IMDb > Point Break (2015) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Point Break
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Point Break More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 21:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 207 reviews in total 

205 out of 280 people found the following review useful:

It's almost as though they made a terrible movie on purpose.

Author: nixon carmichael from United States
3 December 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Beware people, this is an early review. Being a member of a media group I caught an early screening at the Amc. I was not required to sign an NDA.

Point Break is a bafflingly unsolicited remake of the 1991 cult classic of the same name. It is directed by Ericson Core, a good filmmaker who directed the 2006 Invincible, a film which is criminally underrated. When I found out that Point Break was being remade I shuddered in fear, but I when I learned that Core was directing the film, I immediately changed my tune, as I hold Invincible in such high regard, as it truly is an under appreciated film for the ages.

Point Break 2015 is grotesque.

I am not inherently adverse to remakes and reboots, and I am not at all a purist, I am perfectly fine with rebooting material and straying from source material if it serves the story well. What had happened here is that the studio has produced a garden variety action movie and slapped a name on it purely for the sake of brand recognition.

The film exceeds expectations in the sense that this a slickly produced action film with a completely rad soundtrack. The camera work, framing and editing leave everything on the proverbial field. There isn't anything new going on here, but it's produced in a professional manner and the action scenes are handled with extreme care.

And along comes the story, instead of our group of guys pulling bank jobs to fund adrenaline junkie lifestyles, the action men of 2015 are self aware crusaders, too cool for school, hipsters on a self imposed mission from God. Every character in this film is ball- kickingly annoying. The problem is that not one of the main characters are in possession of a redeemable quality and their motivations are completely nonsensical, they are all essentially unknowingly pseudo intellectuals.

If this movie had been titles virtually anything else I may have given it a 4 or 5 out of 10, rather than a three, though the unnecessarily and intentionally sanitized PG13 vibe completely disrupts any potential the film may have had in the first place.

It's not good, it stinks.

No sir, I don't like it.

Was the above review useful to you?

193 out of 284 people found the following review useful:

A disgrace of a movie

Author: nik_it_as
9 December 2015

I just saw the first projection at Chiang Mai Thailand. This is one of the most horrible movies i have ever seen. Please don't waste your money. The story makes no sense. The characters are stiff like frozen cucumbers, the purpose and motivations are completely ridiculous. This is a disgrace of a movie. It is as if the director wanted to create the horrible anti point break. Oh My God! Oh My Buddha! Wasted life! There is no logic, the characters are half-dimensional, the star is beyond ridiculous and annoying, the girl is on drugs, the pace is awful they jump from scene to scene like monkeys jump from tree to tree. The director clearly had no vision. I don't know what to say other than STAY AWAY. STAY AWAY.

Was the above review useful to you?

126 out of 157 people found the following review useful:

GoPro and Red Bull decide to make a film

Author: allstarrunner from United States
15 December 2015

If you like those 3 or 5 minute GoPro or Red Bull videos of people doing extreme sports then you will certainly like most of the movie as a lot of it is exactly that - and to be sure, those moments were pretty cool to watch and very well done.

Unfortunately, in between all of those moments is a pretty boring plot line with characters that you never really care about.

If you like mindless action (nothing wrong with that) then you will probably like this movie - although most of the "action" is extreme sports, not really guns.

Apparently I have to write at least ten lines of text, but honestly there isn't much more to say about the movie!

Was the above review useful to you?

81 out of 91 people found the following review useful:

Impressive action sequences let down by almost everything else.

Author: Troy_Campbell from Sydney, Australia
4 January 2016

A Gen Z update to Kathryn Bigelow's 1991 cult classic, this remake is essentially an episode of Fast and Furious in which the vehicular exploits have been replaced with an assortment of extreme sports sequences. Constructed with an alarming amount of real footage and physical stunt work, the numerous action set pieces are rather impressive; a high octane wing-suit gliding scene and the tension-building rock climbing finale topping the list. Yet the impact of these daredevil stunts is wasted on a film that fails on almost every other level. Stemming from Kurt Wimmer's truly awful screenplay, every second not spent traversing a mountainside, soaring through the air or surfing a mammoth wave is cringe worthy and/or yawn inducing. Wimmer's dialogue attempts to be philosophical and Zen-like, but with clichéd stinkers like "the only law is gravity" and "everyone dies, it's just a matter of how", it's nothing short of unintentionally hilarious. Replacing the eternally cool Patrick Swayze was always going to be tough, however Edgar Ramirez does a solid job as charismatic eco-warrior Bohdi. The same can't be said for low-budget-Chris-Hemsworth hunk Luke Bracey though, who is so wooden as Johnny Utah he makes Keanu Reeves look like Daniel Day Lewis. This modern update boasts a handful of genuinely fantastic action sequences, yet they're not enough to warrant a recommendation in what is otherwise a limp and incoherent thriller.

Was the above review useful to you?

79 out of 108 people found the following review useful:

Nonsensical plot accompanied by visual splendor of world's most extreme corners.

Author: quincytheodore from Indonesia
3 December 2015

Imagine the intense stunts from energy drink commercial or Youtube extreme sport montage while music from Mad Max blares on background. This is where the second coming of Point Break truly excels. When it hits just the right velocity, it's bloody breathtaking. Unfortunately, the narrative is not only poor, it nearly sabotages the movie like a broken parachute.

Story revolves around Utah (Luke Bracey), an FBI trainee as he investigates a series of heists and their connection to a group of athletes led by Bodhi (Édgar Ramírez). As one might expect, it follows the same trail that Keanu Reeves and Patrick Swayze has placed. The new leads do what they can, although it's better to watch this without comparing, because it certainly doesn't have the same caliber of star or chemistry.

The plot then dives head first into uncharted territory. It's littered with so much "save the planet" preachy acts as the writing struggles to place FBI agent in the hippie nirvana angle. The motivation is just a mess of random vague one-liners, even the on-screen characters are perplexed by it. There's a romance subplot, but this is mainly to show the attractive Teresa Palmer as eye candy for several short scenes.

The movie is actually better when they just show the crazy sequences instead of forcing its lackluster story. It has plethora of impressive feats, from high heaven wingsuit flying, the climb on hazardous urban streets and natural cliffs, to the surfing of gigantic waves. This is the level of stunt choreography xXx and Fast and Furious wish they had.

When camera pans into the right angle and lighting, as the sounds is muffled by throbbing tune of the fast music, Point Break reaches the zenith. It's miles beyond what typical action flick could offer, but sadly it's repeatedly interrupted by the shoddy story, which feels like an excuse to fly across the globe to do random cool tricks.

If viewed only on the grand mix of cinematography and choreography, Point Break is exquisite, this would have been a great documentary of extreme sport. However, as action movie, the story is so pretentious, it simply serves as speed bump to hamper the thrill.

Was the above review useful to you?

79 out of 114 people found the following review useful:

Point Break (2015)

Author: horcrux2007
26 December 2015

I sincerely hope the original Point Break is much different than this lifeless, hippy-dippy, overblown Mountain Dew commercial. I've never seen the original movie, so I have no bias towards it. Based on the movie's own merit's, the Point Break remake is laughably awful. In Point Break, a rookie FBI agent tracks down a group of extreme athletes who go around the world carrying out crimes in unusual and life-threatening ways; they plan to do a series of near- impossible stunts called the Ozaki 8 in hopes of reaching spiritual enlightenment. At least, that was the plot for about ten minutes before the movie devolves into a series of party scenes and surprisingly dull extreme sports clips that could have been easily viewed on YouTube, all set to irritating club music. It takes a special director to make BASE jumping and cliff diving this boring. Ericson Core builds as little suspense as possible in his action set pieces and instead films admittedly well-shot highlights reels for the action scenes. Any sort of suspense conjured up is because of the great cinematography because the characters are so flat and annoying that you almost wish they would get killed off. Everyone in this movie acts stoned out of their mind. All they do is spit faux- philosophical nonsense which gets tiring after the first twenty minutes. It gets laughable towards the end of the movie with lines like "Ideas are strong. But not as strong as a whaling ship," and no amount of context will make that line any less ridiculous. The unbearable dialog, muddled plot and dull characters makes this Point Break remake utterly pointless. If you're not a fan of remakes, this will make you reach your breaking point.

Was the above review useful to you?

64 out of 90 people found the following review useful:

What a let down

Author: rchoate-88390
29 December 2015

I was enthusiastically exuberant about returning to what I've known as a cult classic, the original "Point Break". This reboot, is full of slick stunts and visuals, but the story, or lack thereof, makes this taste like pablum. I very seriously doubt that after two hours from getting out of the theater watching this, that anybody would even remember the name's of the central characters in this film. Why, because the film maker neglected to give us a story where the characters are expounded and fleshed out beyond the 3 minutes for any resolute back-story on any of them. I appreciate the stunts and stunt people for their quality work involved, but stunts don't make a movie. A good story, with quality characters that are inter-meshed with emotions and plots that pull the viewer into the characters' world is what makes a memorable film. I'll stick with the original "Point Break".

Was the above review useful to you?

58 out of 79 people found the following review useful:

Pointless Retreads

Author: Mek Torres from Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines
18 December 2015

The original Point Break was mostly known for its memorable bromance between Utah and Bodhi and some of its greatest action scenes ever put to film. Either way, this remake doesn't bring enough justice to the cult classic. Its new approach, instead of a simple undercover cop thriller, is now a globe-trotting adventure featuring daredevils who are pulling off a grand stunt show. Though the stunts are impressive at times, it still pales in comparison with the original. The characters are bland, the plot makes no sense and every moment it tries to replicate with the original is just painfully forced for the sake of what they believe it's called "fan service." Therefore, there isn't much reason for Point Break (2015) to exist.

So Point Break is now about the stunts, but just like most action movies today, it also had to strip away personality. So whenever we see the cops, and even the daredevils, interact, it's just not so entertaining. One of the charms of the original, while it had some great action sequences, even the characters are interesting to watch. Even if it's trifle, it's still worth spending your time. Now, it somehow becomes uninteresting filler, especially the love interest. Remember when Utah had to lie about his backstory to earn her trust? Well, now they just easily hook up and nothing else, until some twist happens or something like that. Utah and Bodhi aren't as engaging, either. They're mostly spewing exposition, while Bodhi is basically acting like a parody of someone from a New Age religion. Their intention of becoming Robin Hoods is kind of vague as well, but I guess no one thinks it actually matters.

What's really worth groaning is when it's really trying to replicate the original; not by heart or personality, but by scene. They did the Ex- Presidents, even though one of them is wearing an Obama mask despite of taking place in 2015, but they only did it once, probably because there isn't much room for this fan service. Also the iconic scene involving Utah shooting up the air, which apparently Hot Fuzz did it better. And the epilogue is horrendously shoehorned, like it's nothing more than a tip off the hat, because... it's not Point Break without it, I guess?

However, there are some things to at least like in this film. The action is kind of stunning; the fact that they're visually more realistic to look at than most CG-fest that blockbusters tend to feed us (except for the epilogue which is too obvious.) Maybe the best among them is the rock climbing sequence where it goes from wide shots to dirty hand shots of seeing how much they'd grip. Luke Bracey isn't quite bad as an action hero, but he seriously needs a better material than this. Edgar Ramirez is probably just stuck with a blandly written Bodhi and really stays stick-in-the-mud with whatever he says about nature. Ray Winstone, though a good actor, is just not the memorably delightful Papas that Gary Busey established. And the movie wouldn't be any different if Teresa Palmer's role was written off.

And Point Break (2015) is just another needless remake. There are ideas that could have been utilized more, but it's too burdened by both action movie clichés and the fact that it is being Point Break. It's not a good undercover cop thriller, nor a good bromantic film. And you better off watching an actual stunt show, which at least doesn't make you get through to its drab expositions and the fact that it's more real and not embellished by any special effects. Then again, the effects aren't bad, but that's not the point. You may give it credit for heightening something from the original, but it doesn't do that well either. The fact how unnatural the homages are made for this remake makes it even more frustrating to watch.

Was the above review useful to you?

58 out of 89 people found the following review useful:


Author: dave-839-45148 from Bangkok, Thailand
10 December 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie really is unbelievably terrible. It's basically a bunch of extreme sport stunt shots glued together with nonsensical storyline, bad acting and awful script.

It's one of those movies that's so bad they can't even keep basic details straight, such as they drive off a boat at night time for a swim, but it's clearly daytime once they get underwater.

There are some scenes that have literally no bearing on the story at all...such as the scene at the pier when the FBI UK guy is randomly pulling a boat out of the water.

