Cube Zero
|
List Price: Our Price: $5.50 You Save: $9.48 (63%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $2.43 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Cube Zero
Movie Review: Every nightmare has a beginning.
Summary: 3 Stars
Hello all you cubists out there...ready for another round of cubery? That's right, they made yet another sequel (in this case a prequel) to Cube (1997), the little film that creeped into the video market and became immensely popular mainly through word of mouth advertising, so much so it warranted a sequel in Cube 2: Hypercube, which begat this prequel titled Cube Zero (I assumed it was a prequel given the combination of the title and the tagline on the front of the DVD case, `Every nightmare has a beginning.' My deductions turned out to be accurate, and thus I rewarded myself with a cookie.) Written and directed by Ernie Barbarash (he also wrote the sequel Cube 2: Hypercube, but did not direct it), the film, like its predecessors, features a relatively unknown cast (to me, at least) of Canadians, in Zachary Bennett (Guest Room), Stephanie Moore (John Q), Michael Riley (Amistad), and David Huband (Wrong Turn).
The story starts off in rather grisly fashion, much like the previous films, in that we witness the inherent dangers of cube reality after a lone man stumbles upon one of the many traps contained within the cube, and meets a particularly gooey fate. This element was a real punch in the gut with the first film, but now the inclusion of a nasty death by peculiar manner at the outset has become the norm...I guess if something works, you stick with it...and it established that we are, in fact, watching a Cube movie. Anyway, it's after this we find ourselves in a dank, dimly lit control room of sorts, filled with piping, monitors, filing cabinets, and populated by two individuals, one young, smart, and full of questions, the other older, by the book sort of man (Bennett and Huband, respectively) who turn out to be technicians (yet they wear the same outfits as those poor schleps who are deposited in the cube), monitoring the activity within the cube, recorded everything for posterity, I suppose (actually, they receive orders from an as yet undetermined source). This behind the scenes peek initiates the possibility that all the questions and mystery developed over the course of the last two films may soon be answered and solved, but tease as they will, tease as they might, there shall be little in the form of answers tonight...things begin to unravel when one of the two techs, a real brainiac with the ability to visualize complex structures within his head, falls for a woman in the cube, and leaves the safety of the frying pan and jumps into the fire, which marks the appearance of Jax (Riley), a higher up assigned to deal with this particular problem, by means of manipulating the computer controlled cube and its traps. I'm really hesitant to give out any more, as I hate to spoil anymore of the film for someone who hasn't had the opportunity to see it...
While I did like the film (it was certainly better than Cube 2), I always felt any sequels to the original were unnecessary. The first film worked so well in giving us the confines of the cube, and then presenting so many questions that were never answered, and probably never meant to be answered, forcing viewers to speculate, theorize, and ultimately develop their own ideas. The following films, trying to build off the original, offer little tidbits, but only with the intention of deliberately raising more questions, creating a sort of self-perpetuating mystery. This same, exact thing was done with the movie Phantasm (1979), a great little horror film that presented a wonderful, obtuse set of questions, which were never answered, but many things alluded to in the cruddy, subsequent sequels. I doubt at the time either of these films, Cube or Phantasm, were made, there was probably much thought to sequels, so they were made in the context of being stand alone films...perhaps I'm being a bit hypocritical about my thoughts of preserving the `sanctity' of the originals, as if I was truly concerned with that, I would have never watched the movies that followed...given that this is a prequel, the appearance of the interior of the cube related that well, having a rough, unpolished look, like that of something still being developed, awaiting refinements and upgrades. The introduction of new traps (one featured a particularly nasty disease) was fun and welcomed. The focus of the story varied from the previous films in that it wasn't confined to individuals within the cube, but spread out a little more. This effectively lessens the character development of a small, core group of cube dwellers, but I did appreciate the fact we didn't have to spend another film limited to only the interior of the cube. I liked the introduction of the mysterious character of Jax, but I thought Riley's performance a little too comical and overboard, reminding me a lot of John Glover's corporate mogul character Daniel Clamp from the film Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990). And what was the deal with the person who actually made it out of the cube and the introduction of the religious implication? It felt awkward and out of place with the rest of the film. All in all, Cube Zero was a good time, and for those interested I don't think you'll be disappointed.
The widescreen picture, presented in 16:9 aspect ratio looks decent, but probably could have looked better, as the darker scenes didn't always come across as well as they could have. The audio is clear, and present in Dolby Digital 5.1, along with Dolby Digital 2.0. Special features include a 20-minute featurette titled `Inside the Box', along with a director's commentary, storyboard comparisons, an art gallery, and a music video by some cruddy band featuring the lead singer moving though sets from the film singing an entirely forgettable piece of metal. There's also some trailers for other Lions Gate releases like Saw (2004), Final Cut (2004), and High Tension (2003). 3 ½ stars
Cookieman108
An afterthought...perhaps the next film could be called 'Gleaming the Cube'...oh wait, that title's already been used...damn you Christian Slater!
