Search - Godsend [UMD for PSP] on UMD for PSP

GOD Send this movie back where it came from!I beg you!

Digibong! | eternia | 05/19/2004

(1 out of 5 stars)

"God this movie was B-O-R-I-N-G!!!!
The story seemed very interesting, but poorly executed.
They practically rush through the first half of the movie in terms of their original son Adam's death to the point that you didn't even feel for them when he died and they were at loss.
One scene you see him with the latest Nikes outside the store, the next a car, a black out, a phone call, a grave site, then Robert Deniro appears with an offer they can't refuse.
The Cloned Adam is 8 years old faster than you can say jack rabbit, and this is when all the problems begin....with the movie. The parent's never seemed to have aged 1 day...I'm guessing "Oil of Olay", Robert Deniro's character was underdeveloped, you didn't see him that much in the movie, and then they come up with a stupid twist to involve his character that we've seen before but better done in a twilight zone episode.
This movie didn't even fully delve into the whole cloning thing and it's other possibilites which would've made the movie alot more interesting to fill up alot of the space where nothing much was happening.
I am still trying to figure out what was the purpose of the attempted Robbery of Greg Kinnear's character at the beginning of the movie by those thugs...and then one of them saying "no leave him alone, he's the best teacher I've ever had?" It didn't link to anything in the film except to put some no name actors on screen for some time....????
This movie was a real sleeper....don't know why I spent my money in seeing it..I guess for the curiosity on them talking about a cloned boy, I guess similar to Artificial intelligence, that movie had personality this didn't."

Should be retitled "misconceived"

Kristopher Haines | Portland, OR United States | 05/08/2004

(1 out of 5 stars)

"I thought "Godsend" was going to be a science fiction thriller along the lines of Gattacca. I thought it might even be sort of a hybrid of "Gatticca" and "A.I." The "Gattacca" angle would deal with the ethical issues surrounding the manipulation of genetics to suit our own desires. The "A.I." angle would come into play because the couple is trying to REPLACE their dead son. This issue was explored far too briefly in "A.I." partly because the son was able to come back to life. Plus, "A.I." had many more issues to tackle because the child was non-human: the hazards of unconditional love, what we as humans owe to what we create, issues of man vs. machine, obseletism, etc. etc. etc. "Godsend" on the other hand deals only with humans, and some interesting issues are raised but never resolved, in favor of being just another evil child horror film. The first of these intriguing issues is one that has been raised countless times, which has a larger role in determining who we are, nature or nurture? The second is the far-fetched but no less interesting concept of cellular memory. The third question raised is what would happen if the replacement discovered he was only a replacement? Adam, (the clone) stumbles upon pictures of the other Adam but the need to explain the photos is forgotten as the clone once again succumbs to homicidal urges. The issue of destiny is also explored briefly, (the new Adam has many close calls with automobiles, the instrument of the previous Adam's demise.) OK, I know some of you are saying, "Once you found out it was a horror film why didn't you just stay home? It's not the film's fault it wasn't what you wanted." To that I say, if it had to be horror, is it too much to ask that it be good horror? The film is purely a collection of scenes designed to make you jump, and I have to say that most of them accomplished that goal. Yet, I have cerebral palsy, which means along with many other nasty things, nature has cursed me with a hair-trigger startle reflex, and even with that working in the film's favor some of the "startle scenes" failed to hit their mark. This alone is testament to the film's gross inadequacy. And lets not forget the horrible writing and acting. If I had parents that said those cutesy-poo things to me, I would have thrown myself in front of that car on purpose. There was once a time when I would have asked, "what's DeNiro doing here?" but by now he should feel right at home. The only thing Godsent about "Godsend" is the ending, by which I mean it has one."

Great idea gone bad.

J. A Hayes | Montgomery, AL United States | 06/27/2004

(1 out of 5 stars)

"I saw Godsend in theaters about a month ago since what I wanted to see was sold out. I though it would be ok though, and the trailers looked pretty good. It starts off with an excellent concept. Greg Kinear and Rebecca Romijn-Stamos play parents who have a great life with their son, who is tragically hit by a car and killed. Robert DeNiro (the only real great thing the movie has going for it) plays a scientist who offers to secretly clone their son to make things the way they were before the accident. Sounds interesting right? Well yes, but it goes downhill from here. The concept of cloning is barely even explored in this movie, and there are scenes that still dont make since to me. Scenes that seem to have no purpose at all. Oh this movie could have been so much better but it never really answers anything. After the boy reaches age 8, he begins to see and hear strange things that all tie in to the son of the scientist who performed the cloning. This never comes together as a whole film, and the ending doesn't answer anything more than what you picked up on near the beginning of the film. It was not thought out well at all, and I regret paying to see this movie."

