This movie looks great and everyone on the film needs to be commended for doing such a bang up job with so little money. Its good that Sony took the punt and threw some money in to finish the visual effects because it would have made this ambitious project so much lesser for it without all those finishing touches. To that end you can say that this isn't really a low budget film - not by Australian standards if the rumor of a 5 million injection from Sony is true. My big gripe about this film though is that it could have gone somewhere bad ass but apart from looking cool it pretty much spins its wheels the whole time. This could have been a bad ass angel kill kill kill film but there ends up being lots and lots of talking instead and a few inventive but quick action scenes. But if you're an Aussie buy it because these guys deserve to get their due.
113 Reviews
Can't put my finger on it
jaydedragonwings27 June 2008
It's hard to make up my mind about this film. I didn't particularly like the writing or most of the acting, but I really like the look of the film (reminiscent of Sin City in a lot of ways) and some of the camera work was great. It's not a film I really enjoyed to watch, though. I can't put my finger on it, something just didn't make me want to keep watching, so I spent half the film thinking "Should I turn it off now? Now?" And when it hit the love scene I just felt sick. "They *didn't* do that, did they? Oh God, they did." However in spite of myself, I watched to the end. There were some good performances, some really bad ones, and more than a few mediocre. I really think Noble belongs in Home and Away. She had a real "Tammin" vibe and (at the risk of sounding really harsh), it just irritated me every time I saw her. I feel like if this film had gotten better funding and some better actors, it would have been amazing. As it stands, I think the art department and overall look of the film saved it from being plain bad. I'm sorry because I can tell what the film *could* have been, but it missed the mark. Maybe I can hope the sequel is better?
Not as bad as one would think
Skinthepig16 November 2007
I saw the film last night. And i honestly don't think it was that bad. Obviously, the film had a few weaknesses and some of the dialog is a little embarrassing, but the majority of the acting was executed fairly well. The effects were great (remember, kiddies... truck-all budget.. a lot of crew working for free). I think an audience needs to cull out all their ideas of fantastic four and other insanely budgeted Hollywood trash films and go in with an open mind when approaching this film. I honestly found it enjoyable. Even the bad bits. um... just a quick note to the fool who said death proof sucked - You really need to lower your ridiculous standards if u thought that film was rubbish.
If purgatory were real, I'd rather spend some time there than watch this again
brchthethird9 April 2015
There's been quite a few good films coming out of Australia in recent years, but this is sadly not one of them. I found about GABRIEL by looking at the filmography for the director Shane Abbess, after watching the trailer for his new film INFINI. Since INFINI looked pretty good (from the trailer, at least; it could end up being disappointing), I thought I should give this one a look see. Who knows? Maybe it could be decent? This movie fails on just about every level that matters. What it does get right, or at least makes it a little interesting, is extensive mythology it covers and a cool visual style. Unfortunately, those elements aren't terribly original and have been given better treatment in other films, like PRIEST (which still wasn't good), BLADE RUNNER and DARK CITY. The plot is kind of difficult to sum up, but I'll go ahead and try. Basically, Purgatory is the place where souls go after people die but haven't been judged yet (like in Catholicism). But in the film, there is a battle waged between Light and Dark that takes place in this realm, and currently Dark is winning. There's some rather complicated backstory at the beginning along with some narration, but I'd forgotten most of it in 15-20 minutes. That's how little I cared about what happened on screen. The worst part about it was how depressingly dull it was. Granted, this is a low-budget film, so I'm not ragging on it for that, but the color palette was too boring. The acting also wasn't great either. Although there was occasionally some moments where it felt emotionally honest/real, most of the time all of the actors talked in this ponderous manner that really didn't work at all. I suppose I should give credit where it's due, so for what it's worth the special effects weren't too bad for a low-budget film. Even the fight choreography and camera-work were pretty decent, although there were far too many closeups (again, probably to hide the budget). Despite the fact that they cribbed the visual aesthetic from a dozen other, better movies, this film doesn't completely discourage me from potentially seeing Shane Abbess' next film. GABRIEL is occasionally inventive, has more plot than it knows what to do with, but ultimately was just too boring to recommend.
$150,000 Aussie dollars.
scott_paisley18 November 2007
I enjoyed this movie. If you have any interest in film making, I would rate it higher than 7 out of 10. It's worth while seeing what can be made for $150,000 Aussie dollars.
The movie may have some flaws, and I think the biggest one was budget. I would have loved to see this movie remade with a better budget. My biggest problem though was the quality of the film on the big screen. Considering it was filmed with a JVC HD101 camera, it's understandable that the film's not going to be as crisp as what people are used to. I hope someone gives the people who made this a chance at another film with a decent budget. At the very least give them a new camera to shoot with.
Acting was not one of the flaws in this film. I have seen many a bad movie with dodgy acting and this was no where near as bad as I was led to believe from people's comments.
Plot wise, it's an interesting tale. Understanding the concept of Purgatory goes along to help people get a grasp of what's going on. I can't believe how people claim this movie has no plot. I found this movie to be more a thinker with some action rather than a straight action film. Their is action in this film, but it is depicted a lot more realistically than most people probably would have liked.
At the end of the day, this is not the horrible movie that the first reviewer is making it out to be. It has plot, solid acting and the sound was fine. The quality of the picture though is probably the hardest thing to forgive. I think it's sad that a lot of people will read the first person's review and not see this film based on someones ability to write 10 lines of text. 10 lines being the magic minimum before they allow people to submit a review.
If you really think this film was awful go and watch "Ultraviolet" and you will truly understand what kind of films deserve to be given 1/10.
