school level CGI to uneven direction and boring subplots, Cyclops is what you've come to expect from the Sci Fi channel these days.

One interesting question was, how cold was it where they filmed this movie in Bulgaria? You could see the actor's breath in many scenes, including the indoor ones. Very strange and out of place. I never knew Rome got this cold.

The CGI was just dreadful. While the modeling of the monster wasn't bad, it seemed to change sizes continually throughout the production. In some scenes, it was enormous and in others, it was human-size.

Because I'm watching this travesty with BOTH eyes and my head is starting to hurt.

Before I wrote this, I checked a few other reviews and I have to ask myself if the cast and/or crew are writing their own critiques. Strong acting? Solid plot? Seriously? There IS a plot, but the only strength I find is in the stench. The directing, the camera angles, the inconsistencies... The director felt it necessary to randomly show weird actor facial expressions at useless times? A Syfy movie with no nudity, no worthy violence, horribly choreographed fight scenes and mediocre-at-best CGI.

This is the second horrible movie I've watched today... Now I know what the guys in Mystery Science 3000 must have gone through.

Well, the flick took no chances. Straight forward good verses bad and with no budget, I think that was a mistake. I feel the lower the budget, the more chances one should take. They could of put something, humor, whatever, into it.

As it was, it is what it is. Fluff and sub-par to slightly par. I did like many of the actors in it, the Centurion ought to get more parts, he has the dignity and charisma foe a big budget picture.

I thought the main female lead was Alantis Morrissette (sp) for a second, lol, a real LONG face but cute nonetheless.

Anyway, a light view, nothing special, but at the same time not taxing in anyway. Watch it, enjoy what is there, and forget it.

I have watched this film two or three times now, and have got to love it. I have found that there are two versions one with the violence left in, the other with most of the violence cut out. (I guess for before the watershed), the cut down version is awful, and makes little sense. But if you see the full version the film is very good indeed. I actually like the CG Cyclops, and the story line was very good in my opinion. I do feel that it would have been better to have a larger budget, as for me there should have been more foot soldiers marching through the forests, but that is a small criticism. Yes this is one for the young (at hart), and no I would not let young children watch the uncut version, but as a fantasy adventure I loved it. I recommend people watch this film, and not just read what has been written in other comments on this site. You may be surprised. After reading there comments, I felt it was my duty to type this quick rebuff, so people will give this film a chance, and make up there own minds.

Given the budget of this film, I would say it is pretty well done. There is some strong acting and the cinematography is impressive. Academy-award nominee Eric Roberts gives a powerful performance. The sets are also nice. From what I hear, these are the same as those used for the TV film, "Spartacus." Although some of the CGI might not be as sophisticated as the kind seen in a typical blockbuster film, it is nonetheless compelling. Despite this small weakness, this picture is extremely entertaining and is well worth watching. Its story is very intriguing. I believe this has better production value than many of the films on the Sci-Fi Channel.

I completely agree with everyone that has panned this on here. Horrible! Low budget, low IQ, and low on delivery. The costumes would have been best suited to The Three Stooges early comedies as well as the dialog and acting. If the women of Rome actually looked and dressed the way depicted in this movie there would never have been any orgies .....trust me. The "coliseum" was about the size of chicken fighting pit. The Sci Fi channel is insulting to its viewers.When taking on subjects that demand more mature writing and subject matter the channel almost always falls flat on its face. I'd much rather the channel would show old sci fi classics , even b movies, than the dreck it currently turns out. I rented this from Netflix and overlooked the source or would never have done so.

Do not judge this movie for its historical imprecision, it's not meant to be a next Troy nor an exact retelling of any historical events. Its story is clearly made up to ENTERTAIN, to not you make think. It's made to let you just watch and maybe smile sometimes. The integration of the Cyclop is a mere refreshment for the story mixed with gladiator fights and tenderly developing love between Marcus and Barbara. Don't judge, this movie is worth more than 2,9. I've seen many a horrible movie, not worth anything, nevertheless gaining better ratings. Why? Do you really need those famous "stars of Hollywood" to make you like a movie? Then you don't like movies at all.

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate sci-fi movies or anything, but I do have a problem when it is this bad. People may write to me saying it is meant to be cheesy, it is fun lighten up or it is so bad it's good, but as much as I wanted to sort of like it there are too many problems. The production values are absolutely awful really with a very cartoony cyclops that lacks menace and instead turns out to be laughable. The script is non-existent, the plot silly to the point of incoherence, the pacing is all over the place, the music is the epitome of cheesiness and the acting is really bad from all involved. In fact, Cyclops seemed more a movie that relied on gore rather than a fun storyline and smart scripting to me. The concept at least interested me into seeing Cyclops but on viewing I'm sorry to say but I regret even doing that. 2/10 Bethany Cox

My real score: 0.1/10

This film is probably based on a true story. This is certainly a historical film. We learn how to Rome lost its empire. It's wonderful.