Movie Review: A prequel to "Cube" that still makes the original look good
Summary: 3 Stars
In the beginning there was "Cube," and it had a memorable opening in which a man enters a cube and is sliced into mini-cubes by razor wire, and it definitely caught the attention of those who watched it. As the movie continued we followed a group of people as they tried to figure out why they where there, what was happening, and how they could get out of there alive given that some of the cubes were verily dangerous. And the film ended with the mystery unresolved and the people applauded and thought that it was a fairly provocative and effective little horror film. Then the money lenders in Hollywood decided they there might be riches to be made from doing a bigger and better version of the "Cube," and lo, they produced "Cube 2: Hypercube." But the people were not fooled and they realized that the sequel had little to do with the original beyond the fact that well, there are a whole bunch of cubes. And the sound of lamentation was loud, with much gnashing of teeth and rending of garments, and the people prayed that if there was another film in this series that they would go back to what made the original film so good. Then the money lenders laughed in the temples of their offices and said to each other, "Come, let us do what they ask, but in a way that will make them regret that they did not lavish more money upon the sequel that we have made."
The title "Cube Zero" is enough to indicate that writer-director Ernie Barbarash, who scripted "Cube Two: Hypercube," is going back to the start. But to reassure the audience that this film is an attempt to get back to at least the spirit of the original you once again get an opening scene in which somebody enters a cube and they die a horrible death. In fact, it is an even more gruesome death than what we say in "Cube," mainly because the victim lives after the very bad thing happens to him. The cubes this time around are about as primitive compared to the orignal cubes as the hypercubes were more advanced. As soon as you are see these cubes you have to be thinking "prequel," strictly on the basis of the obvious disparity in the technological level (think submarine hatches). But as was the case with "Cube 2," there is really nothing concrete in "Cube Zero" to convince us that this film is connected to the original "Cube" beyond that basic idea that they involve a deadly game involved with cubes (this would be the same as saying "Any Given Sunday," "Friday Night Lights," and "The Longest Yard" are all football movies, and the game is the same, but they are not part of a trilogy).
However, despite the promising start (there are people who will stop watching the film because they are not going to want to see anything worse than what happens in the first couple of minutes), "Cube Zero" has a serious flaw. Whereas "Cube" left us completely in the dark as the figure disappeared into the bright light and "Cube 2: Hypercube" had a final scene where we get to look behind the curtain for a few hints as to what is going on, "Cube Zero" decides early on to let us go outside the cube and find out what is going on (or at least more clues along those lines). That means the success of this film depends on how much the audience buys into and likes the "big secret," and in that regard "Cube Zero" does not fare as well as "The Village" (and we all know how vilified that film was by fans and critics). After all, the whole plot line regarding what is happening outside the cubes does not solve the mystery of the original "Cube," which it cannot fairly do since it is a different director and writer, any more than somebody could make a "Pulp Fiction" sequel and explain what is in the briefcase.
Those of us who liked "Cube" will find "Cube Zero" an improvement over "Cube 2" but not up to the standard of the original, but we pretty much knew we would come to that conclusion going into this 2004 film. Once again we have a group of desperate people trying to make their way out of the cubes, and the fact that this time there are not individuals who have necessary skills that can work in combination to save them gives away that the body count will be higher this time around. Being able to watch the watchers takes away some enjoyment as well, because it was always easier to watch the mice in the maze and critique their endeavors than it was to put yourself in their position. By the time the one-eyed Willie Wonka figure shows up in this movie you are pretty much committed to going along for the ride, but not exactly enthralled. Maybe there will be a fourth movie in this series, because it could end up being another one of those Hollywood puzzle boxes, like in "Hellraiser," where they just keep making these movies until they finally get it right.
Movie Review: Prequel Far Better Than the Sequel: Logically Silly But Fairly Enjoyable 'Dead-or-Alive' Thriller
Summary: 3 Stars
Considering the enormous disadvantage, `Cube Zero' did a fairly good job of being enjoyable Sci-fi thriller. Though the fact doesn't change that the truly innovative Cube is only the first one, `Cube Zero' is not as bad as the terrible `Cube 2.'
The basic premise of `Cube Zero', prequel to the first one, remains the same, but the difference becomes clear to us soon as the film begins. That is, the traps and deaths have become nastier than the two others, as you see the demise of the first "subject." Actually, it is probably the nastiest death you ever see in the `Cube' trilogy.
Another difference is a more substantial one. In `Cube Zero,' a young computer operator Wynn (Zachary Bennett, who looks like young Charlie Sheen) records and monitors the deaths in the deadly cubes with his partner Dodd in the dark control room. They receive orders from the higher authority, never questioning what they are doing, until Wynn is interested in one female Cassandra in the cube, and finds that there is no consent form signed by her.
[SILLY BUT ENTERTAINING] Consent form? Are you serious? `Cube Zero' makes such a misstep as that every fifteen minutes, but the film provides as many good (but slightly silly) ideas, and as a result the ride is fairly enjoyable. There is no claustrophobic atmosphere or the insightful observations about the human nature that you found in the original. `Cube Zero' is a kind of dead-or-alive game (especially in the second half).