The movie may have some flaws, and I think the biggest one was budget. I would have loved to see this movie remade with a better budget. My biggest problem though was the quality of the film on the big screen. Considering it was filmed with a JVC HD101 camera, it's understandable that the film's not going to be as crisp as what people are used to. I hope someone gives the people who made this a chance at another film with a decent budget. At the very least give them a new camera to shoot with.
Acting was not one of the flaws in this film. I have seen many a bad movie with dodgy acting and this was no where near as bad as I was led to believe from people's comments.
Plot wise, it's an interesting tale. Understanding the concept of Purgatory goes along to help people get a grasp of what's going on. I can't believe how people claim this movie has no plot. I found this movie to be more a thinker with some action rather than a straight action film. Their is action in this film, but it is depicted a lot more realistically than most people probably would have liked.
At the end of the day, this is not the horrible movie that the first reviewer is making it out to be. It has plot, solid acting and the sound was fine. The quality of the picture though is probably the hardest thing to forgive. I think it's sad that a lot of people will read the first person's review and not see this film based on someones ability to write 10 lines of text. 10 lines being the magic minimum before they allow people to submit a review.
If you really think this film was awful go and watch "Ultraviolet" and you will truly understand what kind of films deserve to be given 1/10.
Really, honestly, very bad.
chris_nfi18 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This was really bad. The concept was great, but could gone for less than 30min with the same amount of interest and depth. The dialog was just rehashing the same thing over and over and over and over again. Everyone else: "Oh, it's so hard, you just wait, wah wah wah", Gabriel "You've lost your way, do your job, blah blah blah". Acting was very bad in some places.
There, now you don't have to see the movie.
It's like the had a checklist as they went: Good vs Bad: Check Love interest: Check Facing past friend as foe: Check Drugs are bad, mmkay: Check Make your own choices: Check Save a friend: Check Token black guy: Check Use of film effects/filter (regardless of need): Check Stupid shot of guy/girl in front of window in rain in dark: Check Face your inner conscience: Check Moral battle: Check Everything else people expect from a high budget 'student film': Check
Actually, I must admit the end 'twist' and some of the shots were cool, (so I gave the film 2 instead of 1) but really awful still, people were walking out in masses (including 5 people I was with, only one stayed with me to the end) by the halfway mark. I'm sorry I watched this film. I needed those brain cells. I was going to use them for important things. Like drinking petrol. That's what they would be better used for. I hate you so much Gabriel.
There, now you don't have to see the movie.
It's like the had a checklist as they went: Good vs Bad: Check Love interest: Check Facing past friend as foe: Check Drugs are bad, mmkay: Check Make your own choices: Check Save a friend: Check Token black guy: Check Use of film effects/filter (regardless of need): Check Stupid shot of guy/girl in front of window in rain in dark: Check Face your inner conscience: Check Moral battle: Check Everything else people expect from a high budget 'student film': Check
Actually, I must admit the end 'twist' and some of the shots were cool, (so I gave the film 2 instead of 1) but really awful still, people were walking out in masses (including 5 people I was with, only one stayed with me to the end) by the halfway mark. I'm sorry I watched this film. I needed those brain cells. I was going to use them for important things. Like drinking petrol. That's what they would be better used for. I hate you so much Gabriel.
Pretty decent if you like fantasy with Angels and Demons.
bapman_209931 October 2008
First of, don't expect a blockbuster like UNDERWORLD. This movie was shot with a budget of Au$ 200,000, that's Australian, by a guy who never wrote or made a movie before. Consider all these when you watch the movie and you might forgive its short comings.
Sure a lot of idiots complain that there are better movies with lower budget, yes, well ask how many of them are effects driven action movies with such a large scope like GABRIEL. Clerks !?... um no.
Frankly, Gabriel is a the indie action film. These being said, the movie moves at a pretty typical style and pace until the ending when it really pays off. The fights are quite cleverly choreographed and the editing is pretty tight. Its the dialogs that needed improvement and the story needed to explain itself a more. Half the time you'll be left wondering the rules of the world.
In the end, watch it for yourself and discover. As an independent effects driven action film with a style of SIN CITY, it is definitely the 1st.
Sure a lot of idiots complain that there are better movies with lower budget, yes, well ask how many of them are effects driven action movies with such a large scope like GABRIEL. Clerks !?... um no.
Frankly, Gabriel is a the indie action film. These being said, the movie moves at a pretty typical style and pace until the ending when it really pays off. The fights are quite cleverly choreographed and the editing is pretty tight. Its the dialogs that needed improvement and the story needed to explain itself a more. Half the time you'll be left wondering the rules of the world.
In the end, watch it for yourself and discover. As an independent effects driven action film with a style of SIN CITY, it is definitely the 1st.
Wasted Potential
fluffymarshmallowsandtof15 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Save your $15 or $7 on Tuesdays. i don't care if it was made for free. no budget means no time limit. this movie has a lot of issues mainly that the plot makes no sense and is very inconsistent.
the actors accents fade in and out, and it doesn't bond to any particular structure.
On triple J they said that it was a compilation of many ideas. and thats where they wrote it from, but its total bull.
the trailer is misleading, and as a whole looks like a cheap pilot with passable special fx. not that they weren't brilliantly executed and well produced.
i think i could've got over it faster had the plot been better. but you can't mask a bad story line with good special fx, as we all know from previous experiences with tom cruise movies- not to say i didn't enjoy them. they just kind of..made no sense.
i think i'm more annoyed since it had such good potential to be a ridiculously good movie.
maybe the characters could have been wiser instead of saying vague stuff everywhere. tip toeing over topics to not offend. potential viewers. all in all it was basically the matrix and Constantine, which we all know featured keanu reeves. but the acting in this was even poorer than that of the movies it was being compared to.
