White House Down (2013) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
576 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Goofy, fun light popcorn flick
Leofwine_draca3 March 2016
WHITE HOUSE DOWN is a film with myriad problems. It's directed by Roland Emmerich for once, a guy known for his less than stellar effects films like 2012 and GODZILLA, although once in a while he makes something like INDEPENDENCE DAY to make up for the bad stuff. It has some terrible CGI effects of helicopters in particular. It's a 12 certificate movie, which means that although violent it's not realistically violent. It's overlong. Channing Tatum, despite being a hot property in Hollywood, is wooden beyond belief. And, as with many Hollywood blockbusters, the writers have to shoehorn one of those annoying teenage characters into the storyline.

Despite all these flaws, I have to say I enjoyed WHITE HOUSE DOWN. It's no masterpiece, and it's not as good as the more serious OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN which came out at the same time. But it keeps your attention on it throughout, and it never fails to entertain. The various DIE HARD homages come thick and fast, and Jamie Foxx has never been so much fun as the Obama-style President who gets in on the action. The bad guys are suitably bad, James Woods acts up the screen, and there's a ton of explosive action to enjoy. You may want more, but this didn't disappoint as a light popcorn flick.
28 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Olympus has Fallen or White House Down?
paulclaassen14 March 2022
Interestingly, in a space of just three months, 2013 saw the release of two films with the same premise: 'White House Down', and 'Olympus has Fallen'. Which one did you enjoy more?

I enjoyed both, for different reasons. 'Olympus has Fallen' was a more serious film, but it also had a much higher body count making it slightly more unrealistic. While dealing with a serious matter, 'White House Down' is unfortunately laden with annoying, unfunny humor which completely ruined any potential suspense.

My biggest issue with 'White House Down' was casting Jamie Foxx as President Sawyer. Foxx is so bad and unconvincing as the President, it quite frankly is the worst portrayal of a President I have ever seen. The script is also to blame, as the character doesn't act or reason the way a President would, with dialogue not suited for a high profile individual such as a President. He sounded immature and incompetent, at best.

There's plenty of action and firepower. The film is a bit cheesy at times, and a bit sentimental at times. Fortunately, it manages to remain interesting and always has some kind of hook to keep the viewer glued to the screen. The action sequences are very well done, fast-paced and thrilling. So, despite some issues, 'White House Down' is still an exciting movie.
12 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Explosions, Gun Battles, and Channing's Biceps
dglink23 October 2017
Not since President Harrison Ford battled terrorists aboard "Air Force One" has a U.S. movie president faced the peril that challenges President Jamie Foxx in "White House Down." An unidentified group detonates a bomb in the U.S. Capitol Building, then takes hostages in the White House and shoots up the historic mansion, destroying priceless artifacts and paintings to the chagrin of a tour guide. Audiences know what they want from a Roland Emmerich movie, and "White House Down" delivers the goods; rapid cutting, action, explosions, gun battles, cheering onlookers, wise-ass heroes and bad-ass villains.

Clichés abound; from a troubled father-daughter relationship to an expository job interview that details the hero's past and a White House tour that fills in the history of the presidential mansion, the plot inches forward until the explosions literally begin. However, logic and plausibility also evaporate as the pace accelerates. While metal detectors screen visitors, the terrorists have an arsenal of automatic weapons already in the White House. While bullets fly and White House staff and visitors cower and flee, a young girl records everything on video for her on-line blog. Preposterous would come to mind, if the action allowed viewers to pause and think for a moment.

The cast of professionals is capable for this type of film. Headed by Channing Tatum, who sports a fetching sleeveless tunic to highlight his biceps, is the negligent father, caught in the dire White House situation with his blogger daughter. Jamie Foxx is fine as the President, while Maggie Gyllenhaal and Richard Jenkins both try to rise above the trite material, which was written by James Vanderbilt. Always fun to watch, James Woods manages to chew on the government-issue scenery in a showy role. The current resident of the White House, who claims ignorance of the 25th Amendment, should catch this film as that amendment is cited several times.

