Hottoceame The Age of Commercialism

GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Freeman This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

wadechurton Okay, there obviously wasn't much of a budget to begin with (this has to be the most bizarrely costumed movie 'Rome' I've ever seen), much of the 'acting' is wincingly bad and the direction is so pedestrian that the entire 90 minutes is devoid of any hint of tension, but what really makes 'Cyclops' so stunningly terrible is the woefully stupid script. Rule number one with a monster movie is 'don't show the audience the monster right away.' One would think this a very wise course of action for movie makers to follow, and especially so if their monster is as unconvincing as the titular creature here. Good enough for Spielberg, good enough for everybody. Nope, a scant minute or so into the pre-credit sequence and there he is in all his poorly-animated (he seems 'weightless' and walks like an arthritic robot) glory. Add to this the most useless Roman army ever depicted in the history of cinema. All twelve or so of them. Honestly, the 'archers' are worse than useless and the spear-toting footsoldiers adhere strictly to their frankly insane and invariably suicidal strategy that the Cyclops be engaged by no more than one man at a time. The other IMDb reviews here catalogue a great deal more ludicrous details which abound in 'Cyclops'; suffice to say that even bored kids on a rainy day would give this one around five minutes before giving it the flick. I could forgive 'Cyclops' a little of its awfulness if the thing had a sense of humour about itself, but this whole preposterous-yet-straitlaced mess doesn't even have that. There is no fair reason that a movie turns out this bad; the likes of 'Cyclops' appear simply because its makers cared more about quantity than quality.

TheLittleSongbird Don't get me wrong, I don't hate sci-fi movies or anything, but I do have a problem when it is this bad. People may write to me saying it is meant to be cheesy, it is fun lighten up or it is so bad it's good, but as much as I wanted to sort of like it there are too many problems. The production values are absolutely awful really with a very cartoony cyclops that lacks menace and instead turns out to be laughable. The script is non-existent, the plot silly to the point of incoherence, the pacing is all over the place, the music is the epitome of cheesiness and the acting is really bad from all involved. In fact, Cyclops seemed more a movie that relied on gore rather than a fun storyline and smart scripting to me. The concept at least interested me into seeing Cyclops but on viewing I'm sorry to say but I regret even doing that. 2/10 Bethany Cox

drystyx No one intends for this film to be anything but "cheese". Historical facts go out the window, but that's okay, because this is a Cyclops.This Cyclops is mean, and eats people's innards. And he can kick Hannibal the cannibal's butt. There's loads of gore for the brats, but the dorks will want more outlandish special effects. We are given more readable actions, so there is a logic of plot and story line to follow than the "video arcade" special effects the dorks would stuff down our throats. This speaks well for the director.One mark against it is the ease with which our hero communicates with the Cyclops. This went beyond cheese.And it is cheese. Lots of fun. Unlike most films, the good guys sometimes win. That's a nice twist. But what makes this into a good cheese, of the Provolone kind, are the fairly well defined characters. Besides the lead, we get several characters we can follow and believe. Gordion and Julian in particular. Even the two bad guys, Tiberius and Falco, have some saving graces. A lot of one scene characters are in for laughs, and do a lot of ignorant things, but this is understandable in human evolution for the scientific minded, because this is set in an unknown BC year, before some of the genes for stupidity vanished. And, in fact, this is Rome, where arrogance did exist in humans, which makes these foolish characters much more realistic than the illiterate masses want to admit.The female lead is ultra beautiful, at least by male standards, but isn't a "woman's woman", but more of the male fantasy woman. She doesn't fit the mode of the former, who we know survive these films, so the viewer never really knows if she'll survive. That does make for suspense.I would've given it a higher mark if there was less gore, and if the scenes where the Cyclops communicates with the hero were deleted. That was ridiculous. The story was fun, though, and entertaining.

bkoganbing One of the dopier products ever to come out of the Science Fiction Channel is this epic about the Cyclops who helps free Rome. In some alternate universe, no doubt.Actually when I was watching this film, I thought of the TV series Sliders where Jerry O'Connell and his friends keep dropping in an alternate universes in other dimensions. In this alternate universe the Emperor Tiberius is assassinated and the Roman Republic restored with the help of your friendly Cyclops.The Cyclops has been thought to be extinct, but out in the hinterlands one's been reported attacking and eating Roman merchants. Can't have that in the Empire so Tiberius played by Eric Roberts assigns Kevin Stapleton to bring him back because he'd be such a hit at the Coloseum games.Stapleton does that, but even with the beast escaping a few times and eating a few citizens Tiberius is still thinking about those lovely box office receipts for the games. When Stapleton falls out of favor Tiberius reduces him from centurion to gladiator.Yes this film is as dumb as it sounds. But I guess in the true tradition of the old Hollywood studio system, we couldn't let the sets from the television Spartacus go to waste.So with those nice Roman sets, why not a production of Julius Caesar?