The time-line of just about every event makes no sense at all.

The characters have nothing at all about them; they all seems to merge into one hipster bearded blob on the screen and the only way i managed to tell them apart was from their color coded outfits.

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

It's a black eye to the fans of the original who might have given this disaster a chance

Author: Likes_Ninjas90 from Australia
7 January 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Point Break marks another blockbuster fizzer from Warner Bros., who after several flops is now in desperate need of a major hit. This is a useless, money-grabbing exercise that rides the name of an already overrated cult film as an excuse to stage pointless stunts. I'll say this once: do not waste your money on this film. If you are a fan of the original Point Break by Kathryn Bigelow, the film where Patrick Swayze played a bank robbing surfer who took Keanu 'I am an FBI agent' Reeves under his wing, watch that film again. If you are in the mood for crazy stunts and set pieces, open YouTube and watch some extreme sports videos on there. These are comparatively sound alternatives to this dreck, courtesy of director Ericson Core who has made his first film since 2006. It might take another nine years and extensive therapy to overcome this stain. The film is so bad and amateurishly composed that it appears someone first listed off a series of extreme stunts and told Core and screenwriter Kurt Wimmer (Salt) to write the movie around them no matter how jarring or ill-fitting they may seem. If you're still wondering, the stunts don't work on their own because the script's lousiness makes them boring since there's no investment in the one- dimensional characters and the weak performances of the actors.

No thought went into planning this narrative. It starts with two motocross riders jumping between rock faces. One of them is Utah (Australian actor Luke Bracey), who watches as his friend falls to his death. The film forwards seven years to when Utah has joined the FBI and is under the watch of Instructor Hall (Delroy Lindo), who doubts Utah's commitment and calls him son a lot. Since Utah was once a motocross rider in the extreme sports circle, he magically has the background information about the activity of the dangerous gang of extreme sports criminals Hall is chasing. It's mega stupid and as contrived as the stunts themselves. The gang, best described as a hodgepodge of philosophers, hippies, extremists and Mountain Dew sports stars, is performing a ritual called the Osaki 8. The Osaki 8 involves eight different extreme sports trials, some of which are criminal activities but others are plain stunts including surfing and mountain climbing. The transition between these set pieces is embarrassing. When Utah bombs out in an early surfing attempt, the gang saves him from drowning by bringing him onto their boat. He's recognised as a famous motocross rider from all those years ago but everyone, at least at this point, is oblivious that this not-exactly-inconspicuous surfer dude has been training as a cop and is allowed to freely explore the boat of the gang leader Bodhi (Joy's Édgar Ramírez). The other members of the gang, including Teresa Palmer as a brief love interest, barely register at all so you won't give two hoots about them and they aren't even smart enough to background check Utah before initiating him. More criminal than the stunts is how Ray Winston as Utah's partner Pappas, a potentially good replacement for Gary Busey's comic relief character, is inconsequential through much of the film except when questioning if Utah is overly enjoying the gang life. But since we don't care about the other gang members, what's the point in blurring the two lines of the law?

Does every blockbuster have to be self-serious now because it worked so well in the Nolan Batman films? Whereas Bigelow's film meshed action and comedy, this remake doesn't have a funny side at all. Instead, Bodhi's long, boring monologues about giving back to the earth (what?) are serious delusions this film has about becoming meaningful. But even watching the film solely for the stunts is futile. The film's marketing has emphasised how the stunts are performed by actual stuntmen as opposed to employing special effects. But given the stunts often have nothing to do with the gang's criminal activities, like the surfing, gliding and snowboarding sequences, we're watching a stunt showcase that's completely aloof from the plot. Similarly, the apparent realism of the stunts is malarkey since some are about as plausible as a Looney Tune's cartoon. Driving down mountain slopes ahead of an avalanche, through a dense forest on bikes and climbing mountains with just his bare hands will make you think that the FBI has really intensified its training or Utah has spent a lot of time with the Avengers. The only good things about the film are its brief reference to the bank robber masks of the original and that this boring pile falls under the two hour mark. It's a small victory for anyone who is foolish enough to pay money to see it. I lied and will reiterate: don't pay money to see this because you're only encouraging movies like this with boring action and such carelessness towards the story. It's a black eye to the fans of the original who might have given this disaster a chance.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 21:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history