Audiences for a Roland Emmerich movie know what they want, and "White House Down" will deliver the goods for them. However, after two hours plus of mindless action, plot holes big enough to swallow a tank or a helicopter, and casual dialog between elected officials that propels the world towards Armageddon, some viewers may long for a slower paced film with a literate script and a plot based on logic. But then again, some may find Channing and his muscles more satisfying than either literacy or logic.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Great, silly, cheesy action fun - this movie should have been a hit!
gogoschka-113 December 2013
I'll never fully understand why people flock to films like "Iron Man I-III" and then completely ignore a fun action film like "White House Down". After reading so many bad reviews, I started watching Emmerich's latest noise-opera only because I wanted to get tired enough to go to bed. I had planned to watch the first 5 minutes and to then fast forward through the rest of the film and have a quick look at the expensive special effects. Never did I expect to actually enjoy myself - and yet I did. In fact, I enjoyed myself so much that I couldn't stop watching for the entire 2 hours, and I didn't even get up to go to the bathroom. Right from the start I realized that this movie doesn't take itself too seriously and that this is Emmerich having fun (destroying the White House - if you count freezing it - for the fourth time). But despite all the silliness and the tongue-in-cheek moments, this is a suspenseful ride which never lets up and kept me hooked the entire time. There are quite a few unexpected twists and turns along the way, and the wonderful supporting cast (James Woods, Richard Jenkins and Jason Clarke, to name a few) keep even the most clichéd characters fun and interesting. So my verdict: Great, silly, cheesy action film! Suspend your disbelief and you will have one hell of a good time. I rate it 7 out of 10.

Favorite films: http://www.IMDb.com/list/mkjOKvqlSBs/

Lesser-known Masterpieces: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070242495/

Favorite Low-Budget and B-Movies: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls054808375/

Favorite TV-Shows reviewed: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls075552387/
164 out of 232 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not as bad as everybody told me !
mpflipper-459-1152559 September 2013
I wasn't that eager to watch this movie, because I had seen some clips on TV shows reviewing it, and read reviews in newspapers...and none of them were very positive.

But on a rainy Sunday night, nothing else to do...i thought to myself...why not !? Have an open mind and go and see it.

And i must say I was pleasantly surprised !!! YES every normal thinking adult must know that the things you see in this movie are outrageous and simply couldn't ever happen that way. But so is most of what happens in any Bond movie ! So just forget about that part of it all...and decide if the movie is entertaining, and i thought it was !

Channing Tatum, James Woods, Maggie Gyllenhaal and little Joey King did really good work ! The only negative for me in this movie was Jamie Foxx, and I don't even know what it was that bothered me about him in this movie, but I just didn't think he was the best choice for that part !
64 out of 108 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Entertaining! But that's it.
gkc-kelvin2 July 2013
Let me just begin by saying, this movie was worth the price of my ticket. But that might just be because I got my ticket at 50% off.

The world has seen millions of movies where USA comes under attack. This was probably just a rehash of every single one of those movies. There was nothing fresh, or new; there was no wow factor. Simply put, the producers probably just took a bunch of pre-molded "Lego blocks" that had already been overused in every other action movie, threw them all together, made a new movie, and called it "White House Down".

But that's not to say this movie was all bad. The undeniable chemistry between Tatum and Foxx was like a consolation for a 99.9% cliché storyline. The light humor between the two might have just given the audience a couple of time-outs from the heart-thumping moments during the movie's intense sequences, making the somewhat draggy, long-winded two-hour film a little easier to sit through. But as mentioned, a million clichés thrown together made the storyline absolutely predictable, so don't expect any twists.