Then putting in a completely unnecessary sex scene to illustrate the emotional attachment between 2 angels. when there was a perfectly sufficient kiss. Who knows. maybe some people like that. maybe some people enjoy bad movies because they're bad i don't know I'm not a doctor.
no character development. its one of those movies where it completely depends on the vague dialogue to introduce characters that are already little known to the audience.
just because you call a character by the name of a fallen or arch angel from some passage in scripture doesn't help the audience find out what relevance they have to the plot.
all we know is they're the enemy. and they have guns. guns that shoot bullets- in Purgatory??? and bad acting. i think thats the most damaging part.
i think the best way I could describe the special fx are if the chaser did a spoof of the matrix. THATS what the cgi was like.
it was blatantly Australian. which once again with a low budget of 0 and volunteer work might be a good argument. but once again that argument doesn't quite stand the test of time when you try to keep track of the plot.
1. a bad guy goes to purgatory getting rid of "the light" and the power from "the source"
"the light" being code for "good" and "the source" as a vague interpretation of a higher power without referring to "The Lord".
and they drop in the words "forgive me" every couple minutes lest we forget that these are angels and not just dudes named after angels.
the over use of coloured contacts made me cringe- although there was one of the best dark flashy strobe scenes i've ever seen. with rapid machine gun fire a dozen men and a dark warehouse. that was pretty sweet. totally discotek style.
the overall soundtrack was played to invoke emotion on the scene. but the mastering of it was terrible, volume was inconsistent.
they had a freaking guy from star wars help them, no wonder the overall production values are pro looking. seemingly.
now i'm not professional movie critic, and I'm not a doctor and I don't usually go on about movies this much. but its trying to convince the public that its something that its not with that trailer.
i watched the trailer after i watched the movie. and it fooled me again. into hoping there was a better made movie. a better version. with actual relevance. to anything.
instead i was left empty. alone. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHO ANY OF THOSE CHARACTERS WERE?????????
at least dogma was smart about making a joke out of religion. this was just picking random bits and pieces and making a Frankenstein of a movie.
I SAW NO WINGS. oh wait. cos they were in human form...i forgot. yet they can somehow call upon super human strength and heal each other. yet once "healed" the guys still limp around.
Don't Bother. Imagine the lord of the rings if it had no big name actors and was made by the hallmark channel, on a low budget.
the actors accents fade in and out, and it doesn't bond to any particular structure.
On triple J they said that it was a compilation of many ideas. and thats where they wrote it from, but its total bull.
the trailer is misleading, and as a whole looks like a cheap pilot with passable special fx. not that they weren't brilliantly executed and well produced.
i think i could've got over it faster had the plot been better. but you can't mask a bad story line with good special fx, as we all know from previous experiences with tom cruise movies- not to say i didn't enjoy them. they just kind of..made no sense.
i think i'm more annoyed since it had such good potential to be a ridiculously good movie.
maybe the characters could have been wiser instead of saying vague stuff everywhere. tip toeing over topics to not offend. potential viewers. all in all it was basically the matrix and Constantine, which we all know featured keanu reeves. but the acting in this was even poorer than that of the movies it was being compared to.
Then putting in a completely unnecessary sex scene to illustrate the emotional attachment between 2 angels. when there was a perfectly sufficient kiss. Who knows. maybe some people like that. maybe some people enjoy bad movies because they're bad i don't know I'm not a doctor.
no character development. its one of those movies where it completely depends on the vague dialogue to introduce characters that are already little known to the audience.
just because you call a character by the name of a fallen or arch angel from some passage in scripture doesn't help the audience find out what relevance they have to the plot.
all we know is they're the enemy. and they have guns. guns that shoot bullets- in Purgatory??? and bad acting. i think thats the most damaging part.
i think the best way I could describe the special fx are if the chaser did a spoof of the matrix. THATS what the cgi was like.
it was blatantly Australian. which once again with a low budget of 0 and volunteer work might be a good argument. but once again that argument doesn't quite stand the test of time when you try to keep track of the plot.
1. a bad guy goes to purgatory getting rid of "the light" and the power from "the source"
"the light" being code for "good" and "the source" as a vague interpretation of a higher power without referring to "The Lord".
and they drop in the words "forgive me" every couple minutes lest we forget that these are angels and not just dudes named after angels.
the over use of coloured contacts made me cringe- although there was one of the best dark flashy strobe scenes i've ever seen. with rapid machine gun fire a dozen men and a dark warehouse. that was pretty sweet. totally discotek style.
the overall soundtrack was played to invoke emotion on the scene. but the mastering of it was terrible, volume was inconsistent.
they had a freaking guy from star wars help them, no wonder the overall production values are pro looking. seemingly.
now i'm not professional movie critic, and I'm not a doctor and I don't usually go on about movies this much. but its trying to convince the public that its something that its not with that trailer.
i watched the trailer after i watched the movie. and it fooled me again. into hoping there was a better made movie. a better version. with actual relevance. to anything.
instead i was left empty. alone. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHO ANY OF THOSE CHARACTERS WERE?????????
at least dogma was smart about making a joke out of religion. this was just picking random bits and pieces and making a Frankenstein of a movie.
I SAW NO WINGS. oh wait. cos they were in human form...i forgot. yet they can somehow call upon super human strength and heal each other. yet once "healed" the guys still limp around.
Don't Bother. Imagine the lord of the rings if it had no big name actors and was made by the hallmark channel, on a low budget.
I wanted to hate it
lopesche9 February 2008
Well, after reading some of the reviews here, I was expecting this movie to be awful. I wanted to watch it as the storyline sounded intriguing. From the moment I starting watching this movie, I wanted to hate it. Most of the time, films with these kind of story lines, always seem to mess up, and was expecting the same here. But, it wasn't the case. The time seemed to fly by, usually a good sign when watching a movie. Now yes, if you 're the "critic" type, or work for the Oscars, you might have lots of negative things to say about this film, but then again that would be the case with any movie. It doesn't have the Hollywood glare, nor did it have the budget, but if you're not so concerned about the "aesthetics", you will enjoy this movie. If you enjoyed the movie Constantine, you will enjoy this.
Such Disappointment
bluebanrigh7 November 2007
It's an interesting concept but I felt the execution of it was a bit lacking, for me it doesn't even fall into the category of guilty pleasure kind of bad.
The film felt like it was trying too hard to be cool with it's stylization and it came off very, very poorly.
It drowned in the stiff and unnatural dialogue and the intrusive musical score was more irritating than rousing. It suffered from poor characterizations (felt no pathos for them whatsoever but that might partly be due to the bad acting) and bad movie clichés (ho drum romance and faintly ridiculous poses).
IMHO, the epileptic lighting and ADD editing seriously detracted from the story. A for the love of god, someone should have stopped the person who went nuts with post production effects. What was with that weird airbrushing thing? Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Too bad it was such a disappointment, I really liked the trailer for it.
The film felt like it was trying too hard to be cool with it's stylization and it came off very, very poorly.
It drowned in the stiff and unnatural dialogue and the intrusive musical score was more irritating than rousing. It suffered from poor characterizations (felt no pathos for them whatsoever but that might partly be due to the bad acting) and bad movie clichés (ho drum romance and faintly ridiculous poses).
IMHO, the epileptic lighting and ADD editing seriously detracted from the story. A for the love of god, someone should have stopped the person who went nuts with post production effects. What was with that weird airbrushing thing? Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Too bad it was such a disappointment, I really liked the trailer for it.
Don't judge the film too quickly
arwen-g18 November 2007
I had my doubts about this film when I first saw the trailer - to me it looked like a ripoff of the Nightwatch premise. However, when I saw it I learned that the story itself was very different. Oh sure, it has a Jesus-like story arc much like the Matrix and a good vs bad that pretty much every fantasy film has.
What I liked about this one was that the story didn't follow the usual formulaic storyline that you can almost time down to the minute. At first I wasn't sure where the story was headed, but as it unfolded I became drawn into it. I enjoyed the story, and it's exploration of the concept of freedom. I found it to be a story of great substance, and bears watching a second time in order to fully appreciate it, much like films such as Donnie Darko.
I liked that the cast was filled with people I didn't know, it gave it a freshness and allowed one to view it without the context of the actors cluttering the story. I liked the gritty visuals and sound - it pulled this off without the need to provide motion-sick tablets with your ticket, unlike movies like the Bourne Ultimatum which took wobbly camera shots a bit too far. It is a look typical of many Australian films, such as Wolf Creek, but the comic-book look of the film gives it a sense of fantasy which suits the story perfectly.
One thing I particularly liked was the way the fight scenes were realised - a fresh approach to supernatural battles which, I think, works well.
I found the effects a little over-done at times, and some of the visuals could have used a bit more polish, but considering the film's budget (or lack thereof), I think it's very impressive.
Sure, it's no Hollywood blockbuster, but that's kind of the point.
What I liked about this one was that the story didn't follow the usual formulaic storyline that you can almost time down to the minute. At first I wasn't sure where the story was headed, but as it unfolded I became drawn into it. I enjoyed the story, and it's exploration of the concept of freedom. I found it to be a story of great substance, and bears watching a second time in order to fully appreciate it, much like films such as Donnie Darko.
I liked that the cast was filled with people I didn't know, it gave it a freshness and allowed one to view it without the context of the actors cluttering the story. I liked the gritty visuals and sound - it pulled this off without the need to provide motion-sick tablets with your ticket, unlike movies like the Bourne Ultimatum which took wobbly camera shots a bit too far. It is a look typical of many Australian films, such as Wolf Creek, but the comic-book look of the film gives it a sense of fantasy which suits the story perfectly.
One thing I particularly liked was the way the fight scenes were realised - a fresh approach to supernatural battles which, I think, works well.
I found the effects a little over-done at times, and some of the visuals could have used a bit more polish, but considering the film's budget (or lack thereof), I think it's very impressive.
Sure, it's no Hollywood blockbuster, but that's kind of the point.
No surprises here
neva1700-117 November 2007
I went and saw this movie primarily because this one of very few Australian movies that is trying to be mainstream instead of art house, and I think that effort deserves to be rewarded. There is nothing really new and different here. This film borrows very heavily from others in the genre, most notably "The Crow", with occasional nods to "The Matrix" and even "Ëquilibrium". However having said that the film looks great (especially considering the very low budget), the action is okay, and the acting is competent. So no one is going to win an Oscar here. So what. Its an entertaining way to pass a couple of hours. Don't expect great feats and you won't be disappointed.
good idea turned into nonsense
laurentiu-corin12 February 2008
The desolation and deception of the Archangels, the struggle they've been through was a beautiful idea to construct upon in a very solid way. Unfortunately they pushed too far into a haze of nonsense that destroyed the characters aura. Michael is nothing less than a grotesque villain, Uriel is a pathetic drunk and Amitiel prostitutes as Jade whore. It could have been so much better than that. Even at the end when they could make some difference and save the day the mighty Gabriel childishly slides between love and hatred and leaves us with a very big question mark: what was it all about ? The characters missed consistency and purpose, as the whole movie did and I just felt that I have lost my time watching this. Although the directing was randomly OK, the script was weak and disappointing. As a rule of thumb, when you try to direct your own script there is a huge chance of losing touch with reality, so you people take care in the future because you can do so much better than this.
