Rating: 
Summary: Matrix- NOT
Review: If you enjoy this genre of films then this is probably worth your time. I saw it because I was interested in seeing more of Halle Berry's work with her new academy award status. In this she proves she can play beautiful manipulative seductress very well. It could have been a good movie- some of the plot ideas and charachter parallels were good- but the movie just didn't pull it off. Baby-faced Travolta was hardly scary or awe inspiring as the evil agent promoting American values no matter the cost. Whenever he tried to come off as demonically obsessed you almost thought you were watching a comedy. If you are looking for a good action adventure that will completely blow you away, skip this. If you've got an evening to kill and love this kind of stuff, see it.
Rating: 
Summary: Just a BAD movie
Review: The only thing I can say about this movie is that it was bad. A bad plot, bad dialogue and Travolta's copyrighted bad acting. I watched this movie because of Hugh Jackman, and he was truly the only part of the movie worth watching. Several times he seemed to be marveling at the horrendous movie he found himself in. I only gave this movie one star because there was no half-star rating. Hugh Jackman fans, avoid this movie and watch him in The X-Men, Someone Like You, or Kate and Leopold.
Rating: 
Summary: What do you mean I have to "think"?
Review: Well, let's sum up the negative reviews of this one:Negative Review Excuse #1
"Well, this movie jumps around so much, and the plot is so twisty and incoherent that it isn't worth your time to figure it all out." Negative Review Excuse #2
"Well, it's painfully obvious that this whole film is merely a cobbled together string of gratuitous violence with a few sexy bits added for additional decadent flavor." Well, the truth is that Swordfish does has some twists and turns and does keep you guessing (oh my word, does that mean I have to actually THINK?) I see this as nothing but positive given Hollywood's penchant for Arnold-esque dumb-as-rocks poor excuses for "action" films. If you're too lazy to pay attention then maybe you should be sticking to reality TV and other famous less-than-brain-intensive wastes of American time. Is there violence? Yes! By the bucketload! But it isn't gritty violence, a la Pulp Fiction or Snatch. It's all very Hollywood cars-flipping-over and heavy-machine-guns-blazing sorta stuff. The kind of which we've all seen before. Some of it is actually sort of innovative, or at least a mild positive on the cool-factor scale. Why we have decided to get all puritanical and start whining against a hallmark of American cinema is beyond me. It's impressive stuff, I like it. And though the film is good, it's not quite good enough to be considered a "classic." A little too cheesy, a little too slick, and the dialogue is a little too self-conscious to be considered a great critical feat. But if you're looking for a fun action-type movie, this will hold your attention better than Mission Impossible 2, and has enough lies and deceit (misdirection?) to lower the guilt-factor significantly. It ain't art, it's a movie, and a satisfying one at that. The self-righteous should just go read a book.
Rating:
Summary: Not so bad it's good--so bad it's JUST BAD
Review: Not even fun. There are movies that are so preposterous you just have to sit back and laugh. Unfortunately, this is not one of those movies. Hugh Jackman seems in pain a good part of the time, and not because of what his character is enduring--but rather what he as an actor is having to suffer through. The other actors seem to either not sense how appalling their dialogue is and how ridiculous the action and plot are, or not care.
Rating:
Summary: just poor
Review: I want to know why the Finnish characters in this film were speaking german! There are a reasonable number of people who speak german and finnish in this world to call BS on that. Just stupid. *maybe* rent this, but only if you have 2 hours to waste on a dumb movie that doesn't even fall into the humorously bad movie category.
Rating: 
Summary: I thought this movie was pretty tight.
Review: In my opinion, all of the actors in this movie did excellent jobs at the roles they played. There was plenty of action in this movie to keep me interested, and the idea basically spawns from the theory of "fighting fire with fire." Travolta's character basically fights terrorism with terrorism. Halle Berry does an excellent job of keeping Jackman interested in the plan, which is to steal roughly 10 billion dollars from the government. The whole movie keeps you asking questions about it, which can basically make the movie worth seeing again and again, to allow you to understand what's happening. I recommend this movie to everyone (over a certain age of course). Go rent it! Go buy it! Just go see it!
Rating:
Summary: Great movie!
Review: Lots of action, computers, twists, bad guy/good guy. John Travolta was a little over the top, but Hugh Jackman and Halle Berry were great and they have excellent chemistry. Basically Hugh, stole the movie. Watch it for the action, Hugh and Halle.
Rating:
Summary: Awesome movie
Review: Okay, at parts it was silly, but either than that, it was great. John Travolta is the bad guy. A very likeable bad guy though! Than, Halle Berry was a good guy pretending to be a bad guy, but she really wasn't. Hugh Jackman and Travolta are both hackers and a cop(Don Cheadle) is chasing after them! All Stanley(Jackman) really wants is to see his daughter. Travolta will make that deal for 10 million dollars. So, their like buddies throughtout the movie. Enjoyable! Not Travolta's best, but it's darn good! Travolta's character is played a happy bad guy! This was unique. Nothing like other movies. See this movie!!
Rating: 
Summary: Swordfish? Worth it?
Review: No. Borrow it for the ten seconds that you want to watch. You know which 10 I speak of. Not worth it.
Rating:
Summary: Hokey contrived cinematic nihilism
Review: I find it strangely amusing that while this film was clearly made with the ambition to become an icon for being THE epitome of unflinching cinematic violence, it's level of style and substance never gets above that of "Howard the Duck." Don't think youre going to see another "Pulp Fiction" here.
| 
