Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Maidexpl Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

Paul Magne Haakonsen I remember seeing this movie back in 1992 or 1993 when it was a new movie, and remember it as being quite alright. And now in 2012 I am revisiting the movie. And I must say that it is still an alright movie. Not a groundbreaking or overly innovating movie in anyway, but still it is good entertainment.The story in "Fortress" is about John Brennick (played by Christopher Lambert) and Karen Brennick (played by Loryn Locklin) who are sent to an underground high security prison for having an illegal pregnancy. The prison is owned by the Men Tel Corporation and controlled with an iron fist by the the prison director Poe (played by Kurtwood Smith). But John Brennick wants to get to his wife and break out of the Fortress prison at all costs.The reason for why I watched this movie even back in 1992 or 1993 is because of Jeffrey Combs (playing D-Day in this movie), as I am a big fan of him and his movies. And it was very interesting to see him in a sci-fi movie like this and be out of his usual Lovecraftian horror element. In my opinion, he is the one making the best performance and having the most interesting character in the movie. But of course, that is because I am a big fan of him.Personally I am not an overly big fan of Christopher Lambert, although I think he did an okay job in this movie. But he wasn't the main attraction in my opinion. Aside from Jeffrey Combs, then Kurtwood Smith really also carried the movie well, with his great charisma and good performance.The physical effects in the movie were nicely done, given the age of the movie. As for the CGI effects, well by today's standards they are not great, but for a movie from 1992, they were quite alright."Fortress" is rather predictable, but aside from that fact, then the movie is actually good enough entertainment. Oddly enough, as I am a big movie aficionado, then I have never seen the 2000 "Fortress 2" sequel.

Munin75 In a dystopian future, a morally innocent couple is sentenced to decades of imprisonment in a high security nightmare-like prison, and plan to escape. The premise of Fortress is intriguing. It kind of reminds me of the prison scenes of the 1997 film Face/Off, which were incidentally among the better scenes of that film. Unfortunately, Fortress fails to deliver.With this premise, I was expecting an elaborate escape. The kind we got used to with old classics like The Great Escape to modern series like Prison Break, only this time set in a gritty future prison where screenwriters could invent the most terrifyingly inescapable jail imaginable and the cleverest escape plans. Fortress had none of that, since the protagonists just escaped guns blazing. What's up with the yellow and red lines on the floor? I was expecting those to be major plot points... But no. No elaborate plan, no stress, the prison doesn't even seem that bad, and the build up to the escape is practically inexistent. Speaking of build ups, did anyone care for the protagonists? I certainly didn't - that's the second major flaw. I also feel the sub-plot with the wife being coerced was a drawback. I didn't care for that, and wanted a cool escape plan. That's all the film needed! On the other hand, I was entertained for 90 minutes. I wasn't bored because the film is short enough. Had they given the film 30 minutes more and a genuinely clever build up and escape, Fortress could have been much better. Disappointing.

jmatrixrenegade This is not a great work of art but it is a great work of popcorn eating genre watching. Everyman against evil corporation in a scary future.Shades of Margaret Atwood for those who might not know who she is. ["The Handmaid's Tale is worth reading or watching -- it is quite readable Atwood, the film pretty good too.] The film should not be confused with a lesser known foreign genre flick by the same name about a schoolteacher trying to escape a different kind of danger with her school children. Again, both the film and book is worthwhile.Anyway, so, a man (Christopher Lambert, perfect genre everyman) has to escape from a prison to save his wife with the help of the likes of Jeffrey Combs (taking a break from trying to bring things to life) against the evil Kurtwood Smith (of course!). Great for late night viewing. Don't take too seriously!

DigitalRevenantX7 After making an astounding breakthrough into the horror genre with the splatter classic RE-ANIMATOR, Stuart Gordon's career has consisted of a wild string of hits & misses. His biggest miss was Fortress, a futuristic prison breakout film that was also his biggest hit, proving so popular that a sequel came out half a decade later.When I said "his biggest miss", I meant that despite being a box-office hit, the film met with a mixed reaction from critics & genre fans alike. I personally don't like the film – Fortress is sci-fi at its most brainless. It is perhaps the worst film that Gordon has ever made (not to mention being so cheesy that it will win a French cheese competition).The USA has become a totalitarian regime, with a law passed that limits a woman to one child only. Marine Captain John Brennick & his wife, who is pregnant with her second child (the first died at birth), are caught at a checkpoint & sent to the Fortress, a secluded underground prison complex situated in the middle of a desert. There, prisoners are terrorised by pain-causing implants & computer-controlled devices that censor dreams. Brennick attempts to conduct a prison breakout, no mean feat considering that the prison is virtually escape-proof.Fortress is actually a wild concoction of every sci-fi cliché under the sun, which, although entertaining in the check-your-brain-at-the-door sense, proves to be amazingly silly. First, the film shows the US adopting a one-child policy, which is rather improbable given the fact that the US is a large country & is not packed to the brim like China, thereby making such a law pointless. The implants are another thing – they are poorly designed (they can be pulled out of the prisoner's body using magnetics) & there is nothing to stop them from being passed out as waste matter. The dream censor is ridiculous to say the least – if they can eliminate wet dreams, then why are prisoners going around raping their fellow inmates. The film also shoves in cyborgs (a staple of many self-respecting genre films during the 1990s), with a cyborg governor (who acts more human than machine) & whole cyborg SWAT teams, who prove to be nothing more than convenient cannon fodder for our hero, although they do kill half the escaping party.The acting is rather mixed. Christopher Lambert does his naughty-schoolboy impression (he is one of the most wooden actors around), while his fellow inmates are a lot more believable, with Jeffery Combs playing a jittery-nutbag to perfection & Kurtwood Smith trying to be a sympathetic villain, but narrowly missing out on that role by Tom Towles. Gordon throws in his usual darkly comedic splatter, which does contribute greatly to the film's watchability, although it is a style which belongs more to the horror genre than an action film like Fortress.