Awful
okky-15 April 2008
B grade acting, slow moving, seen it all before genre/storyline/effects/bad guys/good guy/good guy gets girl/good guy saves the day.
Something I probably would have enjoyed when I was 12. That's what you get when you let friends, who still haven't quite matured with their movie tastes, choose movies for you.
The movie tries hard but it fails miserably on all levels. The bad guys (these are the ones who frown continually so you know they are baddies) predictably get wasted one by one by the good guy( he's the one that frowns really hard at the end so you know he is very angry but in the interim has bouts of compassion, tenderness and not so angry frowning). I am filling in here to get the necessary 10 lines for the review.
Something I probably would have enjoyed when I was 12. That's what you get when you let friends, who still haven't quite matured with their movie tastes, choose movies for you.
The movie tries hard but it fails miserably on all levels. The bad guys (these are the ones who frown continually so you know they are baddies) predictably get wasted one by one by the good guy( he's the one that frowns really hard at the end so you know he is very angry but in the interim has bouts of compassion, tenderness and not so angry frowning). I am filling in here to get the necessary 10 lines for the review.
It's worth watching
gultepee30 December 2008
I was quite afraid of quality of the movie before watching it. But, it is definitely not another B class horror/Gothic/cheesy movie.It has a decent story, interesting characters, just enough tweaks to keep everything in place. I should also add the action scenes are quite well done; couple of them are quite remarkable, and no overkill.
You'll find some resemblances with Dark City, Donnie Darko and Blade Runner.
Yes, the scenario is about the history old war between pure good and total bad. But, that war would never loose its popularity and this movie is a good addition to the list.
You'll find some resemblances with Dark City, Donnie Darko and Blade Runner.
Yes, the scenario is about the history old war between pure good and total bad. But, that war would never loose its popularity and this movie is a good addition to the list.
Save your life
stonesoundjam15 November 2007
This film is terrible. It runs the gamut of bad movie ideas done bad.
The premise is that in Purgatory, a city that is envisioned as a rundown dilapidated city where every occupant is homeless or destitute in some way, a battle is being fought between 7 Angels and 7 Fallen of which the fate of the universe lies.
Sammael, one of the fallen, has found a way of harnessing the powers of those he has bested among the Angels, and all but one is left, Gabriel, who is obstinate and eager to take on these bastions of evil.
The premise isn't new, and a Gothic metropolis being a battle ground of individuals who look like extras in a Nine Inch Nails video may be tempting as a concept to some, its execution is agonizingly bad.
The pacing of the film is lax to begin with, and never does the film step up from it's first gear of painfully drawn out and wooden-eared dialogue, and even when action takes place, it is painfully short and garish rather than stylised. A particular action sequence with machine gun fire in a strobing effect should come with a surgeon-general's warning because those with epileptic tendencies might fit from the visuals.
The characters are stereotypical and flat and from the number of people leaving the movie halfway, it should not be under-emphasized why you should not pay to have such celluloid agony imposed on your poor selves.
This review aims to warn those unsuspecting but those with a penchant for very bad film may take a liking to it out of morbid curiosity.
Lowest score possible.
The premise is that in Purgatory, a city that is envisioned as a rundown dilapidated city where every occupant is homeless or destitute in some way, a battle is being fought between 7 Angels and 7 Fallen of which the fate of the universe lies.
Sammael, one of the fallen, has found a way of harnessing the powers of those he has bested among the Angels, and all but one is left, Gabriel, who is obstinate and eager to take on these bastions of evil.
The premise isn't new, and a Gothic metropolis being a battle ground of individuals who look like extras in a Nine Inch Nails video may be tempting as a concept to some, its execution is agonizingly bad.
The pacing of the film is lax to begin with, and never does the film step up from it's first gear of painfully drawn out and wooden-eared dialogue, and even when action takes place, it is painfully short and garish rather than stylised. A particular action sequence with machine gun fire in a strobing effect should come with a surgeon-general's warning because those with epileptic tendencies might fit from the visuals.
The characters are stereotypical and flat and from the number of people leaving the movie halfway, it should not be under-emphasized why you should not pay to have such celluloid agony imposed on your poor selves.
This review aims to warn those unsuspecting but those with a penchant for very bad film may take a liking to it out of morbid curiosity.
Lowest score possible.
Characterization and Low Expectations Save This Film
evilbunny8822 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Overall I was entertained for a solid chunk of time, and I enjoyed the lack of effort on the filmmakers part to make the movie more than it was. It's just a b-movie, and it wasn't half bad if you're not expecting much more than that, which (considering it's budget and it's overall theme) you shouldn't be anyway.
Though they use obvious references to past films (particularly The Crow, The Matrix) they cut back substantially on obnoxious elements from those films, such as over-showing how horrible the sinners are. Sure there is a drug element and one or two "kinky" sex moments, but the horrible scene is a near rape which I found almost necessary to the characterization.
Also, unlike previous films, they kept the action scenes fairly downplayed and focused instead on connections between the angels, and the soldier mentality that appropriate characterized Gabriel. As far as the characters go, I found their view on angels a bit more original than it's given credit for.
Typically the main character angel should fall or show decline in his resolve: doubt God. Yet Gabriel's all about his fellow angels (loving them, saving them even when he shouldn't) which plays off his constant desire and need to follow through on orders (because he is the last soldier and as a good soldier, understands this). And that love for others mixed with soldier mentality is much more true to the general religious views of angels and their purposes than most movies allow, even if they sin in this film.
**SPOILER** True to that characterization he does in fact bring back the light in the end, and while many people may be confused by his suicide afterward (which ruins his chances of getting back home to his commander) it in fact is a play off his love for the other angels. He completed his orders, but going back and forgetting his companion angels as well as all they had suffered for the cause was something he could not do. So to avoid the choice: either forget or fall, he simply ceased to be and therefore remained (in a way) caught in his own purgatory(neither good nor bad). Ironic, if not cliché. **END**
I thought that idea was pretty fresh for the genre. It was a good drive for the movie and they handled it well considering other flaws this movie excelled at.
