Resident Evil : Afterlife 3D

L'intrigue serait suffisante pour un film normal pendant 15 minutes, mais elle est gonflée à 100 ici et finit même au moment où elle devrait devenir plus intense. Le pillage flagrant des scènes spécifiques de Matrix ou de l'Île de Bay, plongé dans une logique de jeu vidéo radicalement orientée vers le "lavage de cerveau", confirme simplement qu'Anderson ne se soucie pas du tout de ce que les autres pensent de lui. Et il en profite. Il savoure l'image sexy des trois personnages féminins (y en a-t-il encore une de plus excitante ?) ainsi que la mise en scène exquise (le meilleur élément du film), combinant de manière contrastée des nuages de poussière et des tuyaux métalliques putrides avec des pièces d'un blanc immaculé. Resident Evil: Afterlife est une fétichisation ultime en 3D, avec une débauche plastique et un méchant énorme armé d'une hache. C'est une débauche visuelle très agréable à regarder. Russell Mulcahy a élevé la série au niveau d'un film d'action apocalyptique avec le troisième volet, mais Anderson l'a ramenée dans les limites du jeu vidéo. (01/10/2010)

Go ahead and get mad at me, but even in the traditional dimension, I enjoyed it as much as all the other films in the series. I have no love for the original Capcom franchise, but the movie series, spoiled by the hellish B-movie director Paul Anderson, always reliably puts me in a gaming mood, even if there’s really no plot, and if there’s meant to be one, it's the same thing over and over again. The fact is that it’s never boring, the slow-motion shots are not annoying, and the fetish of stolen action, which is mostly unleashed by girls, is damn emphatic. Subjectively, I have nothing to complain about. 3 ½ [I’m tempted to enjoy this romp using the effects of Cameron’s technology.] (26/10/2010)

A stupid movie that tries to be incredibly cool, but wherever the director sets his foot, grass doesn't grow for seven years. The action scenes are dull with unbelievably long slow-motion shots, not-so-great characters, no plot progression whatsoever, and throughout the entire film, we only change locations maybe two or three times – very little for an action flick of this type. The ending and the main villain are not good either. We're basically back to zero again. The 3D definitely helps, not all the details are completely terrible. There are a few usable moments, but that is barely enough for a below-average rating. And this is considering the whole series, which didn't start off bad at all. (17/10/2010)

Over-stylized and ultimately laughable in the most negative sense. Anderson takes the series back under his wings and thus returns it exactly according to my expectations into the waters of dull mediocrity. The perpetually slowed-down action quotes all the parts of Matrix, the actors literally kill it with their performances (surprisingly even the completely exhausted Milla), and the plot only moves forward thanks to the nonsensical behavior of the characters or glaring logical mistakes. Unbearable like the first two parts, but Afterlife is not. Its transparency and simplicity predispose it to a relatively brisk story and a few cool action moments. In everything else, however, the expected tragedy. (26/11/2010)

The third instalment Resident Evil improved the reputation of the franchise, just like Paul W.S. Anderson with Death Race, so I started to look forward to Afterlife when it was announced. At least until I saw the first posters and trailers, which openly shared the unpleasant fact that, instead of horror, this time it would be a computer generated 3D action orgy – an incredibly boring and sterile orgy. Every scene leaves a sad fake impression, the performances are pathetic and the script is laughable. I can’t call this technological promo titled Resident Evil: Afterlife a film. 1/10 (08/10/2010)