www.testfreaks.com

Reviews, reviews, reviews...

Knowing.33991509
5.8 out of 10

Knowing

Best Price at Amazon

Reviews and Problems with Knowing

Showing 1-8 of 8
Overall 2
2.0

User Review

Rakkie, FilmCrave
30 June 2009
  • Summary: ending, adam and eva? no way. this movie is really suck.
  • Read full review
Overall 1
1.0

This is propaganda

clement-reber, IMDb
5 April 2009
  • Summary: This movie is bad propaganda for Scientology. This is already obvious after five minutes watching. First, evolution is called "Theory of Randomness" and described as something sad by Nicolas Cage. Of course, there's no mention at all of all the proofs of evolution, even when Cage is supposed to be this serious MIT teacher. The little girl Lucinda is born in 1952, year of Scientology creation.
  • Read full review
Overall 1
1.0

OMG, what in the world

EricBosarge, IMDb
29 March 2009
  • Summary: Okay, this is a movie that I would classify as "I lost two hours of my life for this?" It was almost as if one person wrote the beginning, one person wrote the middle, and one person wrote the ending, and none of it meshes together at all. This movie has horror, religious, and sci-fi aspects that are all over the place. The first thirty minutes are okay, but it just plummets from there. There was not really any back story and it was kind of all over the place.
  • Read full review
Overall 1
1.0

I don't want to know!!!

phantasmagoric-1, IMDb
28 March 2009
  • Summary: If, like me, you expect films to have a cohesive plot, intelligent writing and an imaginative ending then this is NOT the film for you. What is the point of giving an astrophysicist a list of predictions and telling him when the world is going to end if there's nothing he can do about it?
  • Read full review
Overall 1
1.0

Sucks like a neutron star

prezidanto, IMDb
25 March 2009
  • Summary: I can't believe people are calling this the "best SF movie of the year", unless there aren't any other SF movies this year. Ebert obviously needs to adjust his meds if he gave this four stars. Plot holes? Plot holes? The rocks... do they mean *anything*? How come the aliens can't find *some* way to communicate with people? How do they expect to leave their numeric clue hidden for 50 years and have just the right person run across them?
  • Read full review
Overall 2
2.0

Thinly veiled Scientology promotion

jayceb, play.com
13 November 2010
  • Conclusion: Quite possibly the worst film I've ever seen. Admittedly the first 3rd of the film hooks you in with a series of puzzles and disasters - what do all of these numbers mean, what's the connection to the children?
  • Read full review
Overall 2
2.0

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

aural8, play.com
13 November 2010
  • Conclusion: I watched this film in stunned disbelief... as an avid filmbuff I don't think I have seen a film that has so completely insulted my intelligence in such a flagrant manner. More scientology than science fiction this film is rubbish rubbish rubbish!
  • Read full review
Overall 2
2.0

Flaming Moose!

adamatdramatrain, Flicks
10 December 2009
  • Summary: Alex Proyas directed the excellent CROW and the interesting DARK CITY and then the big dumb dull popcorn epic I ROBOT and then this sorry excuse for a sci-fi actioner. Some nice cgi and some bizarre - was that a moose... in flames? Seriously? It ranks alongside Tony Scott's predictable sci-fi bore DEJA VU and joins Nic Cage's ever expanding catalogue of dismal movies... WICKER MAN anyone? One star? It's for the moose. Seriously.
  • Read full review