Yes, the effects are not perfect or even great. The directing is only fairly good and the bad guys leave MUCH to be desired (too cliché and badly handled. Think The Crow City of Angels).
But if you're looking for some entertainment and some action and some drama, then check this one out. And please leave any film critique mentality at the door because it isn't perfect. It was just a b-movie and nothing I saw during prompted me to believe it was (or should have) been anything more.
Though they use obvious references to past films (particularly The Crow, The Matrix) they cut back substantially on obnoxious elements from those films, such as over-showing how horrible the sinners are. Sure there is a drug element and one or two "kinky" sex moments, but the horrible scene is a near rape which I found almost necessary to the characterization.
Also, unlike previous films, they kept the action scenes fairly downplayed and focused instead on connections between the angels, and the soldier mentality that appropriate characterized Gabriel. As far as the characters go, I found their view on angels a bit more original than it's given credit for.
Typically the main character angel should fall or show decline in his resolve: doubt God. Yet Gabriel's all about his fellow angels (loving them, saving them even when he shouldn't) which plays off his constant desire and need to follow through on orders (because he is the last soldier and as a good soldier, understands this). And that love for others mixed with soldier mentality is much more true to the general religious views of angels and their purposes than most movies allow, even if they sin in this film.
**SPOILER** True to that characterization he does in fact bring back the light in the end, and while many people may be confused by his suicide afterward (which ruins his chances of getting back home to his commander) it in fact is a play off his love for the other angels. He completed his orders, but going back and forgetting his companion angels as well as all they had suffered for the cause was something he could not do. So to avoid the choice: either forget or fall, he simply ceased to be and therefore remained (in a way) caught in his own purgatory(neither good nor bad). Ironic, if not cliché. **END**
I thought that idea was pretty fresh for the genre. It was a good drive for the movie and they handled it well considering other flaws this movie excelled at.
Yes, the effects are not perfect or even great. The directing is only fairly good and the bad guys leave MUCH to be desired (too cliché and badly handled. Think The Crow City of Angels).
But if you're looking for some entertainment and some action and some drama, then check this one out. And please leave any film critique mentality at the door because it isn't perfect. It was just a b-movie and nothing I saw during prompted me to believe it was (or should have) been anything more.
It could have been great but it wasn't
galiaig12 February 2008
I am so disappointed I really had great expectation about this movie, however it was nothing new, even interesting. I watched it till the end but I must admit it was hard. Most of the actors I see for the first time and as far as I checked for some of the leading actors this was also the very first or the second movie (no hard feelings here).
Basically the idea is good I liked it but the performance suffered serious lack of acting skills. It is also obvious that the budget wasn't much either.
I am rating it so low because I really don't see anything that deserves more. Once again if the actors were better and more experienced probably the movie wouldn't be such a disappointment for me.
Basically the idea is good I liked it but the performance suffered serious lack of acting skills. It is also obvious that the budget wasn't much either.
I am rating it so low because I really don't see anything that deserves more. Once again if the actors were better and more experienced probably the movie wouldn't be such a disappointment for me.
Gotta love those Arcangels...
Indyrod21 August 2008
I'm a sucker for these movies about Arcangels, and battling biblical wars and such, that's why I like "Constantine" so much. This is about Purgatory, and Gabriel descending from the Light to try to bring the light to the dark Purgatory and end the evil fallen Angels control. Gabriel is the last of the Arcs to try to fight the Fallen Angels, after Arc Michael had failed. To mass additional power, Gabriel tries to locate the defeated Arcs, including Raphael and Uriel, and Michael, but Michael's appearance doesn't come until the end, which is quite fun if you like these types of movies. The battle between good and evil in a dark landscape that almost resembles "Dark City" is very good, IMO. This is one I would like to own, it has many exceptional set pieces, and some pretty strong violence. We even get a peek at the deadly demon Lilith too. How much more could you ask? :) I loved it.
Wow... disjointed trainwreck
hewchris23 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I'm clawing for the zero, but will settle for 1/10 because the opening scene made sense (rest didn't). Watching this movie was similar to being in purgatory yourself, it never seems to end, and you REALLY REALLY want it to.
Alright, the start of this movie seemed like it might be alright, but it failed to progress anywhere from a slow, depressing talk-fest. This would have been alright, except the dialogue made barely any sense.
The action scenes were sporadic and very scarce, and for such a poorly thought out movie perhaps they could have covered up with some more action scenes to detract from the painfully terrible everything else.
The actors seem to change accents from Australian, to American, then to something I never want to hear again - all in the same sentence, which I suppose isn't too bad thing, but its hard to concentrate.
The cover of the movie is an exact replica of that of underworld, and most of the action scenes are ripped directly from "the matrix" and one from "the transporter", but they are most definitely the best part of the movie.
The ending.... well frankly I'm proud of myself for not walking out... the good guy fights the bad guy, bad guy turns out to be his brother (wha...?) they fight almost to death, at which point the bad guy suddenly changes his mind and uses his last energy to heal gabriel.. gabriel then commits suicide for, as far as i can tell, no reason - in fact I would say they included this twist solely to have a scene where he is falling from a roof, so they could say something clever about a fallen angel.
Worst sex scene ever thrown in for absolutely no reason, I was neither entralled or aroused.
In summary, I don't understand how this story was ever approved for mainstream, or how it could get positive reviews. I felt like I was having a terrifying acid trip and it wouldn't end, the only thing that stopped me from beating my head against the wall until I passed out was the fact I was laughing so hard at this mess I couldn't get up.
