Cell

Saban Films | Release Date: July 8, 2016

3.5	USER SCORE Generally unfavorable reviews based on 62 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Watch Now

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

DirigiblePulpJul 7, 2017

Feels lazy and bored with its very existence. It's clear the original King story it's based on has some interesting takes on the zombie genre (and at the time of its writing was timely in regards to cell phones zombifying our culture) butFeels lazy and bored with its very existence. It's clear the original King story it's based on has some interesting takes on the zombie genre (and at the time of its writing was timely in regards to cell phones zombifying our culture) but this film cannot muster any energy towards exploring those or doing anything but marching heedlessly forward towards a "conclusion".… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

BroyaxNov 11, 2017

C'est d'après un bouquin de Stephen King cette épidémie de zombis qui se propage via les téléphones portables ! incroyable, faut croire que le célèbre écrivain est à court d'idées ou bien qu'il est devenu sénile...

En tout cas, des ****C'est d'après un bouquin de Stephen King cette épidémie de zombis qui se propage via les téléphones portables ! incroyable, faut croire que le célèbre écrivain est à court d'idées ou bien qu'il est devenu sénile...

En tout cas, des **** malins (?) en ont démoulé vite fait mal fait un nanar qui ne paie pas de mine et se repose principalement sur les règles passablement usées du genre... à savoir le film de zombis lambda. Néanmoins, l'Appel des Zombis (le titre français de Cell Phone) se révèle assez efficace dans sa première moitié, voire carrément hilarant par endroits (le genre est d'ailleurs propice à ces moments d'hilarité sporadiques à l'insu de son plein gré ou non).

Cusack et Jackson font en tout cas le boulot sans forcer alors que le réalisateur se laisse trop souvent aller à la caméra à l'épaule. Et la caméra à l'épaule, c'est le mal, le mal incarné en caméra : ça file la migraine. Stephen King oblige, l'histoire prend un vague tournant fantastique, puis se perd en incohérences surtout à la fin, incroyablement bâclée. J'ignore si le scénario a pris des libertés ou si le bouquin est vraiment de la merde, cela dit.

Un nanar parfois drôle donc mais décidément trop mal foutu pour espérer convaincre qui que ce soit, même en étant gentil. Heureusement, on ne s'y ennuie (presque) pas.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

Q8MarrongGlaceAug 17, 2016

Not sure what went wrong on this one here ! This movie has a pretty good director and based on the novel by Stephen King with a stars like John Cusack and Samuel L. Jackson it suppose to be categorize as a Horror, Sci-Fi, Thriller but in INot sure what went wrong on this one here ! This movie has a pretty good director and based on the novel by Stephen King with a stars like John Cusack and Samuel L. Jackson it suppose to be categorize as a Horror, Sci-Fi, Thriller but in I thinks its more of a comedy is some case something just went the other way with this movie might be a bad cgi and some bad idea with those indicted people that it could be much better movie what a waste !… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

S1r-R34lFeb 24, 2017

Another bad Stephen King adaptation, even worse when you realise Mr King wrote the screenplay. Though it's the direction of the film which makes this dull and boring. It's too short to do the book justice... and the novel wasn't that good.Another bad Stephen King adaptation, even worse when you realise Mr King wrote the screenplay. Though it's the direction of the film which makes this dull and boring. It's too short to do the book justice... and the novel wasn't that good. Only Samuel L Jackson and Stacy Keach put any emotion into their characters. Nice idea badly produced.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

HotelCentralApr 28, 2017

Stephen King is quoted as saying that cell phones are "21st-century slave bracelets," and frankly I guessed this might be so while watching "Cell," based on his novel. If you like anything that hints of a zombie apocalypse then you mightStephen King is quoted as saying that cell phones are "21st-century slave bracelets," and frankly I guessed this might be so while watching "Cell," based on his novel. If you like anything that hints of a zombie apocalypse then you might regard the film as passably OK. It has some problems. It's about non-zombie-type zombies. They do certain things that seem impossible. Admittedly, zombie flicks are all about the impossible but "Cell" provides no real explanation for how the impossible is achieved or what's really going on and in the end it all seems kind of half-assed. The acting is OK but even Samuel L. Jackson, John Cusack, and Stacy Keach aren't enough to make this tepid production particularly watchable. Frankly, I'd suggest trying out "The Signal" (2007) instead, a very low-budget non-zombie zombie indie that makes characters stand out.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

MarioGRSep 30, 2016

OK movie but very disappointing!
Could had been far better film instead!
It had all the potentials to be phenomenal horror movie but it just failed big time sadly.

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

TheQuietGamerMay 13, 2017

The problem with the movie isn't it's cast (Most of whom give pretty good performances), the low budget, or even it's rather derivative zombie movie formula. It's the writing. This is a very unsatisfying adaptation of the book. The movie isThe problem with the movie isn't it's cast (Most of whom give pretty good performances), the low budget, or even it's rather derivative zombie movie formula. It's the writing. This is a very unsatisfying adaptation of the book. The movie is at it's best when it's using scenes straight from the source material. This just doesn't happen very much at all. We see familiar bits and pieces along the way, but for the most part the movie largely does it's own thing, and poorly at that.

Those who have read the book will know that it wasn't your average zombie story. King infused the apocalyptic scenario with his unique sense of imagination. The "Phoners" were gifted psychic powers, connected by a hive mind, and led by a menacing Phoner of higher intelligence and a thirst for vengeance. The movie touches on those elements, but fails to use them to any satisfying results. They're just sort of there and only serve to confuse those who didn't read the book and tick off those who did with how ineptly they are handled. The plot itself is also only a hollow imitation of the real thing. I understand the obvious budgetary restraints would have prevented an entirely faithful adaptation, but they certainly could have done better than this. It follows the overall outline of the book's plot to a degree, but it's filled in with original moments. None of which are good. All the original stuff is just badly written, particularly where the dialog is concerned. It's all a mad rush to a crappy conclusion. The interesting and important bits are skipped over in favor of a whole lot of nothing. You want to know the really shocking part about all of this? It was written by Stephen King himself. He butchered his own book onscreen! Stick to the books King, because you just proved that you can't write a good movie. Now, I could have dealt with the less than faithful adaptation of the book provided the original stuff was good, but it's not. For my fellow fans of the book, I highly recommend skipping this one. It doesn't do the source material justice at all. As for those without knowledge of the book, but are hoping for a solid zombie flick, also look elsewhere. It's just a bad movie.

4.5/10… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

r96skMar 23, 2022

Very poor, despite the presence of John Cusack and Samuel L. Jackson.

'Cell' is basically 'Land of the Dead' without the proper zombies, at least that's what this 2016 flick kept reminding me of. That George A. Romero film is good, this TodVery poor, despite the presence of John Cusack and Samuel L. Jackson.

'Cell' is basically 'Land of the Dead' without the proper zombies, at least that's what this 2016 flick kept reminding me of. That George A. Romero film is good, this Tod Williams release is not. It's a mess throughout and lacks any tension, freshness or uniqueness.

Cusack and Jackson should be a good pairing, yet I don't even recall anything from their respective performances just minutes after watching. Both are capable of a lot better than this, especially Jackson. No-one sticks out behind that duo, though it's neat to see 'Prison Break' actor Stacy Keach involved.

One to avoid, I'd say.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

JLauSep 18, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Using your phone turns you into a zombie but a group of "normals" are walking up North to do...something.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews