City of Ember (2008)

I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

For some reason after we took the state exams when I was in the 8th grade we had to watch this movie. I think I almost preffered taking the exam as opposed to this garbage. The effects are bad. The story is convoluted and stupid. The acting is bad. Everything about this movie is cheesy and dumb and boring. I would not recommend this movie.

The sets are beautiful and the acting is very good (I am very critical of child/teen actors in general but the main characters were great fits for their roles). The movie is slightly cartoonish in the exaggerated stereo-types shown. The world they inhabit is simplistic and the people are mostly friendly and helpful to each other. It is not a dark movie despite the ominous feelings of doom approaching. The lead up is rushed and I'm not sure if really young viewers would get the gist of what's going on. The rest of the story-line is easy to follow and interesting enough to engage all age groups. Some of the action sequences didn't make a lot of sense which I forgave. I just let logic go at some point near the end and enjoyed the experience.The giant mutated animals had no explanation, and didn't progress the story-line at all. I'm pretty sure they could have been dispensed with. I also thought the escape route wouldn't be the most efficient way to evacuate an entire population.Forget that stuff if you can and you'll enjoy the ride.

As with most movies based on dystopia world novels, this movie presents a unique world setting that gives the main characters their unique background and conflict that they strive to resolve. The art direction and production designing are done beautifully to complement what's being told by this movie. Also the movie put enough time to elaborate on the story's uniqueness; about the hierarchy, the division of the population, the certain resources the world needs and the critical conflict that looms to be resolved. Yet until the movie's end there seem to be one too many questions left unanswered, like the reason why the animals grew so big in the world, other ways to get out of the city (since the gopher can find it's way in whereas it would need fresh air to breathe too). The acting overall is not really a great job, even with big names such as Bill Murray and Tim Robbins in the cast list. Saoirse Ronan was still at the developing stages of her acting, while Harry Treadaway didn't have any notable acting career advancement after his not so good performance here. Bill Murray and Tim Robbins are very much underutilized here while Toby Jones here also didn't get much trust to play any greater part.

...but it never really bursts into flame in this adaptation of a somewhat popular young adult novel. Someone was obviously hoping to establish a new franchise to be exploited ala Harry Potter or the Twilight series, but alas, it was not to be, Tom Hanks support or not; "City of Ember" bombed at the box office. Problem: it's a mite too derivative (see other commentaries elsewhere) and a little too low-key for its own good. Saoirse "Hanna" Ronan is likable enough in the lead, but her co-star, Harry "Control" Treadaway, seems more of a cipher, leaving the audience somewhat indifferent to what happens to either of them, or anyone else in their poorly designed underground haven, for that matter.Sadly, there are just a few too many "Say whats?" and "Oh, c'mons!" in the scenario to allow discerning viewers to relax and enjoy willing suspension of disbelief. Underground quarters dedicated to the survival of the human race with one power source and no back-ups? How do they control their population? What happened to cultural/scientific progress/evolution? What about those ridiculous giant creatures? Job assignments by random lottery---really? That's incredibly inefficient, if not downright stupid. A lockbox with the key to eventual exit from this survival colony with no failsafe, entrusted to a single person--- really? An escape route that goes down, down, down and then forces everyone to climb up, up, up? Sadly, if one thinks too hard about the whole thing, it's just incredibly silly. None of these people remember the past? No one kept a history? And where's all the advanced machinery that ought to be running this little community? Did technology just sort of wither away? Very, very poor planning on the part of "The Builders," methinks.In its defense, "City of Ember" sports some sporty Brazil-castoff production/set design and costuming, and decent camera-work from sophomore director Gil Kenan's collaborator, Xavier Pérez "Monster House" Grobet, so I have at least mild hopes for Kenan's upcoming remake of "Poltergeist." Nonetheless, "City of Ember" fails to ignite any great sparks, and seems unlikely to spawn any sequels. This is likely a good thing. Meanwhile, folks like Bill Murray, Mary Kay Place, Toby Jones, Martin Landau, and Liz Smith take paychecks. I guess that's a good thing, too.Okay for the kiddies who may not have sufficient film/book experience to distinguish the mundane from genuine inspiration, but otherwise little more than just another example of Sturgeon's Revelation. Discriminate viewers can pass this one up and suffer no great loss.