Run for your lives! There may be a sequel.....
Alright, the start of this movie seemed like it might be alright, but it failed to progress anywhere from a slow, depressing talk-fest. This would have been alright, except the dialogue made barely any sense.
The action scenes were sporadic and very scarce, and for such a poorly thought out movie perhaps they could have covered up with some more action scenes to detract from the painfully terrible everything else.
The actors seem to change accents from Australian, to American, then to something I never want to hear again - all in the same sentence, which I suppose isn't too bad thing, but its hard to concentrate.
The cover of the movie is an exact replica of that of underworld, and most of the action scenes are ripped directly from "the matrix" and one from "the transporter", but they are most definitely the best part of the movie.
The ending.... well frankly I'm proud of myself for not walking out... the good guy fights the bad guy, bad guy turns out to be his brother (wha...?) they fight almost to death, at which point the bad guy suddenly changes his mind and uses his last energy to heal gabriel.. gabriel then commits suicide for, as far as i can tell, no reason - in fact I would say they included this twist solely to have a scene where he is falling from a roof, so they could say something clever about a fallen angel.
Worst sex scene ever thrown in for absolutely no reason, I was neither entralled or aroused.
In summary, I don't understand how this story was ever approved for mainstream, or how it could get positive reviews. I felt like I was having a terrifying acid trip and it wouldn't end, the only thing that stopped me from beating my head against the wall until I passed out was the fact I was laughing so hard at this mess I couldn't get up.
Run for your lives! There may be a sequel.....
Excellent Surprise
Bloomer20 November 2007
Aussie self-consciousness, whether it figures in support of this film or against it, ain't relevant. Gabriel is a great existential-goth-action piece about archangels and their nemeses warring in human form and grappling with their newfound human frailties. For budgetary reasons the film favours the goth and the existential elements over the action one, and it's definitely all the better for it, because what it ultimately develops which is sorely lacking from a lot of films whose stylings it's adopted (the Underworlds, the Crows, etc.) is a ton of genuine involvement. The unknown actors give universally fine performances, and in the case of bad guy Sammael (Dwaine Stevenson) a deeply charismatic and disturbing one.
I was a bit worried by the wordlessness and flat grey look of the earliest scenes, but as soon as we hit the first dialogue two-hander, I got pulled into the characters' situation. Also, the film never looks as grey again as it does right at the start, even if the digital video footage doesn't give much depth of field in this dark world.
The fights are spaced out, but they're very cool. The choreography is of The Matrix almost ESP-martial arts kind, yet filmed in nice clear wide shots with minimal editing (or editing that's well-disguised by passing obstacles) so you can see what's going on. Sometimes it's guns, sometimes hand-to-hand, sometimes both, with bullet time, slow-mo, folks zipping around bullets, all the nifty stuff that's been developed in this genre. There's also an exciting shootout in strobing darkness that reminded me of Equilibrium's gun cabal scenes.
The film Gabriel reminds me of most strongly, however, isn't something super recent. It's Blade Runner. In that film, replicant robots unsure of their identity and nascent emotions variously went into hiding, went insane or fought for their survival in a world that wasn't really theirs when push came to shove. Replace 'robots' with 'angels' and you've got the basic premise of Gabriel. The angels are sent to purgatory to get in amongst the humans and steer them in the right direction, or in the case of bad guys The Fallen, keep them corrupt. But to adopt the mortal form is to become vulnerable to human weakness, and that's what Gabriel has to struggle with as he tries to rally his angel pals who've failed before him for one last battle.
Freakin' good film!
I was a bit worried by the wordlessness and flat grey look of the earliest scenes, but as soon as we hit the first dialogue two-hander, I got pulled into the characters' situation. Also, the film never looks as grey again as it does right at the start, even if the digital video footage doesn't give much depth of field in this dark world.
The fights are spaced out, but they're very cool. The choreography is of The Matrix almost ESP-martial arts kind, yet filmed in nice clear wide shots with minimal editing (or editing that's well-disguised by passing obstacles) so you can see what's going on. Sometimes it's guns, sometimes hand-to-hand, sometimes both, with bullet time, slow-mo, folks zipping around bullets, all the nifty stuff that's been developed in this genre. There's also an exciting shootout in strobing darkness that reminded me of Equilibrium's gun cabal scenes.
The film Gabriel reminds me of most strongly, however, isn't something super recent. It's Blade Runner. In that film, replicant robots unsure of their identity and nascent emotions variously went into hiding, went insane or fought for their survival in a world that wasn't really theirs when push came to shove. Replace 'robots' with 'angels' and you've got the basic premise of Gabriel. The angels are sent to purgatory to get in amongst the humans and steer them in the right direction, or in the case of bad guys The Fallen, keep them corrupt. But to adopt the mortal form is to become vulnerable to human weakness, and that's what Gabriel has to struggle with as he tries to rally his angel pals who've failed before him for one last battle.
Freakin' good film!
A Great Aussie film
kanndae200318 November 2007
Firstly, I was actually surprised that this film was Australian considering the virtually unknown cast bar one recognisable name.
The film itself is spectacular to watch in terms of effects and visuals that could stand up to any Hollywood blockbuster, and on only needs to compare that budget aspect of this film to Night Watch to know that it stands some chance at success overseas.
Just seeing the trailer, one assumes a film in the manner of The Matrix meets Underworld. However, even though you may get a glimpse of this, you are more likely to relate the film closer to The Crow than anything else.
The major thing that will probably hurt the film internationally is the strong Australian accent from Samantha Noble (Jade)
The film itself is spectacular to watch in terms of effects and visuals that could stand up to any Hollywood blockbuster, and on only needs to compare that budget aspect of this film to Night Watch to know that it stands some chance at success overseas.
