Sainte-Adèle

212 user reviews

6.1

/10
Average votes grouped by age and by sex:
Age: 1-12 13-17 18-25 26-35 36-49 50+ Total
Men:
Votes:
-
0
7.7
6
7.8
17
6.7
31
5.5
40
5
30
6.1
124
Women:
Votes:
9.5
2
9
2
5.8
13
6.7
8
5.9
28
6
22
6.2
76
Total:
Votes:
9.5
2
8
8
7
31
6.7
40
5.7
72
5.5
54
6.1
212
Total includes those who didn't specify sex.



Reviews from 1 to 50 (total: 212)


Filter reviews

The Grey is interesting for about 15-20 minutes. Then, I completely lost interest, because of all the elements that don't really make sense.

5/10zygoto78@ - 273 reviews
8.8.2012 - age: 26-35


No. Redeeming. Qualities. This was pure bad, which is misleading because Liam Neeson is normally very respectable. Not even he could save this trainwreck. Dermot Mulroney was quite entertaining but there was simply no plot to speak of, dialogue was lame and tiresome. It's like the producers played a big practical joke on everyone. Avoid at all cost because they don't get much worse than this. It borders on B movie!

3/10nanolovesjesus@ - 78 reviews
28.6.2012 - age: 36-49


Big disappointment. Expected much more than unrealistic and ludicrous survival strategies and bad dialogue. It was like a plane crash in the hood, every second word was the F-bomb. The plot was weak. The ending was even weaker.

6/10crooker41@ - 161 reviews
23.6.2012 - age: 36-49


In this man versus wilderness film, we feel the harsh conditions men are subjected to in their attempt to survive. Liam Neeson easily carries this film with some good supporting cast.

7/10paulleslie12@ - 406 reviews
14.6.2012 - age: 36-49


I usually like Liam Neeson in most movies but not a big fan of this one. Hard to believe that wolves would act this way, hard to connect with any of the characters, and the wolves also looked pretty phoney. I thought the crash scene was fairly well done but the story went downhill after that.

4/10mwhal@ - 103 reviews
3.6.2012 - age: 36-49


It was okay. Lots of positive hype for it but it's a pretty simple story. The wolves look horrible though and it really detracted from the movie considering everything else looked authentic.

6/10parker_2@ - 297 reviews
1.6.2012 - age: 36-49


Well Liam is excellent but the ending leaves something of a bad taste in your mouth. So while the movie takes you on a 2 hour long journey, the end is not worth the wait.

6/10sacoca_@ - 653 reviews
25.5.2012 - age: 26-35


Probably a 6.5, but meh. Not a bad flick, but some out to lunch scenes that just didn't make sense. There was one part where they had to cross an obstacle, and it was pretty impressive, to get away from the wolves. What transpires is just foolish. I mean, how did the wolves figure that situation out. Lots of that kinda stuff. The whole time you're asking yourself, come on! Liam was pretty bang on though, and the scenery was kinda epic. Not a bad movie, not a great movie.

6/10rob_ontario18@ - 83 reviews
10.5.2012 - age: 26-35


Very unrealistic movie. No attempt by survivors to survive other than walking into the unknown wilderness. The basics of bushcraft escaped them. Was disgusted and knew they would all die one by one.

4/10lynxear@ - 11 reviews
5.5.2012 - age: 50+


A crew of oilfield workers survive a plane wreck only to be in the middle of the arctic surrounded by wolves. My interpretation, purgatory at its best, the devil dogs close behind, awaiting another soul. Though maybe each survivor can make up for their past mistakes by honoring one another with compassion, or lack their of, and define their true colors resulting in eternal judgement delivered by merciless demon hounds.

8/10photosundown@ - 25 reviews
2.5.2012 - age: 26-35


Suspense was there but I kinda knew where it was going too. Glad I rented it instead.

6/10shazjoao@ - 1728 reviews
9.4.2012


Note a very noteworthy nor memorable film. Stereotype characters with thin plot line. Watching Neeson is the only redeeming feature.

5/10sigalius@ - 2 reviews
2.4.2012 - age: 50+


Good action movie. Realistic in a lot of ways. The scenery alone is worth the money. Liam Neeson does a great job in this film. Very touching ending.

