"The Chronicles of Riddick" Movie Review

The Chronicles of Riddick came out 4 years after Pitch Black (2000) as a sequel. It tells the adventures of Riddick (Vin Diesel) five years after the events of Pitch Black, when the Necromongers, an invading empire, comes onto Helion Prime, the planet that Riddick happens to be on, trying to take out the whole human race.

            

How was the acting?

The Chronicles of Riddick stars Vin Diesel, Thandie Newton, Karl Urban, Colm Feore, and Judi Bench. Vin Diesel returns in this film and was very good like he was in Pitch Black, but none of the other cast returned, so it caused this film to have different acting than the first. Thandie Newton, playing Dame Vaako, did alright. In some scenes, Dame Vaako was a believable character, but in some, she was not. Newton had trouble handling the material when Vaako was supposed to be menacing. Vaako is only being menacing about ¼ of the time, though. Karl Urban played someone named just Vaako, and did not play Vaako that well. Urban also had a hard time playing a menacing character, with Vaako was supposed to be about half the time. He was able to play a menacing character better than Thandie Newton, though. Colm Feore, playing the big role of the leader of the Necromongers, Lord Marshal, did a mediocre job playing Marshal. He was slightly believable, but I wouldn’t see him as the leader of the Necromongers. Judi Bench played Aereon almost horribly. She was incredibly unbelievable, it was incredibly easy to tell that she was acting, she always had the same look on her face, and when she had dialogue with another character, she failed at giving the correct impressions. The acting, overall, was not that great.

            

            How was the writing?

            The writing of this film had some alright character dialogue, but the screenplay seemed like it was written in two days. It seemed lazy and just slapped together because it repeated some lines from Pitch Black, it had repetitive aspects, the story lines stayed the same, and it had cliched, cheesy lines. That’s basically all I can say about the bad screenplay for The Chronicles of Riddick.

            

            Did it have an interesting premise?

            I felt the premise for the movie was not lazy, but it was extremely ridiculous. Pitch Black had a simple premise, which worked for it. The Chronicles of Riddick tried to be big, but did not pull it off. They went incredibly too far. The Necromongers want to take out the whole human race? That’s an incredibly ridiculous story. As the film goes on the events change it up to go even further down into the abyss that it had created for itself. The story’s only turn just caused for a higher number on the stupidity scale the movie. Lastly, I talk about the way the film ends… The ending was incredibly outrageous and hits the floor of the abyss the film goes into.

            

            Was it entertaining or boring?

            The Chronicles of Riddick was all over the place with what’s supposed to be character development with dialogue, what’s supposed to be characters having problems with them killing Necromongers, and what are supposed to be thrilling action sequences. First off, the dialogue with the character was bland and uninteresting, so it was boring. Second, people killing the Necromongers got old after three or four those sequences. Third, only some of the action sequences were enjoyable, the rest were “blah”. Some of the action sequences were even boring. The film had a few slow parts, which were boring, but it also had boring scenes that weren't slow, they were just boring. The film did have entertaining mindless parts with special effects and graphics, but it was only enjoyable about 1/5 of the time, and only had a few scenes I would call “good”.

            

            What things in particular did I like about it (that I haven’t already said)?

            Some of the special effects were good in the film, and some aspects and characters of the movie were interesting. The film also had enjoyable parts, and wasn't extremely miserable to sit through.

            

            What things in particular did I dislike about (that I haven’t already said)?

            Some of the special effects were bad, and the ones that were good were only good because it would show nothing but CGI. It also had a small number of predictable elements. It also had action sequences with camerawork done so poorly that it didn't just have the “shaky cam” elements, but it made me nearly dizzy.

            

            How was it overall?

            The Chronicles of Riddick had a small number of good scenes, some enjoyable scenes, many entertaining scenes, has some good acting, some alright writing, and I didn’t sit through it in pain, but it has boring slow scenes, boring scenes that aren't supposed to be slow, many bad writing elements, some mediocre acting and some bad acting, incredibly ridiculous premise, a large amount of stupid elements, not well done events, poorly done camerawork, and an outrageous ending.

            

            What’s this film’s rating?

            Off of my rating system, I rate The Chronicles of Riddick “Don’t watch this if you’re looking for a good movie”.
            Off of the grading rating system, I give it a D+.
            Off of the out-of-100 rating system, I give it a 36/100.

            

            Do I recommend this film?

            I do not recommend this film because I think about it negatively. Overall, I didn’t really enjoy it, so I would not tell someone else to watch it.

            

            Will I buy this film?

            Since I don’t recommend The Chronicles of Riddick, I will not buy this film. I will not look forward to watching it again, and I will try my best not to watch this film again.