The Maze Runner online movie review - Please allow me to answer all of the questions and 'plot holes' you have after the movie. And to explain how it's 100x better than 'The Hunger Games'
Seriously, what's with all the super negative, terribly written upvoted reviews on the front page of this movie on IMDb?
I'm starting to have grave concerns for this website, if the most upvoted review of this movie is one of the most badly written, incoherent, illogical and simple-minded so-called 'reviews' I have ever read from someone who admits that he can't even speak English...
Lets just start cutting off some big 'numbers' right off the bat.
1. Yes the 'teens' have been living there for 3 years. But they're exactly that 'teens' they aren't geniuses. They've had their brains wiped clean minus their names. Besides, I'd like to see how far Einstein would get if you just gave him a bunch of trees, some seeds and grass for company for 3 years. People are expecting too much out of these kids.
2. Of course we were all thinking "Why not build a ladder/dig a hole under the wall/etc/etc". But anyone who actually thinks past that and uses their brain realises that the taller a ladder gets, the more unstable it is. Did you see how tall those walls were? Did you see how smooth they were? I'd like to see you try and climb that, and like 'Newt' said. What then? You climb the top of the maze, and you get to walk on one little piece of the billion that it consists of. Someone also said "Just build a ladder so you can climb out if you're late to the door". Umm.. you've still got to build one from the other side so you can climb back down. Then what.. the Grievers use that to follow you and massacre everyone. Movie-goers not using their brains... not 'Gladers' not using their brains.
3. The acting was awesome. So much better than what most teens pull off in crap like 'The Hunger Games' or 'Divergence'. 'Thomas' (Dylan O'Brian) and 'Chuck' (Blake Cooper) put forth very good, very believable performances. Even 'Gally' (Will Poulter) played the unlikable 'd-bag' very well.
4. Someone complained "No Violence" in a bunch of boys. Umm no one wants to die? You put a bunch of men into the Army and they all wind up best friends. 100% guaranteed. The only way anyone survives any trial, is together. Obviously after 3 years these kids would have reaslied they shouldn't be killing each other. 'Alby' said they got past that anyway.
5. Yeah the movie centres around a person who is 'different' to everyone else in the group. Isn't EVERY SINGLE MOVIE LIKE THAT? So why are people bashing this one?
6. I love how people mention that this movie is sooo cliché, yet they fail to mention even ONE EXAMPLE about how it is cliché.
7. This kind of movie has been done 1010200425 times before? Oh really...? Funny because I can only think of 'Cube' and 'Cube 2' and I've seen probably more movies than you. What other movies exactly? Besides this is a modern, AWESOME movie with GOOD acting and actual SUSPENSE!
8. "Why not build some sort of catapult, or ballista to fight the Greivers?" Firstly, no one has ever seen a Griever (and lived), so they don't know what they are fighting. Secondly, no one really goes into the maze, and almost always the runners come out. Plus there's only a tiny group of people who risk their lives. Thirdly, these kids aren't geniuses, it took humans hundreds of years to evolve from sticks to bows, let alone to catapults. What are they going to use for ammo... Mud? (Again movie-goers not using their brains). Oh and the Grievers, never in 3 years have come into the Glade.
9. "Conditions inside the 'Glade' are too good, everyone is too clean etc." After 3 years and with monthly supplies, I think they'd have hygiene and clothing sorted out pretty well. Gosh people will complain about everything. Actors don't always have to look 'filthy' for their low living standards to be believable.
10. "Where's the romance?" Wrong genre of movie go see "The Crying Games". The fact that 3/5 reviews are all asking questions like "Oh a girl after 3 years.. why didn't anyone.. you know..." You people make me puke, I guess we can't expect any logical, informative and decent reviews from such idiots.
-1 Okay, so basically the idea for the movie was really stupid. Putting a bunch of kids together and studying the way they overcome insane trials (by what, building treehouses and gardening?) is supposed to cure some affliction called 'The Flare'? I agree, it's stupid. So the movie loses a point. But just because the VERY SUBTLE plot is stupid doesn't make the ENTIRE MOVIE bad.
-1 Some small plot holes, and a few questions like "Those trees are almost as tall as the wall, why not cut one down from the base, and move it towards the wall for a ladder etc". (Explained why) "How did Gally get there in the end when the door was closed" (Good question actually) "Why did Thomas kick that gun away instead of take it?" (Who was expecting Gally?) "Why did Chuck have to die, what does it do for the plot?" (Nothing) Anyway who cares, like you've ever seen a totally polished movie. Too many people are being judgmental after seeing ONE of a THREE part series.
It saddens me that this movie has been badly rated by a bunch of self-indulged pricks who were expecting to see nothing but bloodshed. This movie had better acting, better CGI and more suspense than 'The Hunger Games', 'Divergence' or any other movie for that matter that somehow got better ratings than this. Oh and yeah it was tons better than Cube, which is only really enjoyable and entertaining to someone who wants to see people trapped in a small space and killed in 'disgusting and imaginative' ways.