Just seeing the trailer, one assumes a film in the manner of The Matrix meets Underworld. However, even though you may get a glimpse of this, you are more likely to relate the film closer to The Crow than anything else.
The major thing that will probably hurt the film internationally is the strong Australian accent from Samantha Noble (Jade)
Waste of time and money
vadim-berman26 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Big money doesn't make a great movie. Great script, character development and acting do. (This is true about many great Aussie movies.)
Unfortunately, this movie has neither a great script, nor acting or characters. And I doubt the budget would change much.
I did like the decorations - for their consistency. The ending twist wasn't much of a twist for me, because the movie was already trying hard to look smarter and more original than it was - so some sort of twist was a must. Fighting sequences are OK, but nothing you didn't see in 3,445,695 other action flicks you watched.
The rest is, simply put, pure crap made of overused clichés. A good angel descends to the purgatory in an attempt to bring back the light. Then all the predictable stuff: good angels vs fallen, all armed with guns, knives, powers to heal (think The Crow). Character development is nil. Briefly: the fallen angels are cartoonishly bad; the good are good but morally weak. This sentence covers what 1 hour of the movie is trying to tell us.
They're supposed to struggle with emotions, but you don't really see it - neither the struggle, nor the emotions. And again, these oh-so-predictable comments about how humans are much wiser than the angels.
Can anything be done with this idea? Not sure, but probably it could be better.
Unfortunately, this movie has neither a great script, nor acting or characters. And I doubt the budget would change much.
I did like the decorations - for their consistency. The ending twist wasn't much of a twist for me, because the movie was already trying hard to look smarter and more original than it was - so some sort of twist was a must. Fighting sequences are OK, but nothing you didn't see in 3,445,695 other action flicks you watched.
The rest is, simply put, pure crap made of overused clichés. A good angel descends to the purgatory in an attempt to bring back the light. Then all the predictable stuff: good angels vs fallen, all armed with guns, knives, powers to heal (think The Crow). Character development is nil. Briefly: the fallen angels are cartoonishly bad; the good are good but morally weak. This sentence covers what 1 hour of the movie is trying to tell us.
They're supposed to struggle with emotions, but you don't really see it - neither the struggle, nor the emotions. And again, these oh-so-predictable comments about how humans are much wiser than the angels.
Can anything be done with this idea? Not sure, but probably it could be better.
could have been worse... wait, no it couldn't
connorslattery15 November 2007
This is like the 80's B movie bastard child of the Crow and the Matrix without any of the good bits. It's so bad that it past where bad becomes funny and it just bad. Coloured contact lenses aren't really all that exciting any more, especially when the guy wearing the white ones can't get them to stay in the middle of his eyes, making him look like he trying to see in two directions at once. To go on about the major plot flaws, a plot twist you see coming a mile off, characters so clichéd as to be almost offensive and all the other aspects of the film that make this film so unwatchable would be to miss a perfect opportunity to go on about the painful accents that most of the cast put on, where there seems a real attempt to sound legitimately American, but it's like watching someone try to lick their elbow. You can ignore it for a while but in the end you wish they'd just stop what's obviously futile. Especially when they shout. Then it just sounds like Crocodile Dundee just burned himself on his crack pipe, but less funny. That's not to say there was nothing good. at least 25 seconds of the action was fun to watch and in fairness the leading man was commendable. But the most telling thing I can say about Gabriel is that when the guy behind me answered his phone half way through, I found the distraction a welcome piece of entertainment.
Check out this film
rocksteady_7-126 November 2007
I saw this film this afternoon. I was impressed with the visuals such as the framing and the animation used and since having learned this evening that it was made for under two hundred thousand Aussie dollars i find myself being more forgiving of its flaws. At the very least, what we have is a creative team that are home grown that have the ability to produce something new and exciting for very little money by todays movie making standards. The acting was good and at times great. The baddies were cool especially the Rasta from hell. There is a great action scene involving this character. What is important from the point of view of an aspiring film maker is that something to this level was produced on this budget.
Having just finished shooting a film on Super 16 myself i understand the challenges of making movies. Last week we got our film telecined and it looks great. Super 16 film looks great. It (film) is much more forgiving in low light than low quality HD. So let this be a lesson to all low budget film makers every where being swept up in the hype of HD. Unless that HD camera you intend to use can crank out crisp progressive scan images on the big screen-steer clear of low resolution HD and go for Super 16 film. The JVC 101 just can't handle it-i have never seen so much grain in all my life. Actually its ironic that Sony Pictures funded this film but didn't throw a couple of their high end cameras the film makers way. That sucks! It's obvious films like Sin City, Wolf Creek and Rogue are using a much higher resolution HD camera. This could have been a beautiful looking film, so much work went into it. So hopefully next time the people who made this film will have the budget to give their ideas and stories justice!
Having just finished shooting a film on Super 16 myself i understand the challenges of making movies. Last week we got our film telecined and it looks great. Super 16 film looks great. It (film) is much more forgiving in low light than low quality HD. So let this be a lesson to all low budget film makers every where being swept up in the hype of HD. Unless that HD camera you intend to use can crank out crisp progressive scan images on the big screen-steer clear of low resolution HD and go for Super 16 film. The JVC 101 just can't handle it-i have never seen so much grain in all my life. Actually its ironic that Sony Pictures funded this film but didn't throw a couple of their high end cameras the film makers way. That sucks! It's obvious films like Sin City, Wolf Creek and Rogue are using a much higher resolution HD camera. This could have been a beautiful looking film, so much work went into it. So hopefully next time the people who made this film will have the budget to give their ideas and stories justice!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