What is remarkable about the film is the production designs of the cubic rooms and the monitor room. The cubes, which must be one-generation earlier than that of the original film, is made with rougher workmanship, and the deadly traps are more unsophisticated (which means more pains to the victims). The mishmash designs of the monitor room are better than the cubes themselves, and the incongruous combination of the state-of-the-art computer with grey old filing cabinets is a nice idea.
But still there are many bad things in it, and they are really bad. The acting from the principal characters is acceptable, if not great. But the worst is the bureaucratic section which is represented by the characters in suit. When they appear, the film suddenly (and unwittingly) becomes a unfunny comedy, and one irritating character Jax with plastic eye virtually ruins the film, swinging a stick, speaking like a magician hired for a child's birthday party. And the ending that is supposed to connect to the first `Cube' looks simply a forced one.
Still I enjoyed it as mindless fun, as so-so B-thriller with some scares and gores. Not as great as `Cube,' but far better than `Cube 2.'
Movie Review: Not Bad, For a Prequel!
Summary: 3 Stars
I first watched 'Cube' in 1998 and thought the film uncommonly good (particularly for a Canadian low budget film). Did I ever think it needed a sequel, let alone a prequel? No! Ater seeing thi prequel (I have no desire to see the universally panned sequel) do I NOW think a prequel was in order? Not particularly, but the film was still half-way decent.
First, Cube Zero is the kind of film, like Star Wars, Episode III, that is ONLY interesting IF you care about getting answers left by the film's predocessor(s). That is, if you did not see Cube, or if you saw Cube and did not find yourself bothered by questions about the Cube's purpose, etc, then you probably will not like this film. (I DID see Cube, and while I entertained questions about the Cube's backstory, I did so casually and fleetingly. Hence, 3 stars out of 5.)
Unlike Cube and Hypercube, Cube Zero takes us outside the actual cube, and into the control room, where we meet two of the Cube's employees. One, Eric, is soon to become our main character when he realizes that one of the unwitting 'players' inside the Cube does not deserve to be there. Eric decides to obey orders and enter the cube himself in order to get her out. Now, we get to see the cube from inside and out; Eric is trying to get out, and several 'executives' are trying to get to him: dead or alive.
The good part about this film is that it was intelligent and captivating, just like the original. It also explains (or hints at) a decent amount of the Cube's backstory (though it does keep you guessing about a few things). Everything from what happens when a player reaches the 'exit' (the quotation marks are there for a reason, folks!) to why the character known as Kazan appeared in the original Cube film. Those who want at least some resolution to Cube will not be disappointed.
That being said, let's get to the bad aspects of the film. As in the original Cube film, the script was quite bad, the acting was stiff, and the characters were unidimensional and cliche to the core. Quite honestly, if my curiosity towards the cube's backstory were not providing me with incentive to keep the film on, I'd have turned it off during the first half hour.
So there it is; three stars. I still don't feel a prequel was necessary, but at least it was interesting.... to those of us who wanted backstory to Cube, that is. If that is you, this film will not disappoint. If not, look on.
Movie Review: I'm a big fan of the first Cube...
Summary: 3 Stars
Much to my surprise, Cube Zero popped up on Showtime this week.
I'm a big fan of the original Cube. It was nice to see a low budget flick that demanded the use of brains as well as having life or death stakes. There were genuine surprises in Cube that held up well under second and third viewings and Nicole De Boerr is, well, remarkable.
Cube 2: HyperCube was pretty horrible. Slick ideas but the basic plot sucked. Assuming someone could build a hypercube, I find it a little ludicrous that, being able to screw with spacetime and quantum events, someone would then choose to torture people like that. Then the ending...without spoiling, it endangered my fairly happy view of both movies. The first movie was good enough to equivocate my opinion of the two. Maybe it was because the first one never left the Cube. In it, you were as trapped as the poor souls inside.
Now, Cube Zero comes along. Hypercube must have banked some bucks to have created demand for a continuation. Its nowhere near as good as Cube, but its certainly better than Hypercube. For the first time, you have an explanation, however implausible, for the Cube, a detailing that there were more than one and why they were created. Not sure I bought the explanation, but at least there is one.
Only one of the characters was of any interest and that is only mild. There's now both supersoldiers and bad guys (really bad). The stakes are raised by throwing a child into the mix (and then out again) and then raised yet again.
That last 'raising' of the stakes is the killer. The cool thing about the Cube was the presumption that if you were smart, thought your way through, you might be able to get the hell out of there. Oh yes, it would also help if you didn't have to deal with violent co-survivors. But now in Cube Zero, they're messing with your head, your memory, your intelligence. Instead of being trapped with your basic tool kit (your head) you don't even get that.
Not as much a mess as Cube 2, but if this was the first entry, I wouldn't have bothered with any more.