In a nutshell, it's just a mashup of a whole series of music hits, in movie form. But oh well, at least the mashup was decently done.
91 out of 180 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
There's better there's worse
MAYESY-445 June 2020
Decent action movie but not as good as Olympus has fallen which is similar and came out around the same time. The problem with this is not the story it is the acting which is not the best and a bit cheesy at times but if you are looking for a decent action movie it is not bad to watch.
11 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Puff and Fluff
LeonLouisRicci21 November 2013
There won't be any "check your brain at the door", or "get the big bucket of popcorn" Clichés here. Speaking of Clichés, is it possible that a Movie can be nothing but a Cliché? Anything Goes in the World of "Summer Blockbusters".

It is Curious that this one would come so Soon after the Virtually same Scenario of Olympus Has Fallen (2013), but that may be Thinking too Much. Speaking of Thinking. Is it Possible that a Movie can be made Without Thinking? Anything is Possible in the World of Hollywood Hacks.

Listing the Clownish and Clonish Aspects of this Featherweight Failure would be a Taxing Exercise for Everyone Concerned. But Suffice to say that this Movie is so Light and Airy that it will Float from the Memory Immediately upon the Onset of the Ten Minutes of Credits. Speaking of Credit. Is it Possible that a Movie can be a Credit to its Artform with Absolutely Nothing Artistic to Offer. Anything is Possible in the World of Puff and Fluff Films.

Overall this is a Waste of Time and mostly Painful to Watch. It Owes more to the Keystone Cops and Bad Sitcoms then to the Action Genre it so Shamefully Copies. The Best that can be said is Check Your Brain at the Door and Buy a Big Bucket of Popcorn and...Oops!
13 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
It's called entertainment people
shane-may7 July 2013
This is the first review I've ever written ever. I don't subscribe to movie reviews--at all. I actually enjoy movies. It seems to me that by in large reviewers just don't like movies. Not the intelligent reviewers anyway. They seem to be more concerned with how they look to their readers, pretending they know something about film. Reviewers are writers who want to be something else, filmmakers perhaps, and find it incredibly trendy and smart to disassemble and deconstruct the hard work of others; and to hate entertainment. They all seem to have this idea that they know better and I have little time for their self righteous, self important, pretentious bullshit thinly disguised as some sort of public service. Heads up: it does no one a service to be condescending or insulting.

With that said I will now step off of MY self righteous soap box and say that White House Down is a damned good time time with excellent shots of DC (making it look like an attractive, interesting place to be as opposed to the hot and smelly dumpster it actually is...seriously, the place smells like a dumpster), in your face action, fine performances-- Jamie Foxx is pretty cool as the leader of the free world--a bad guy who you just can't wait to watch die (there are several bad guys in this movie, so I'm not counting that as a spoiler), and pretty awesome hero in John Kale.

Now the movie gets a little long which is only an issue if you're a smoker like me, by the middle of the third act I was craving pretty hard, and there's some dumb lines of dialogue during one of the action sequences that didn't seem to fit the characters, but whatever.

White House Down is a fun and intense action movie that I would gladly see again. 8 out of 10!
391 out of 690 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
And the Search for the New Bruce Willis Continues...
A_Different_Drummer7 July 2013
Lets tell a story. IN THE BEGINNING there was a fairly unique TV show called Moonlighting directed by a maverick director who used a lot of strange cuts and spent a lot of time on the chemistry between the two stars. The female star was an ageing blonde bombshell and the male star was a relative unknown named Bruce Willis. The show was a hit. When it ended, both tried to move into features, but only Willis succeeded. His breakout role was an adaptation of a novel by (then) bestselling writer Roderick Thorpe and it was called Die Hard. It was brilliant. One of the best films of its kind ever done. And Willis was brilliant, showing a knack for action and pathos at the same time. The movie (DIE HARD) was so good it became a franchise although the quality of the sequels was very uneven (and the last entry was an abomination). But Hollywood is nothing if not repetitive, and as it becomes clear that Willis is too old to continue, the HUNT FOR A NEW BRUCE WILLIS CONTINUES. In one corner we have Gerard Butler who, to be fair, does a brilliant job in a movie (OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN) that lacks good writing, good direction, and a good supporting cast. And now (because, as noted, Hollywood is repetitive) we have WHITE HOUSE DOWN, where the versatile Channing Tatum gives it a go. Here the writing direction and supporting cast are a bit better than OLYMPUS but the net effect is to make Tatum part of an ensemble cast and that of course is the absolutely wrong thing you want to do in this kind of picture. It is somewhat entertaining and (as said) a heck of a lot better than anything Willis himself has done lately. BUT DIE HARD IT Ain't.
28 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Way too stupid and overlong
preppy-34 July 2013
A bunch of terrorists attack and (way too easily) occupy the White House. Cale (Channing Tatum) is there with his 11 year old daughter Emily (Joey King). Through circumstances Cale saves President Sawyer (Jamie Foxx) from being killed and they try to figure a way to beat the terrorists and save the White House.

