Survivor

It is certainly not as bad as the ratings and majority of the reviews suggest. Yes, there are lots of plot holes to find, but I believe a movie should be judged by its entertainment quotient rather than its bullet-proof plot. This one keeps you interested. Brosnan, I felt, was pretty sharp in his role as the assassin and Mila does what she does best, run for cover and retaliate. As I always keep stating, a movie is half as good as its climax, this one though left much to be desired on that front, pretty low key to say the least. I go with a 6/10 for this one.

Granted this movie may not be anything special and it does not deserve a great rate, but there are a lot of hater answers here which are anything but fair.

The movie is more than watchable. It's an action movie, with not that many twists, (and very few of them unexpected, if any) but has a reasonably good plot, great acting, ok special effects,...

Those rating this movie below 5 don't really know what a bad movie is. This is not. Many of the flaws some reviewers point out are actually no flaws at all.

I am pretty sure that if you have seen your share of thrillers, you will have a great feeling of deja vu while watching "Survivor". The same basic plot has been done many times before. To be fair, there are a few fresh touches, like the fact that the heroine of the movie is not a superwoman, just very smart. And Milla Jovovich does do pretty well in this role. And for what was just reportedly just a $20 million budget, the movie generally looks pretty good. Anyway, I wouldn't have minded that fairly predictable script had the main problem I had with the movie not existed, and that problem is that the movie isn't very exciting or tense enough. There's almost a matter-of-fact feeling throughout. We don't sense that the heroine is in real danger or that something very bad is brewing that could bring a major disaster. Maybe had the budget been higher, the production could have not only put in a few more action sequences, but made them more elaborate, which might have gotten the blood really pumping. This movie really isn't bad, but it's without much needed bite. By the way, fans of Angela Bassett and/or Robert Forster should be warned that they are given precious little to do.

It's a good thriller movie. I didn't understand the negative responses, nor the logics about the scenes many are writing. This is a movie, well, I prefer everyone to watch and judge by themselves. My verdict: I liked this film, it's one time to watch, good movie. Milla Jovovich action is always good to watch, and Pierce Brosnan can never be disappointing with his roles. This is the work of a nice script and direction. Although the film could be better in many ways if we put intense logics in every scene and action. But who cares, for a normal average viewer (i.e. not the critics or someone who looks for the flaws in any movie), this movie will be a good time pass.

boring from start to finish...........acting as good as statutes and scenes as clear and interesting as mud. This movie is an exemplar of how little imagination throws together actors ending their careers in ignominy. If you can accept and connect the beginning to the plodding plot points that follow perhaps this is the movie for poor you.

ridiculous plot points arrive one after the other (I do not say one follows the other).

The writer is identified as Philip Shelby. My bet is this is a made up name. no one involved in something as uncreative as this would allow his name on the

Watch out of the director, James McTeigue. I looked him up and found him only directing stinkers since V for Vendetta.

I rated it as high as "2" for a few nicely photographed scenes of New York City on new years eve.