Saul Rifkin-Carroll

Firstly the positives, if you enjoy or want to just appreciate the CGI skills that made this film. It is a good film to watch. However, if you want a storyline and characters that progress with substance and style this is not the film for you. The style is true to the DC and Marvel brands. i.e. two hours of smashing and destruction on screen. Leaving me thinking " how much longer!?" And finding out that there is still 40 mins from the end. "Seriously!" There's a lot of talent that went into the making but the money should have been spent on good plot/script creation and development. I was bored 30 mins in.

In my opinion, the film could have been edited by at least half. The story was good and easy to follow. However, I was disappointed very quickly as they had cast Richard E Grant and Henry Cavill to get the audience numbers and not for their talent. Richard must have only had five lines if that. It was a waste of an actor, and I feel that the film could have saved money with different actors and had a better product.

Humourless, lazy and slow. Having two actors, Saoirse-Monica Jackson, (Derry Girls) and Tanya Reynolds, (Sex Education) in this whom I have seen very good acting before I thought this may be a good casting. The cast was let down by dire writing, a slow and non-plot. It is not getting to a point and often it resorts to sex scenes to cover screen time. Don't get me wrong I don't mind those scenes, but when they were used as a lazy director's way of filling out poor plots by the writers that's when I get bored. There is no comedy that I found funny either.

I agree with most of the reviews here, the female lead was a strong character for a male-dominated setting. You can see it was made on a low budget as all of the crew were Eastern European. The escape scene where the female was escaping the compound went on too long and was like you were watching a shooting game.

Appallingly dubbed editing, even if you were able to hear it in Italian and understand it, the acting is poor as there is one actor early on so when he is speaking it's like he is just barely opening his mouth so when the dubbing goes over it, it's obvious and stands out to someone like me who notices these types of things due to ND.

Allthough a mild comedy film. The cast are a bit weak, I noticed that after they got out of their new car at the end of the film and stood infront of it. It was so easily destroyed by the villian they must of thought how can we explain the question "what are they building"? A line repeated in the inventor's basement office. They may of said in a planning meeting "Lets make it a car" But it was unimpressive, also it was like Hart broke character at that point too. So a smile only comedy. Even for children.

Although it does meet the criteria of a PG rating, in my opinon, We Can Be Heroes is a poorly scripted film that is yet another failure to go alongo with even when you suspend disbelief that even a superhero can survive in lethel enviroment of space. As with all Robert Rodregez's films after Spy Kids 2, there are oversized sets, preachy scripts and a real lack of imagination to the script. I feel he should of moved on to something new after SK2 as the 3rd Spy Kids was poor and hardly featured big stars as was advertised and Spy Kids 4 was just a joke. This film is as bad as the latter 2. It was a waste of money and as a kids film I knew it would be a stretch drawing a 29 year old in. But going on the basis that I loved the SK1 and 2 and still do there's been a long while since SK4 I thought "give it a chance" but it didn't draw me in as his earlier work did. My advice is quit while your ahead.