This starts out badly. The first half hour deals with character development. Nothing wrong with that--but it's so DULL! Then the action starts up and it picks up. There's plenty of violence--LOTS of shootings but no blood (hence the PG-13 rating). Still it isn't that good. The action is strong and violent but not enough to carry the movie. Also it's far too long and gets stupider as it goes along. Seriously--by the end I was getting insulted as how moronic the film was getting. Also Emily (an 11 year old) is slapped around, threatened and (more than once) has a gun held to her head! That's going too far. Even worse is Tatum's acting. He was blank-faced throughout. On the plus side the special effects were great, Foxx was good as the president, and Maggie Gyllenhaal and James Woods were great in supporting roles. So it was loud and violent but too long and too stupid.
35 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Very entertaining with action and comedy!
yankeefan5331 July 2013
This is one of the best movies I've ever seen! I loved every part of it with its twists in the story you never see coming, the action filled moments and the comedy. I didn't think this movie would be this good from what the trailer showed us but it surprised me a lot. Jamie Fox and Channing Tatum make a good pair for the main roles of the movie but I know there could be a better pair but they were still good. Now if you saw the movie with a similar plot called, Olympus has Fallen, and you liked it you'll like this too. I've seen a large amount of movies and this one is definitely in the top 10 best movies I've ever seen. I don't get why a lot of people thought this was stupid but they must look at movies in a different way. All in all this movie was memorable one for me.
37 out of 74 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Settle in for a pleasant surprise
Mr-Fusion1 July 2018
"White House Down" promises slick action and lots of malicious property destruction. On that basis, it's an enjoyable summer diversion, but it's what Roland Emmerich manages to do with it that's really surprising.

It's a Die Hard movie. Not even really a clone, but an actual, honest-to-god, best-we've-gotten-since-1995 Die Hard movie. It blows the last two sequels out of the water and fills in the whole checklist:

Down-on-his-luck protagonist (check) Confined space (check) Loved one in danger (check) Black sidekick (check) Outside support (check) (the list goes on)

Make no mistake, I don't go into these action movies with an actual checklist. But this was a wholly enjoyable curveball.

Seriously, did any of us see this movie coming? It looked terrible!
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A waste of 2 hours
Paulh61624 May 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Rating this as 1 out of 10 (awful) doesn't really reflect just how poor this film actually is. I understand that this is Summer blockbuster patriotism but this trash is an insult to the eyes, from the bad acting to the script... who would say these things.

Rather like 24 (which is a good watch) can I suggest that the Government departments and agencies beef up their recruitment procedures because it seems that they regularly employ traitors and never properly check the background of people who suddenly start working in Government buildings.

One positive is that the bad guys gradually lose their ability to shoot accurately as the film progresses. At the outset, they are slick and basically kill everyone with dead-eye precision but later on they become standard 'can't hit a barn door' baddies who attended the university of bad guys never win..

2 hrs lost forever...
91 out of 154 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Whether or not you've seen the earlier 'Olympus Has Fallen', do yourself a favour and avoid this loud, dumb and boring poorer cousin that is best described as an utter farce
moviexclusive25 June 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Forever etching his name on the 'blacklist' of the highest office in Washington, Roland Emmerich is back at destroying the official residence of the President of the United States. Alas, Emmerich has been beaten at his own game, his White House under siege premise coming less than six months after the similarly-themed 'Olympus Has Fallen'. Besides cast and character, both are essentially variations of the same movie - or to sum it up succinctly, 'Die Hard' on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And having lost the novelty factor to 'Olympus', what matters is only whether it is in fact a better movie than its predecessor, to which our answer is unfortunately a resounding no.