Darn Silly

Jayson Orelans | Greenwich, Ct USA | 05/03/2004

(1 out of 5 stars)

"Talk about your false advertisment! This film is in NO WAY a Godsend. It is a train wreck waiting to happen. And the sharp robotic movements need to stop!
Do not think for one second that just because Robert De Niro stars in this horrid Sci-fi thriller, that it's the bee's knees. In fact, don't even think about this trashy film at all. Playing the mad scientist in this dopey piece of schlock about some cloning crap I could care less about, De Niro mostly sleep walks through the role, leaving the heavy emotions to his unlucky co-stars.
The plot of Godsend seems lifted from one of those trashy, cheap horror paperbacks you'd buy in the airport to kill time on a layover-and then leave on the plane! The movie begins with a biology teacher (Greg Kinnear) bringing his son a gift. The mom (Rebecca Romjin-Stamos) takes her talkative, hyper, and downright annoying son, Adam (Some kid, probably another Culkin) out to do some Mother-Son shopping. This film has many inconsistences abound as Stamos looks more like Adam's yappy babysitter than his mother and Stamos looks practically like jailbait standing next to Kinnear!
ANYWAYZ
The brat is killed off in a freak accident and this is when the film's pacing comes to a screeching HALT! Enter Dr. Richard Wells (The best actor in the world, Mr. Robert De Niro) who tells the young couple how he can give them back their son in a new procedure. The mom is all too ready to jump in, while pop is indifferent.
When 'Adam 2' is born, he is the mirror image of the first Adam (complete with that annoying, whiny voice).'Adam' reaches his eighth birthday and begins to act crazy and have night terrors. This is when the film gets too absurd for anyone with an IQ higher than 60. Cheap scares, irrelvance, fuzzy logic. This is when you should turn off the film.
It really hurts to know that De Niro actually signed up for this rubbish. You would think that with all those other great films under his belt (Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Cape Fear), he would pass on this trash. One can tell the producers had to pay De Niro a large sum of cash to appear in this crap, and it shows! This movie has the worst special effects that look straight out the 1980's!
The two parents are helpless ( in acting skills as well) as thier rebellious, angst-driven 'son' runs amock spitting in teacher's faces, throwing temper tantrums, screaming, smoking, setting fires, exploding microwaves, swearing, and even offing fellow schoolmates.
Kinnear seems to be confused in his role. He doesn't know if he wants to be the Seventh Heaven father or Al Pacino. He breaks character beyond excuse and is unintentionally funny whenever he says "Adam?" or when he's rambling on about stupid stuff. The only time Kinnear tries his hardest not to break character is in the film's laughable climax when he confronts De Niro. De Niro, on the other hand looks like he's about to laugh his head off through the entire scene!
Rebecca Romjin-Stamos is the weak link in the acting chain of this film. Her role is basically reduced to screaming "Adam!" in every scene or crying her eyes out to the point that it gets annoying with her Dana Scully haircut. She is given little to do except walk around an old Victorian house with an early '90's cordless telophone in one hand and a Michael Myers kitchen knife in the other.
As far as the musical score goes.............bah! You've heard better pieces from your uncle who always sings in the shower. The musician of this film decided that banging random notes on a keyboard was good music. Some of the pieces sound like they've went through your mother's old Hoover vacuum cleaner. One piece sounds like a slower and more subdued version of Michael Jack's "Thriller"! Well, horrible movies should have horrible music to accompany it.
This film left the viewer with more questions than answers. Not one question was answered after the mediocre ending. Who and what are Watchers, and why has one of them gone beserk? What ever happened to Dr. Richard Wells? How exactly had Wells gotten Zachary's DNA if Zachary had been burned to a crisp? Did they even suspect that Adam killed that boy? Why did Adam wanna bump off his mom? And finally, who and what exactly is Adam at the end of this stupid film?
What a mess this film is! This movie is the equilvalent to a forty car pile-up that happens right on I-95! A pretty dumb plot, bad acting on almost all of the actors, and stupidness. The film suffers most when the lead actors are walking around on the screen together. De Niro looks wooden and stiff, Kinnear looks like he forgot his lines, Stamos looks like she has a bad hangover, and the brat seems a little too interested. The actors are a little fine alone, but Kinnear and Stamos lack chemistry and leaves the viewer with a bad taste in their mouth. De Niro and Kinnear look like this is all a joke. Why is the brat always hyper?! Stop that! I wasted a good one hundred some odd minutes that I can never get back on this 'movie' just to see actors who look like they've been abducted by aliens and then sent back to Earth trying to remember the last past two hours.And the refrences to other films needs to stop! This film took from Sixth Sense, The Exorcist, and a little undertones of The Shining. Neither of which can save the movie (just like Mr. De Niro). With dumb characters, dumb acting, and '80's grade special effects, it's a wonder why this film wasn't released on a 'straight-to-video' basis. Who's gonna clean up this mess? Not me! Shame on all y'all for making this Omen-wannabe, overwrought update to The Bad Seed!"