Now before starting, I must confess I'm not really good at grammar. The English language is my second language. Also, this is my first review.
I'm open to positive and negative feedback, as long you give an argument, I will accept it.

As I was searching for a good movie to watch after my workshift. I was thinking. "A horror movie would be great". I went to wikipedia and I discover a canadian movie named Cube. It's the first movie of a trilogy, but i'm only reviewing the first one.

I also have a standard for horror movies. If it starting to screw with your head and install a fear in you, it's a good horror movie.

The Concept: Strangers finds themselves prisoners in a Cube-like chamber with 6 doors. Each door leads to another Cube-like chamber. But the twist is some chambers has trap in them.

First of all I was impressed on how the details in this movie look good with a low-budget. The designs of the chambers were well-made. The traps in the movie are perfect. The storyline keeps the mystery, it doesnt screw 15 minutes to know the origins of the Cube-like prison. Right now the review seems a perfect positive for you, right? "Quote from Yahtzee" WRONG, and shut up".

The thing that slows the movie down and makes me remember this is a story is the acting and the presentation of their characters. I'm not sure if the producers were short of money to pay some good actors for this movie.

I'll show you what I mean.
With the characters with bad design+bad acting

Quinton: Is supposed to be a cop. The actor playing his role did get the part of a cop by giving everyone a pep-talk. After a while, the guy goes crazy after discovering that he's screwed. (That's the good thing I can mention).
However, I'm not sure if the actor is trying to make all expressions that a human face could do. Also, I felted that the guy was still wondering which tone of voice he should use.

Holloway: Is a doctor who lost all hope from the start. She complains alot and starts to get on your nerves really quickly.
But, other than anger, the actor cant play any other feelings.

Leaven: I think this character didnt fit with her background. She is supposed to be a High school student, but she seems someone who studies in math in a university degree. If the producer could at least switched it to a math student, I would had beleived her character.

Summary: Cube can be a good movie if you can live through the acting. Like I said, if a horror movie put a fear in you, it's good. In this movie the concept did put a fear, but the acting removed a great part.

Verdict: Rent it or download it
Score: Concept:9.0 Story:8.0 Acting: 5.0 Total: 7.0

Pretty good for a second language (although 'felt' is already past-tense so 'felted' doesn't exist), but not a very in depth look at the movie.

I thought the traps were super cool, and the way the concept was done was pretty neat. I heard they had one white cube and lit it differently, which I though was devilishly clever. But yeah, the acting wasn't the best it could've been.

You haven't seen Cube 2: Hyper-cube yet?

More of the same.

I was gonna, but the fact I saw poor acting in review and a repetition of plot, I thought I should skip it.
As for Cube:Zero I heard there explaining the mystery part which ruined the concept.

Cube Zero doesn't really explain the mystery very much - its set only partially outside the Cube, with the main characters being technicians who observe and monitor people inside the Cube, until one decides to go rogue and head in to try and help them. It implies that the Cube is a punishment for traitors and that the world is a theocracy (when one man reaches the exit, he is asked if he believes in God. When he answers no, he is killed.) But other than that, no real unveiling of mystery.

Cube was the first film to really mess with my head as a kid, because it was seriously unpredictable, which at first terrified me (I was like ten and way too young to watch it) but looking back on it makes me fond of it. The enviroment isn't safe, which was incredibly non-conventional for the time, it was a much cleverer version of Saw about seven years ahead of Saw. The group dynamics were interesting and unpredictable - you never quite knew who was going to play what role in the group, and it was a genuinely intriguing concept - a "rubix cube of death".

Cube 2 meddles with time travel and four dimensional space. Essentially, the second cube is just one room, repeated endlessly, and when you head from one room to the next, really you're only staying in one room. Its "traps" are to do less with conventional means and more the side effects of the Hypercube passing through itself as it spins. Does this make sense to you? Then I'm explaining it wrong. That being said, with all its delightful madness and stark, sterile aesthetic (standing in contrast to the others dingy gloominess) it suffers from a lot of the problems mentioned earlier - not very good acting being the problem.

Remember seeing Cube ages ago and thinking it was pretty pointless.
However, Cube Zero is quite a lot better, I'd recommend trying to see that one if you can.

Interesting read. I watched this movie on the Sci Fi channel and lost patience with it about 20 minutes in. If I recall correctly due to a combination of boring cinematography and lack of sympathetic characters.

Random argument man:

Leaven: I think this character didnt fit with her background. She is supposed to be a High school student, but she seems someone who studies in math in a university degree. If the producer could at least switched it to a math student, I would had beleived her character.

This was the only real problem I had with the review. While the actress for Leaven may have been bad, this complaint has a lot more to do with the writing. However this may be indicative of another complaint that you did go over briefly: terrible writing. From the sound of it the actors may have been confused by reading the script and the director was more interested in showing off the set than giving direction to the actors.

The dilemma with acting in a situation like this is that the premise is static, and does not open itself up very well to a diversity of emotion. When you consider the story of Cube, there is no real room for any emotional growth or exploration, because it's fairly realistic; people in a situation like this would get worried and frustrated, and since it's the entire movie, the characters can only ever be worried or frustrated. The exploration of other emotions is entirely possible, but requires more suspension of disbelief, because realistically speaking, people would not be overly composed. In a movie like Cube, I would focus the review away from the characters except to say whether they are characters we enjoy watching for two hours or not. In a movie like this, we are exposed to the people the entire way through, so a writer really has to work hard to make sure we care about them.

The only really good acting in Cube was Kazan, the autistic (who isn't in any way mentally deficient in real life, I know him, he dated my aunt). I rather liked cube. For a B-Movie, it was alright. The second and third don't exist in my world, you don't do sequels to something like Cube.

Khell_Sennet:
The only really good acting in Cube was Kazan, the autistic (who isn't in any way mentally deficient in real life, I know him, he dated my aunt). I rather liked cube. For a B-Movie, it was alright. The second and third don't exist in my world, you don't do sequels to something like Cube.

I agree with you. Worth was the only one I thought he did an "ok" job.