St-Georges

The director of this film I must admit was putting a message to this film but found it like most draggy and was difficult to understand mostly towards the end. I was sort of dozing off as I think it needed a lift up to get people like myself to make it interesting and understandable for us not to feel discomfort and ease.

3/10
movieactress2002@ - 143 reviews
3.11.2007 - age: 50+

The movie wasn't bad... but it wasn't that good... it could have been done much better... it wasn't scary at all... the characters were not very real in the movie... Katie Holmes has done some great movies, but this was not one of them...

6/10
soccer_star_444@ - 9 reviews
13.2.2007

This movie is very good! Katie Holmes is wonderful and play with fire! :) The script is great too. Felicitation.

10/10
benzo_o@ - 2 reviews
6.12.2005 - age: 13-17

Katie Holmes is one of the worst actresses ever but the movie is very interesting and the ending is unexpected. If you're a fan of thrillers, you will like this one.

7/10
krayzie_lady@ - 212 reviews
3.7.2005 - age: 18-25

this movie is one of the best I've ever seen, but then, you have to be the kind of person who can relate to it on a personal level. If you've never known the extent of the damage abandonment can have on you, or experienced any subsequent rejection, you may find this movie boring. Even then, you will still have to say the acting was awesome and it left you wanting more!

9/10
mdowdle@ - first review
13.1.2005 - age: 26-35

Ummm... I didn't understand it... I mean the switching back and forth was confusing and on top of that the ending made no sense... I think it would be a better movie if I understood it... but nevertheless that Charlie Hunnam is sooo HOTT!!

5/10
diamondprincess_829@ - first review
30.12.2004 - age: 13-17

It's a good movie!!

8/10
bizz_bizou@ - first review
4.8.2004 - age: 13-17

[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
How is the end predictable? I thought the detective was going to kill Embry. I don't understand how the flashback two years earlier of her killing him could of made sense when he physically touched her since that time in which she went to the detective for help. So, all that time she thought Embry was following her... she was just visioning it? Or it had happened BEFORE? One part I am interested in knowing is how they found out the letter for her was written two years earlier... meaning she went to the house two years earlier and everything happened when she didn't know the detective. And she went to him because she was seeing it all in her dreams... and at the end she was seeing Embry there but he wasn't and the detective was realizing she had a mental problem and shouldn't go with him. So, she killed him the same way... while still seeing Embry. Wierd movie. I'm watching it again. I sound like an idiot trying to guess this all.

7/10
karissa_justified@ - first review
4.1.2004 - age: 13-17

It's a really good movie, if you understand it.

10/10
mel2442@ - first review
13.12.2003 - age: 13-17

Very weak and predictable story line, you don't have to think at all while watching it, you just have to struggle to stay awake.

2/10
crazy33@ - 65 reviews
10.12.2003 - age: 18-25

Benjamin Bratt is a very vbery hot shot in this movie.

7/10
johnny_lover1@ - first review
20.8.2003 - age: 13-17

I give this movie a 7 because it did have a good storyline even though in parts of the movie it got confusing. Great acting!

7/10
samanthakenn@ - 33 reviews
22.7.2003 - age: 13-17

This is an awesome movie Charlie is soooo fricken hott!!! It is alittle confusing but at the end you get it!!! Seeing Charlie in the movie made it fun to watch!!!

9/10
shortiegirl@ - first review
21.7.2003 - age: 13-17

Yeah I just saw it. I really liked it! But it is so fricken confusing!! I need some questions answered!! But yeah Charlie is hot!

7/10
precious9393@ - first review
18.5.2003 - age: 13-17

The movie was great!!! All I wanted to do was watch it over and over again! Charlie Hunnam is SO HOT in the movie! I love Katie Holmes she is the bOmB! Anyone who asks me about the movie I say it's the HoTTesT movie ever! This movie deserves a BIG 10 and Charlie Hunnam is a 100!

10/10
courtie741@ - first review
1.5.2003 - age: 13-17

Ok I saw this TERRIBLE MOVIE. I almost fell asleep during the movie and WISH I DID. It was terrible and Dumb and so Predictable. I would of had more fun bashing my head on the chair infront of me or seeing if I could chew my toe nails. Don't Rent this flik or go to the Theater for it So bad I wish there was a 0 rating.