Yes, despite a bigger budget and perhaps more bankable lead stars (Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx are still surer box-office bets than Gerard Butler going by their respective track records), 'White House Down' is a disappointing letdown. To be fair, that ain't the fault of Tatum and Foxx, both of whom are the saving graces of an otherwise embarrassing exercise in hokum; instead, Emmerich and his screenwriter James Vanderbilt are squarely to blame here, the latter for throwing any semblance of logic out the window and the former for trying too hard to emulate Michael Bay.

Whereas 'Olympus' had the real-life threat of the North Koreans to lend some authenticity, Vanderbilt engenders none with his far-fetched premise of the President's Head of Secret Service, Walker (James Woods), recruiting a hodgepodge bunch of right-wing ex-military fundamentalists to kidnap the President and exploit his nuclear arsenal so as to wipe out America's enemies in the Middle East (here's looking at you, Teheran) off the map. The trigger for that? A G8 speech where current President, James Sawyer (Foxx), essentially tells the world that the U.S. will be pursuing peace diplomacy by taking the first step to lay down its weapons.

Despite a backstory that tries to explain Walker's motivations, there is little coherence to just how the Head of the President's Secret Service detail would be so compelled to attempt such an act of treason, let alone assemble a ragtag team of militarists with past criminal records and sneak them into the White House to aid his 'noble' cause. Ditto for the likelihood that a hacker, however brilliant he might be, could simply run a programme to crack the NSA's firewalls without even so much as alerting anyone else in the process - and may we add thereby precipitating a thoroughly laughable chain of swearing-ins that goes from the Vice-President to the Speaker of Parliament Raphelson (Richard Jenkins). If you thought 'Olympus' was just implausible, then 'White House Down' pretty much operates on its own system of reasoning.

Further turning the proceedings to farce is the buddy team of aspiring Secret Service agent John Cale (Tatum) and President Sawyer. A classic case of the right guy in the wrong place at the wrong time, Cale finds himself rising to the call of duty when the terrorists launch their attack just as he and his daughter Emily (Joey King) are on tour in the White House. But instead of repeating the formula of one man saving the day (or the President for that matter), Vanderbilt introduces a twist to the dynamics between Cale and Sawyer by turning them into partners - though how much it really does veer from the earlier cliché is questionable.

Nonetheless, Tatum and Foxx make a pleasantly amusing pair and are - truth be told - the best things that the movie has going for it. But the immediate trade-off of injecting comedy into a premise that intuitively demands a certain degree of solemnity is that you cannot quite take anything else that happens in it seriously afterwards. Nowhere is this more evident than in an utterly ludicrous sequence where Cale and Sawyer are in the President's limousine driving round and round the fountain in the middle of the White House lawn while being chased by the bad guys, the sheer stupidity of it matched by the fact that Sawyer is in the meantime figuring out how to assemble a mini rocket launcher in the back seat.

Whereas 'Olympus' kept its pacing taut by emphasising the gravity of the threat facing the nation, there is nary a frisson of tension even as Walker comes dangerously close to acquiring the President's nuclear commandership. Simply put, the self-aware humour that is the only reason why the movie remains watchable sits at odds with the self-serious tone in the last third of the film, and no number of fighter planes nor surface-to-air missiles can regain the credibility of its premise.

It doesn't help that the action, which consists largely of close combat fights, is surprisingly lacklustre, choreographed with neither finesse nor technique to distinguish one from the other. Wherever Emmerich gets the opportunity in the screenplay to stage the action against a wider canvas, he squanders that chance to make it count, the surfeit of CGI and excess making for a toxic combination that renders what is shown little more than an afterthought. Indeed, a similar sequence as that in 'Olympus' where the Special Forces attempt to land on the roof of the White House from helicopters unfolds with so little excitement that it might as well have been cut out altogether.

