Event Horizon

Great sci-fi horror and also a brutal spectacle for something form the late 90s. The atmosphere does let down by the end, but never to the point that would affect the overall impression. The premise (a spaceship returns after being lost in the cosmos, bringing something with it) is awesome and I don’t think it could have been developed better. Hands down, Paul Anderson’s best work, even if students of physics would not agree. (29/05/2008)

The fact that this is without a doubt the strongest contribution to the discussion since Paul W.S. Anderson's automatische doesn't mean it's a very well made spectacle, but the premise is exactly what I look for and need in a science fiction film. The constant strobes, retarded jump-scares, and sweat-soaked zooms are thankfully outweighed by a gutted Jason Isaac, decompressed crew members, and cute visions of hell. The fact that 40 minutes of mostly gore scenes were cut and lost from the original 130-minute long cut is the biggest crime with this film. Otherwise, Andrei Anastasov would have been happy. (07/09/2015)

The stormy atmosphere of Neptune and a space ship spewed from the depths of hell didn’t give me a moment of rest for the whole 92 minutes. Anderson can do it if he wants (the faultless dizzy beginning) and if it weren’t for the slightly over the top ending I would easily give it 5*. But now I can only remember the perfect build up of atmosphere in the first two thirds, the superb acting performances of Laurence Fishburne and Sam Neill, the very decent effects and the idea which, if it had been developed right could have satisfied my dark side. (08/12/2009)

The density of the claustrophobic atmosphere and the psychedelic dread of the first two-thirds of this film are among the best you’ll find in the sci-fi horror genre, which of course is ruled by Alien. The scenes with Sam Neill wandering through the narrow green tunnels are brilliant, as are a lot of the other visual tricks, including the opening circular “vertigo shot” (I saw it on the big screen and got seriously dizzy). Unfortunately, the film later becomes an action exhibition of screenwriting trash, like something from Paul W.S. Anderson. But I so fondly recall the first two-thirds that I'm sticking with by my four-star rating. (25/04/2005)

It's a very bizarre disgusting thing, which is brilliantly filmed and probably won't make you feel very well. There aren't many films like this. I applaud Paul Anderson for always pushing the envelope hard, regardless of audience reaction, and not giving a damn about disgusting the average viewer. I wonder what the original unedited version, which is 40 minutes longer, looked like. It must have been cool. (19/06/2002)