Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Stellead Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

Micah Lloyd Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.

Sienna-Rose Mclaughlin The movie really just wants to entertain people.

Floated2 The Rock maybe seen as an earlier film by director Michael Bay. It appears that Bay had always had his way with action type films. While The Rock proved that Sean Connery could still cut the mustard as an OAP action star, it was the making of Cage as action hero, his wild and wired approach gelling perfectly with Connery ís gruff demeanor. Overall this film does fulfill for action fans, although it does feel quite long in run time and seems to drag. Nonetheless, one of Michael Bay's best films of the 1990's.

tommie-00400 A glorious action movie that never takes the third choice, paying the terrorists money to right the wrong of militairy neglect, seriously. But that only matters if you can look past the progan... I means SPLOSIONS.10 out of 10. MURICA!!!

slightlymad22 Continuing my plant to watch every Sean Connery movie in order, I come to The Rock (1996)Plot In A Paragraph: A group of U.S. marines, under command of a renegade general, take over Alcatraz and threaten San Francisco Bay with biological weapons. Stanley Goodspeed (Nicholas Cage) chemical weapons specialist and John Mason (Connery) the only man to have ever escaped from the Rock are the only ones who can save the day.I love this movie. Both my kids love this movie. Everyone loves this movie. Even people who think it's rubbish, love this movie. Anyone who doesn't love this movie is just wrong. Any way you look at it, The Rock stands the text of time, and after 21 years, remains a perfect example of nineties action cinema and one of the most is one entertaining action movies ever made.The cast are all on top form, Connery and Cage make for a great double act, and it is a pity that nobody had the idea to reteam these characters in a sequel (OK it may have been more than a tad far fetched) or someone else reteamed them as they do have genuine chemistry that you can not buy. Ed Harris invests Hummel with real empathy!! In fact, of all the villains in most movies, Hummel has a genuinely understandable motivation. Personally I think more should have been made of this. John Spencer, David Morse, Michael Biehn and John C McGinley all offer solid support It's not perfect, there are parts of this movie, which drive me crazy. The car chase in San Francisco is a major culprit - the cutting is so fast and disorganized that the it's a headache!! You get an even bigger one if you look at the destruction of property and the lives endangered. Isn't this movie all about saving people from a terrorist attack?? That's my only gripe!! The Rock went on to become the highest grossing movie starring Connery in a leading role, as it grossed $134 million at the domestic box office, to end the year, the 7th highest grossing movie of 1996.

stageneral I don't look at IMDb until after I've seen a movie, but it's pretty rare that the IMDb rating is far off from what I would rate (or at least in the same general goodness or badness range). This is apparently one of those rare cases, though. I had to double check that I pulled up the right title when I saw a rating of 7.4 (at least at the time of this writing).I honestly can't understand what people see here. It's over 2 hours long, and I was watching the clock after the first hour, hoping it was getting near the end. I mean, it's a light enough action ride - I was leaning towards rating it a "5", but then the number of things that bothered me just kept mounting, and I finally decided "4" was more appropriate. Here's some of those things (I don't intend any significant spoilers, but clicked the spoiler alert just in case):The movie couldn't seem to decide whether it was a gritty war drama (lots of scowling, shooting, and F-bombs), or a slightly tongue-in-cheek action movie (comic relief characters, trying-to-be-witty dialogue). Heck, it even seemed like Nicolas Cage couldn't decide either, because he bounced back and forth between the two.Similarly, a fair amount of carnage during the shooting scenes, but Nicolas Cage and Sean Connery dove, walked, or swam away from everything, no matter how many people were shooting, or how big the explosive device, or how far their bodies were thrown.The characters were wooden and stereotypical. A flamboyant gay hair stylist? Some "Sir, yes sir!" Marines, the wronged ex-con, the never-been-in-the-field agent, the trolley driver, ...The plot was predictable and clichéThe drawn out shoot-em-up, crash-em-up sequences. I haven't seen so many cars trashed in a chase scene since the Blues Brothers. And geez, that Humvee didn't even get a broken headlight.In short, it was just one cliché scene after another, strung together over a tired and predictable story line. OK, I watched it in 2016. Maybe it was fresh in 1996 when it came out, but I find that hard to believe.