Doomsday (2008) | REVIEW

Woah...long time no update. I know. Same ol' excuse; I've been extremely busy. Anyway, I checked out the unrated version of Doomsday yesterday and decided that I have to review this flick one way or the other; it's just too damn bad to let pass! I know there are people out there who probably enjoyed the film but in all honesty, 30minutes into the movie and I began hating it! Before I go on...

This Flick Is About......
-------------------------------------------------------
Doomsday is a 2008 British science fiction action film written and directed by Neil Marshall. The film takes place in the future, where Scotland has been quarantined due to the onset of a deadly virus. When the virus emerges in London, political leaders send Major Eden Sinclair (Rhona Mitra) to Scotland to find a cure based on evidence of survivors. Sinclair and her team run into two groups of survivors, marauders and medieval warriors. This is obviously where Sinclair's mission gets tough as she has to overcome the odds that are stacked against her and derive a cure out of all the madness that has blanketed Scotland!
--------------------------------------------------------

That synopsis rocks, to say the least. It makes for a very enjoyable movie based on a specific theme with its own twists and turns. Sure, movies set during post-apocalyptic events are a dime a dozen in Hollywood and the genre itself has become somewhat of a shortcut for directors hellbent on making a mainstream breakthrough, but who doesn't enjoy a good flick based on the sort of plot described above? End Of Days? I Am Legend? Mad Max? Yeah they all have their downsides but they all make for excellent popcorn movies to say the least. Doomsday could've been in the 'enjoyable popcorn movie' league, but instead they decided to fall under the 'gritty, gruesome, and pointlessly gory' category for some reason. Let me elaborate.

See, in my opinion, there's horror / gore / disgusting-ness with a concept and then there's the type that makes no sense at all. While Doomsday markets itself as a unique take on the post-apocalyptic scenario, it falls short in every single way possible. It doesn't deliver, it doesn't entertain as much as it disgusts the audience, and it doesn't portray itself as a relatively different sort of movie. It comes off as a B-grade no- brainer that initially had the potential of being something special. The posters were good, the marketing was done well, and for some reason Europe seems more believable as a nation hit by Armageddon so Doomsday has all the right ingredients. Europe, the apocalypse, bad guys, and a hot chick. So why did it fail? Because there was a good theme, a nice plot, a solid concept, but horrible execution. What could've been pulled off in 15minutes was dragged to form a near-2 hour mesh-up of disturbingly gory scenes. It's actually hard to eat anything while watching this film. Is it really that repulsive, you might ask. Well, yeah! Without spoiling anything, I'm gonna elaborate on a single scene from Doomsday which will give you an idea of what I'm talking about. In this scene, a bunch of people fry a man, set him on their table, start to slice his crispy lil' self up and then begin having him for dinner. Want me to repeat that? Yeah, they fry the guy and then begin eating him. Unless you're Hannibal Lecter (who'd probably have an eruptive orgasm if he read what I just had to say / watched the movie), this is just way more disturbing than Doomsday should have been.

I'm not against extremely horrific films. But like I said, there's gore based on concept and then there's just pointless blood and severed limbs. I loved 300 and that had violence from start till finish. It had severed limbs...but ones that were necessary to the film. What kind of a war epic doesn't have severed limbs? What is this, a pillow fight? So in 300, gore and violence and flying heads were expected and accepted. They didn't overdo it, either. As demented as this may sound, the brutality in 300 is art in its own form. It's perfectly balanced. The same goes for movies like Saw or Hostel or something that tells you straight off that you should expect eyes popping out of sockets, knee caps getting crushed by sledgehammers, and nude chicks getting stabbed in the shower so many times that it isn't funny or sexy anymore. Doomsday, however, is marketed as something with more action and kickass violence. Instead, it just pulls through with so much unnecessary blood and so many brutalized bodies that it gets annoying and boring. Where are the cool fight scenes? Where are the awesome weapons that nuke the ugly bad guys? Where's the logic for Pete's sake? I guess in an effort to create a cult-following director Neil Marshall gave his film an overdose of needless puke-inducing scenes which eventually killed the movie overall.

Does the film has any good sides? I like Rhona Mitra, that's one good thing. I like the concept behind the film and the basic idea of it. And I like the consistency of grittiness. But take note, none of these simple positive pointers will save any part of the film. The acting is mediocre and the soundtrack isn't anything beyond the ordinary. Rhona Mitra tries to pull off the 'Selena (Underworld)' look too much that it eventually becomes embarrassingly obvious.

Leave it to me and I'd say you're better off not watching Doomsday. But since that's just my take on things, you know how to watch it without having to waste any money. To me, it isn't worth the time and it doesn't live up to expectations if there actually were any in the first place. Doomsday could've been something big, something special, but it ends up being a montage of uselessly bloodbath-ish scenes that seriously get on your nerves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrap : Doomsday gets a 1.0 out of 5.0. Why not lower? Because despite all its flaws it had (like I said) a concept to it and hey, at least Rhona Mitra tried. Miss this and you are missing absolutely nothing, people.