<![CDATA[1) Shockingly awful.]]>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Babylon A.D.

fasteddyuk — 13 years ago(July 05, 2012 02:44 PM)

  1. Shockingly awful.
  2. Devastatingly poor.
  3. Good value for the $50 spent on it.
    Your thoughts.
]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/238146/1-shockingly-awfulRSS for NodeWed, 13 May 2026 06:36:40 GMTMon, 04 May 2026 07:25:41 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to 1) Shockingly awful. on Mon, 04 May 2026 07:25:46 GMT]]>Crystalline3 — 13 years ago(February 02, 2013 08:02 AM)

I think I'm gonna go with 4) Well thought-out and deeply enjoyable sci-fi film with a story that's not meant for everyone.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1993565https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1993565Mon, 04 May 2026 07:25:46 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to 1) Shockingly awful. on Mon, 04 May 2026 07:25:44 GMT]]>HazelMurphy2021 — 13 years ago(January 04, 2013 02:37 PM)

Not sure what you mean by $50, but option 3 is what I would say. Liked the theatrical cut when it came out, like the extended cut even more. It's definitely an above average scifi flick.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1993564https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1993564Mon, 04 May 2026 07:25:44 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to 1) Shockingly awful. on Mon, 04 May 2026 07:25:43 GMT]]>Jay_Kay_71 — 13 years ago(August 01, 2012 10:56 AM)

i'm going with option 2)
although futuristic vision of new york was ok, kinda interesting
other than that i had no idea what was going on, plot? character motivations? story? what? no seriously, what?

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1993563https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1993563Mon, 04 May 2026 07:25:43 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to 1) Shockingly awful. on Mon, 04 May 2026 07:25:42 GMT]]>IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1993562https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1993562Mon, 04 May 2026 07:25:42 GMT