Huievest
Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.
Dynamixor
The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.
Portia Hilton
Blistering performances.
Fatma Suarez
The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
Ian
Right! My thoughts after an hour...Derivative, predictable drivel. Psycho gets control of a smart home, monitors family - gosh, that's original! - hacks into computer system, etc, etc, etc. The authorities don't believe it. Ring any bells? It should ring a whole campanile!But if you can stick it out for an hour, it actually, amazingly starts to get more interesting. Although still largely predictable, with the obvious 'hero' stupid moves, and with more script Uh Ohs than you really want.Any attempt at redemption after an hour eventually dissolves into a hackneyed, cliched story line. Poor writing.Having said that, if you like this sort of movie, it's as good - or as bad as any! But do yourself a favour and watch a Pierce Brosnan James Bond rerun! And because or Pierce, I just can't bring myself to give it 1*!But hey - I watch these things so you don't have to!
Joshreynolds-47
I loved this film. In the sense that the acting was OK, the writing was good (Ish) and the general plot was entertaining.Why 3/10? Because of the lack of any police use. Nobody called the police when he kept turning up to family events. The police didn't catch him doing any of the hacking stuff.He doesn't call in IT people to fix his house or phone.Just the lack of common sense from the protagonist annoyed me despite the rest of the film being half decent.
Argemaluco
For better or for worse, I.T. combines two archaic recipes from the '90s in order to a cook a dish as rancid as its ingredients. Yes, it was for worse. The "cyber thriller" and the obsessive maniac" were two very formulas which were very popular during the '90s, and they were represented by movies such as The Net, Hackers, Pacific Heights and Single White Female. And, for some reason, the producers of Voltage Pictures thought it was a good idea to resurrect both clichés in a single film, with a tedious and irritating result. The villain is one of those omnipotent hackers controlling everything and instantaneously penetrating any safe system in a matter of seconds; his lair has a dozen of monitors in where his magical operative system practically anticipates his wishes and displays exactly what he's looking for. The only positive thing I can say about this piece of junk is that Pierce Brosnan managed to bring a credible performance despite the horrible screenplay he had to work with. On the opposite, James Frecheville is laughable as the villain, Stefanie Scott is just employed as a pretty face and Anna Friel doesn't have too much to do (or even say) as the mother who keeps herself aside from the situation, until she becomes a hostage during the "exciting" (boring) conclusion. In summary, I.T. doesn't work as a retro tribute, and it doesn't add anything new to the two formulas it destroys; and I wouldn't even recommend it to those people who have never seen any similar films, because there have fortunately been much better things which updated those themes and found fresh and creative twists for this century. For example: the TV series Mr. Robot as regards "cyber thrillers"; and The Gift (2015) for the obsessive maniacs. Both are much better alternatives which achieved what I.T. didn't even make an effort in trying.
ahmedq
The trailer and concept of the movie really reeled me in; I love advanced technology movies. Although the idea wasn't too bad and had potential the execution was terrible. This movie just raised my blood pressure. Really unrealistic, terrible acting, unrealistic decision making by the victim, etc. I would definitely not recommend this movie to anyone.
