Hyper is a prefix meaning "over". It has a common meaning of the extreme of a thing. So, if "Cube" was good then "Hypercube" should be great. Right? Wrong.
Everything was wrong with this. All of the things that made "Cube" endearing were totally lacking in "Hypercube". This time there were ten people in the cube except they only focused on six of them. There was the misplaced alpha male, Simon (Geraint Wyn Davies), who is only there to create conflict. The ultra-protective nurturing doctor, Kate (Kari Matchett), who's there to help everybody. Two handicapped persons, Sasha (Grace Lynn Kung) and Mrs. Paley (Barbara Gordon), both whom were typical burdens until their function was revealed. Two engineer types, Max (Matthew Ferguson) and Jerry (Neil Crone), both whom were unwitting participants in the creation of the cube. I think that covers the very same characters that were in the first version. There were a few other ancillary characters thrown in there but their purposes were insignificant and more-or-less a diversion. Ten cube captives in all and ten terrible actors.
The cube itself was a suped up version of its predecessor and it wasn't any better. It was like the classic car that's stripped of its original parts and replaced with a bunch of gaudy upgrades. It may look shinier and newer but it doesn't hold the same value. This cube was a CGI nightmare. Now it moved silently and had a bunch of cartoonish ways of killing the cube members. I know that CGI was still a relatively new toy in 2002 but it cheapened the movie and made it less likable.
Even the story was a sham. They tried to give us a little more information while still leaving us guessing. It did nothing to enhance the plot.
If I were to run down a checklist grading this movie here's what it would look like:
Acting: exaggerated version of all the characters in part one, all more terrible.
Story: More convoluted than the first.
The cube: Hyperized. In attempts to make it more uncrackable they made it more absurd.
My math isn't good enough to get me out of a cube but I know when things don't add up. Poor acting, poor story and a cheap set equals bad movie.
Everything was wrong with this. All of the things that made "Cube" endearing were totally lacking in "Hypercube". This time there were ten people in the cube except they only focused on six of them. There was the misplaced alpha male, Simon (Geraint Wyn Davies), who is only there to create conflict. The ultra-protective nurturing doctor, Kate (Kari Matchett), who's there to help everybody. Two handicapped persons, Sasha (Grace Lynn Kung) and Mrs. Paley (Barbara Gordon), both whom were typical burdens until their function was revealed. Two engineer types, Max (Matthew Ferguson) and Jerry (Neil Crone), both whom were unwitting participants in the creation of the cube. I think that covers the very same characters that were in the first version. There were a few other ancillary characters thrown in there but their purposes were insignificant and more-or-less a diversion. Ten cube captives in all and ten terrible actors.
The cube itself was a suped up version of its predecessor and it wasn't any better. It was like the classic car that's stripped of its original parts and replaced with a bunch of gaudy upgrades. It may look shinier and newer but it doesn't hold the same value. This cube was a CGI nightmare. Now it moved silently and had a bunch of cartoonish ways of killing the cube members. I know that CGI was still a relatively new toy in 2002 but it cheapened the movie and made it less likable.
Even the story was a sham. They tried to give us a little more information while still leaving us guessing. It did nothing to enhance the plot.
If I were to run down a checklist grading this movie here's what it would look like:
Acting: exaggerated version of all the characters in part one, all more terrible.
Story: More convoluted than the first.
The cube: Hyperized. In attempts to make it more uncrackable they made it more absurd.
My math isn't good enough to get me out of a cube but I know when things don't add up. Poor acting, poor story and a cheap set equals bad movie.