1/10
curtroost@ - first review
29.4.2003 - age: 18-25

What the hell was that? The first hour I thought was great, nice story line good acting---then comes the ending? --it just stops? I thought there was at least another 30min or so left. What happened to her ex boyfriend? What a waste of time, a tale of obssesion gone wrong if you ask me!

5/10
bob14@ - first review
2.2.2003 - age: 18-25

It was such a good movie you should go see it the end is really good and it's not boring at all GO SEE IT!!!

10/10
powerl@ - 2 reviews
29.1.2003 - age: 13-17

Actors and actresses gave a stunning performances, but the story line wasn't the greatest. Could have been better.

4/10
kamani12@ - 8 reviews
8.1.2003 - age: 26-35

With a rising star like Katie Holmes I was expecting the movie to be better. The story was interesting but as the movie progressed it was to choppy and did not build any suspense at all. The ending was good with a twist but by then most of the people in the audience were asleep!

6/10
coolomondo@ - 23 reviews
27.11.2002 - age: 36-49

I thought this movie dragged, like most of the people who have written about it. The beginning was intriguing but it seemed like the middle went on and one without there being much point. However, I personally felt like the ending was worth sitting through the boring middle because it was a complete surprise. I left you kinda stunned... like "ooohhh..." This movie kept me thinking for awhile after I watched it.

7/10
korean_at_heart@ - 3 reviews
13.11.2002 - age: 13-17

Good movie for a cheap night, no oscar buzz on this one...

6/10
joshsommerfeldt@ - 6 reviews
6.11.2002 - age: 18-25

~*~ Hey I loved this movie, I can't believe so many people dissed it!!! Charlie Hunnam is soo hot, and Katie Holmes is way cool!!! Yeah, so I really liked it, go see it for yourself!!!! :)

8/10
lucky_charm07@ - 4 reviews
6.11.2002 - age: 13-17

This show was pretty good, but the best part was Charlie Hunnam!!

6/10
alyson33@ - 3 reviews
6.11.2002 - age: 13-17

The Plot was bad, like their was no meaning to the story. There were no beginning, middle or ending its just like a confusing movie. The ending didn't make much sence and it was quite boring.

2/10
candyworld34@ - 3 reviews
2.11.2002 - age: 13-17

I loved the movie. It is very original, and the end is absolutely unpredictable! Although I hate Katie Holmes, the movie is a masterpiece.

10/10
sage@ - 3 reviews
1.11.2002 - age: 13-17

I watched Abandoned last Saturday, and I can honestly say I would rather of watched Sweet Home Alabama, but unfortunately something was wrong with the movie and they couldn't play it. Katie Holmes is one of my favorites, don't get me wrong, but I felt she could of done a lot better. She has a lot more acting abilities than what she showed. I was somewhat disappointed but hopefully she makes a come back and proves she can do better!!

5/10
s_gulayets@ - first review
30.10.2002 - age: 18-25

I love this fim... very trhiller.. good actor, and creativities.. good story...

10/10
cicho@ - first review
30.10.2002 - age: 36-49

This movie could be better, the only not so good part was the ending which was pretty bad. Also some parts were pretty lame. But the movie wasn't too bad, some parts were pretty good and the actors did a good job.

6/10
vanilla_icecream33@ - first review
29.10.2002 - age: 13-17

WASTE OFFFF MONEY. If you are going on tuesdays or wednesdays, then keep those 7 bucks and go get drunk. If you are going any other day, save your 13.50 bucks and go get drunk too. DONT WATCH... very bad.

1/10
omarello@ - first review
28.10.2002 - age: 18-25

This movie was very good at the beginning, but at the end it wasn't so great. But it's not bad.

6/10
meme_123@ - first review
28.10.2002 - age: 1-12

Where was the good part? I waited and waited and the good part never came. This movie was a waste of my time and money.

2/10
poohbear785@ - first review
28.10.2002 - age: 13-17

I love Katie Holmes and Dawson's creek so I figured the movie would be really good. Was I ever dissapointed... it is not as it seems in the previews. The actors are very good but the story... sorry!!!

6/10
carolechantal@ - 12 reviews
28.10.2002 - age: 26-35

What an awful movie. Actors weren't bad but the plot was very weak. Could have been better. Good thing about it? Charlie Hunman. Don't waste your money or time on this flick!!

