dakjets
Joined Jul 2015
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Ratings1.7K
dakjets's rating
Reviews362
dakjets's rating
'm a big sci fi fan. As a fan of this genre, I love big, spectacular movies. But I must not have it this way. Once in a while, there are films like this with a low budget, which engage to a great extent. Good stories, skilled actors with tight and pointed direction can lift alternative sci fi films to great heights. Unfortunately, Rubikon is not one of these. Feel free to make such films outside the US, make them with little money and promote new talents. But it doesn't help when the film is totally missing what all sci fi films MUST have; excitement. When such films are not even close to having a story with suspenseful moments, I fall right out. In that sense, this film is a failure for me. It's a shame, but if you throw yourself into this genre, we at least demand to be entertained. This was simply boring.
I grew up with the Alien movies. Although I was too young to enter the cinema in 1979, I still got to see the film as an 11-year-old. My cousin arranged to rent it on video (remember video rentals?). The film made me both interested in the sci fi genre and horror films. An interest that has remained throughout my life. The claustrophobic, intense original film from 1979 was and is groundbreaking.
The action-oriented sequel from 1986 was also very successful in that it maintained the horror effects of the original, mixed with magnificent action scenes.
Later the downturns began. Guess if you're still reading this review you know what I mean.
With this film, my expectations were turned up. Maybe too much? I watched the movie with a friend who doesn't have the same interest in these movies as I do. He liked this movie. I thought it was exciting and scary. I understand why he means that, but it's not good enough for me.
The film functions as an action-packed scifi adventure and our "friends" Aliens of course appear and do what they usually do. Although the film makes many references to previous films, this is not enough for me.
I think the nerve in the film cannot compare to the two original films. It will be a dime a dozen in line with comparable films. It lacks the unique thing that made the original film a masterpiece: the ability to scare the life out of us.
And then it's a fact, I can't avoid it; an Alien film will NEVER be the same (and as good) without Sigourney Weaver. Sorry, that's just the way it is.
The action-oriented sequel from 1986 was also very successful in that it maintained the horror effects of the original, mixed with magnificent action scenes.
Later the downturns began. Guess if you're still reading this review you know what I mean.
With this film, my expectations were turned up. Maybe too much? I watched the movie with a friend who doesn't have the same interest in these movies as I do. He liked this movie. I thought it was exciting and scary. I understand why he means that, but it's not good enough for me.
The film functions as an action-packed scifi adventure and our "friends" Aliens of course appear and do what they usually do. Although the film makes many references to previous films, this is not enough for me.
I think the nerve in the film cannot compare to the two original films. It will be a dime a dozen in line with comparable films. It lacks the unique thing that made the original film a masterpiece: the ability to scare the life out of us.
And then it's a fact, I can't avoid it; an Alien film will NEVER be the same (and as good) without Sigourney Weaver. Sorry, that's just the way it is.