7/10orkelly@ - 80 reviews
18.3.2012 - age: 50+


There is plenty of suspense but a few instances where The Girl Guide Handbook would have really helped these guys out (how to dress a wound, how to protect yourself from a snowstorm in a very snowy area, etc.) Because of that, you can't give this film a higher rating. Also, if you go see it, stay until AFTER the credits roll. Most of the audience left during the credits and didn't see a final shot, shown after the credits rolled, that changes the ending of the story! There is NO indication during the rolling of the credits that something else is coming. I read about the ending on-line after seeing the film; I missed it at the cinema :(

6/10damedenise@ - 10 reviews
14.3.2012 - age: 50+


Not a very well done movie, I love surviver movies, and this 1 bites when you remember how much time and money you wasted seeing it. Wolves don't eat people or hunt them, domestic dogs are by far more dangerous with 100s of reported attacks every year. With less than 10 reports of wolf attacks in over 100 years why would anyone think this film's story line is remotely plausible. Too bad this story lacks imagination, the setting's great with good actors.

5/10james@ - 3 reviews
3.3.2012 - age: 26-35


This movie is a masterpiece, definitely gonna be one of the best movies of all time. If you read any dislike comments, that's because they are young; this movie is not meant for kids. Only 17 and over; unless you are "Grown Up" for your age. Such a heart-felt movie, while dealing with the most ridiculous situation. MUST WATCH.

9/10zylex@ - first review
3.3.2012 - age: 18-25


Boring not worth admission. To predictable, please Liam don't waste a great talent.

5/10skipper@ - 4 reviews
1.3.2012 - age: 50+


Ridiculous. Slow. Sensational. Bad acting.

2/10jaime@ - 4 reviews
1.3.2012 - age: 36-49


More BS about wolves. Worst movie I have ever seen.

1/10crazyhorse44@ - first review
29.2.2012 - age: 50+


This movie was terrible! It was extremely depressing, had no plot and no redemption - not for the characters and not for the movie. Too bad about Liam Neeson being in it, cause I thnk he's a pretty good actor...

2/10carebear@ - 10 reviews
25.2.2012 - age: 36-49


I like Liam Neeson but he must have been hard up for cash to make this movie... I could almost predict who was going to be eaten next... the sound was poor too! Very hard to hear what they were saying... very disappointed in the movie as a whole... and the ending sucked.

5/10rickbi@ - first review
25.2.2012 - age: 50+


[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
This is the first film in a long time that portrayed a true human drama. The men start out raw and base, then find their individual humanity through suffering. One may benefit from reading "Man's Search for Meaning" by Viktor Frankl prior to viewing the film. If you saw the film and did not like the ending because it did not play out the final conflict, then you went to the wrong film. The ending was perfect. Go see Star Wars next time.

10/10j.lewis.hoffman@ - first review
25.2.2012 - age: 50+


It's a very good movie, and exciting to watch.

8/10bernilgilbert@ - first review
24.2.2012 - age: 26-35


Amazing movie, a good nail bitter! I recommend it to everyone! A must see.

9/10adam_weinstein@ - first review
24.2.2012 - age: 18-25


[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
The plot was far from the truth as far a the behaviour of wolves - but I knew this before going and Liam Neeson said so in an interview "These are MOVIE wolves" he said. Some parts are too far fetched - survivors jumping a 30' ravine as the wolves are on their trail behind them only to find another pack of wolves waiting at the base of the tree that they just jumped over the gorge to - must have been wolves with telepathy knowing that the survivors would be across the revine? The cinematography is excellent - Liam Leeson is good - a good story to watch if you can put your knowledge of wolves away for 2 hours.

7/10doc_bard@ - first review
24.2.2012 - age: 50+


[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Liam Neeson is the only survivor of a weekend in the woods. It is the worst story of survival I have ever seen. The characters are cardboard and the drama is false. I was actually cheering for the wolves so this movie could end. Everything and I sincerely mean everything that this movie did was the wrong choice. Stupid and wrong. Next time, they should make a realistic movie.

4/10donovan.bd@ - first review
23.2.2012 - age: 36-49


Here's one that u can't miss for an adrenaline rush. Where survival is the key. Good cast, characters & story that must battle the elements of the cold, rogue wolves, serious injuries & growling need for hunger. This is a keeper for Blu Ray or DVD.

8/10lb10jc82@ - 72 reviews
23.2.2012 - age: 26-35


Great movie, I loved the suspense and the survival story in it. I definitely wouldn't recommend it for young kids though. I found it a gripping story about how the ruthless side of nature can test you. But in this movie it tests the audience as well as the characters. I thought the wolves were a bit exaggerated in how territorial they were. I loved the plot and thought Neeson gave a gripping performance, possibly the best I've ever seen him give. [...]

7/10kclos90@ - 12 reviews
22.2.2012 - age: 18-25


I did not think I would like this movie simply because I thought it would be a movie about a guy chasing wolves... turns out the story is way different. Some say that the ending is blah, I think it was pretty obvious how the movie ended. I truly enjoyed this movie.

9/10georgiana.stroe@ - 84 reviews
22.2.2012 - age: 26-35