Seriously, this film is truly a masterpiece. A masterpiece of c**p. How does one come to collect 6 million dollars to do this kind of turnip. Phew! We understand if we were told that these are children 6 to 10 who had created this film. Pseudo 3D animation of the Cyclops is really ridiculous. A boy of 6 years can do the same thing using photos**p.

But where is gone the 6 million? Since there is Eric Roberts (specialist films the most bad as each other) of known it was he who received the big million for this s**t.

It's really unimaginable that we can produce things so bad when you consider that there are humans who have not even eaten anything.

To escape completely or give your worst enemy.

I liked the movie Cyclops very much. The King Kong "bring the big beast back alive so we can display him for profit but he gets loose tearing up the town before we finally kill him tragically" plot is classic. The Roman Emperor granting bread and circuses to the people as cheaply as he can manage it (while having his underlings make it seem like a big deal) and constantly tying the hands of the only seemingly competent military man who can control Cyclops is classic government satire. That same military man being spared by Cyclops in the exciting Colesium scene is classic "Androcles and the Lion" material. The Cyclops defending himself and his property and trying to win his freedom (albeit rather bloodily) is heroic. The historic period recreation (though it may be inaccurate)is interestingly done. The monster is portrayed in many more scenes then the average monster films which try (and usually fail) to build up suspense by gradually having their monsters appear. Technical picks aside I though this a very good film.

Another stoopid Sci-Fi channel "HOTDRAGQUEEENCGIMESS!!!" no humor no dialog soap-opera channel acting. They said we'll do a Cyclops movie make it around roman times get in on that whole 300 thang. This is bad, its just bad, there's nothing here no excitement no thrills. The CYBORG escapes like 20 frikin times all from the same mistake over and over. Foolish Drunk Romans teasing it. So throw a tarp over it, it'll think its night then sleep until the big gladiatorial event. ANyhoo the Cyclops just runs around ripping up roman slaves in unimaginable ways. You've seen enough roman movies to guess the ending. I got this movies because i wanted to see how they did the whole roman armor. i wasn't disappointed at all it was good and in different variety too. But if I watched this for the movie I'd be beside myself with anger.

No one intends for this film to be anything but "cheese". Historical facts go out the window, but that's okay, because this is a Cyclops.

This Cyclops is mean, and eats people's innards. And he can kick Hannibal the cannibal's butt. There's loads of gore for the brats, but the dorks will want more outlandish special effects. We are given more readable actions, so there is a logic of plot and story line to follow than the "video arcade" special effects the dorks would stuff down our throats. This speaks well for the director.

One mark against it is the ease with which our hero communicates with the Cyclops. This went beyond cheese.

And it is cheese. Lots of fun. Unlike most films, the good guys sometimes win. That's a nice twist. But what makes this into a good cheese, of the Provolone kind, are the fairly well defined characters. Besides the lead, we get several characters we can follow and believe. Gordion and Julian in particular. Even the two bad guys, Tiberius and Falco, have some saving graces. A lot of one scene characters are in for laughs, and do a lot of ignorant things, but this is understandable in human evolution for the scientific minded, because this is set in an unknown BC year, before some of the genes for stupidity vanished. And, in fact, this is Rome, where arrogance did exist in humans, which makes these foolish characters much more realistic than the illiterate masses want to admit.

The female lead is ultra beautiful, at least by male standards, but isn't a "woman's woman", but more of the male fantasy woman. She doesn't fit the mode of the former, who we know survive these films, so the viewer never really knows if she'll survive. That does make for suspense.

I would've given it a higher mark if there was less gore, and if the scenes where the Cyclops communicates with the hero were deleted. That was ridiculous. The story was fun, though, and entertaining.

Okay, this wasn't Gladiator level bad rewriting, but it was pretty stupid, nonetheless.

Eric Roberts stars as the Emperor Tiberius as written by someone fairly ignorant of Roman History. (That would be *you* Roger Corman.) Apparently, a Cyclops is on the loose, and they decide to put it in gladiatorial games. Except the Gladiators want to restore the Republic. Really. (Right. If you were a gladiator in Rome, you were the most sociopathic type they had... It's like saying Gacy and Dahmner wanted to restore democracy, really.)

We have the usual "Skiffy Channel" cheese here, including a truly badly rendered CGI monster, no sex, badly choreographed action scenes...

Well, try to have a good time, anyway.