3/10
geoma_74@ - 7 reviews
28.10.2002 - age: 18-25

If you like Katie or Charlie, buy a poster and hang it over your bed. If you want a twist, go watch 6th sense or unbreakable for the 3th time. If you never understand movies with a twist, go see this one, perhaps you Will like it. You don't have to break your brain over this one. If you're a tourist, go and see it for the reaction of the other people. Otherwise, read a good book, have beer with some friends or don't take my advise and see it anyway. It's your decision.

4/10
silverstar39@ - 4 reviews
28.10.2002 - age: 18-25

Great movie. Really good acting by Katie Holmes and Charlie Hunnam he is so hot.

8/10
nellypooh68@ - first review
27.10.2002 - age: 13-17

This is a great movie. How can it get such low reviews?

9/10
horsepla@ - first review
27.10.2002 - age: 50+

The movie was very slow paced and I was not very impressed with the story line. The end was kind of interesting but the rest I found rather dull. If you feel you really must see it, I would wait until it comes out on home video or see it on a cheap night.

5/10
dknuutila@ - 27 reviews
27.10.2002 - age: 18-25

It was good but a little confusing you need to follow it really well!

7/10
chrissy_090@ - first review
27.10.2002 - age: 13-17

First off, Katie Holmes should just stick with Dawson's Creek and stop making stupid movies like this one. Waste of time, people. Although, I give it a 4/10 for that Charlie guy. He is HOT!

4/10
jojosavard@ - 2 reviews
26.10.2002 - age: 18-25

It was pretty good, until the ending. You think that the movie is gonna run for at least another half hour, but it just stops. Waste of time!

6/10
tombaj2@ - first review
26.10.2002 - age: 1-12

FELL ASLEEP... boring... dont waste time or money. When I awoke I was waiting for something to happen, zero, nothing. No acting, no thrill, no nothing... ugh.

3/10
joyala2002@ - 13 reviews
26.10.2002 - age: 50+

This movie was okay... it could have been better. All those flashes forward and backward in time made it a tad confusing. Thank gosh Charlie Hunnam is pretty, or else this movie would have been worse. =)

6/10
tomodachi@ - first review
26.10.2002 - age: 13-17

I have never seen a movie worse than this one.

2/10
saltychevama@ - 4 reviews
25.10.2002 - age: 18-25

I'm happy I only paid $5 for this load of crap. One of the slowest paced movies I've ever seen. When it ended a lot of people looked at each other like "What the hell was that". The highlight of the film was the guy in the bear costume. His acting career should be still going strong while Katie and Ben are on episodes of Entertainment Tonight..."What ever happened to...".

1/10
pgreer29@ - first review
23.10.2002

The movie was very bizarre, not the movie I would recommend. Very disappointed with actor Benjamin Bratt and Katie Holmes. Wait for the video!!!

3/10
kim_epp@ - 2 reviews
23.10.2002 - age: 26-35

Great flick, cuz Katie Holmes is good looking, and cuz you get to see the greatest campus... (well school really) on earth. Thanks.

8/10
jonsmith@ - first review
23.10.2002 - age: 18-25

I have just finished watching this movie tonight. Before I left for the theatre I was reading some of the comments others of you have written. I am not impressed with how easy it is for some people to cut up others with their acting and screen writing. Aside for that, I think that this movie was very good. I don't think that this movie was predictable especially not the ending unlike what most people have told you! I would have to say that no movies are really worth seeing in the theatre due to prices now a days. So use your own judgement, but do see this movie sometime either in theatre or on video!

8/10
soccerbabe980@ - first review
22.10.2002 - age: 18-25

Horrible. Avoid seeing this movie at all costs. I would rather be at church or even a funeral than have to sit through that movie again. Bad acting combined with weak storyline makes this movies one of the years worst.

1/10
somethfs@ - first review
22.10.2002 - age: 18-25

This was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. I am glad I won tickets to the première and did not have to pay for it. My friends all felt the same way and so did everyone else in the theater. I wish someone from the movie industry could have heard the comments of the people coming out of the theater. It was boring. Not even half way through we wanted to leave, but we decided to stick it out. The ending was predictable almost at once for anyone with half a brain. The acting sucked, the storyline and plot were not confusing but just plain dumb and pointless. It could have been a good storyline if it was written better, acted better and hadn't already been done a bunch of times. The actors in this movie should be ashamed of themselves for agreeing to be in this movie.

1/10
hmking@ - first review
22.10.2002 - age: 18-25

Note: The user reviews posted on this page are personal opinions of our visitors. We are not responsible for their content.

Click to see more reviews:
[1-50]  [51-95]