Therein lies perhaps the biggest problem with 'White House Down' - even as a summer popcorn flick, it just isn't thrilling enough. Emmerich tries to keep every frame busy - hence the countless number of times Tatum leaps over couches or slides over tables - but the action is just loud, dumb and plain boring. Only the humour between Tatum and Foxx manages to be entertaining, though it's hard not to regard the movie as farce afterwards. Call us biased, but we like our White House under siege thrillers to be hard-hitting, intense and gripping, none of which can be used to describe 'White House Down'.

  • www.moviexclusive.com
135 out of 251 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Just enjoy the over the top ride
juneebuggy3 April 2020
Policeman Channing Tatum is a devoted father who is at the white house for a job interview with the secret service when a ruthless paramilitary group seize control. In a very Die Hard scenario sort of way 'Cale' must now fight to protect the president, find his daughter, figure out who the bad guys are, stop nuclear weapons from bring launched and drive in circles around the white house lawn while firing a rocket launcher.

This is an over the top action extravaganza that for me quickly crossed over into the so-bad-it's-good department. If you just go along for the ride its a ton of fun watching the White House get destroyed and Channing kick butt trying to protect goofy president Jamie Foxx. Some twists along the way and a decent supporting cast with Maggie Gyllenhaal, James Woods, Richard Jenkins and Jason Clarke as the bad guy.

A lighter version of Olympus Has Fallen.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
If you think "White House Down" is going to be about an attack on the WH
gunn-wrights5 December 2021
If you think "White House Down" is going to be about an attack on the WH..... you'd be correct!

It's slightly above average - mostly because the great acting, and a pretty decent story. I mean, who doesn't like a good gun, Javelin, helicopter, fighter jet, etc. Military shoot 'em up movie ? Nonetheless, it's a story that's been done over and over - there are only so many unique situations you can think of involving 1 house and the people who live in it. With that said - it's still quite good.

RECOMMENDATION: Not the best, but, still worth a watch - especially if you're looking for a movie to play in the background, while doing laundry etc.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Déjà vu?
claudio_carvalho17 November 2013
The North-American President James Sawyer (Jamie Foxx) proposes a global peace plan frustrating the arms industry. Meanwhile the Capitol security agent John Cale (Channing Tatum) had made an application for the secret service to protect the president and travels for an interview with Agent Finnerty (Maggie Gyllenhaal) in Washington with his eleven year-old daughter Emily (Joey King). Cale is not accepted and he goes with Emily on a tour in the White House. Out of the blue, the White House is invaded and overtaken by a terrorist group led by Stenz (Jason Clarke) and Cale fights against the paramilitary group to save his daughter and the president while discloses high treason and coup d'état sponsored by the arms industry.

"White House Down" is a kind of déjà vu of "Olympus Has Fallen" that is a rip-off "Die Hard". The lack of originality is impressive associated to a dull, predictable, boasting of patriotism and unbelievable story and an annoying teenager. However the result is funny and entertains with the absurd. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "O Ataque" ("The Attack")
13 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
White House Propaganda
sycodon28 June 2013
It is inevitable that White House Down be compared to Olympus Has Fallen. Unfortunately, it compares poorly from the title on down.

The special effects lack the realism of OHF.

The action sequences are disjointed and downright goofy at times.

The bad guys are cartoonish and you get no sense of satisfaction when they are put down.

The plot is too complicated by half and really is not relevant to the action.

The movie ends with a whimper and a SNL quality perp walk of the character who is ultimately responsible for all the carnage.

But the worst thing is the crude, amateurish and transparent Left vs. Right political message in which it drapes all the other sub par elements. It is a Progressive's wet dream that really couldn't be any more wacko if you gathered 100 of Huffington Posts's top Super Users in a room festooned pictures of Dick Cheney and GWB, fed them mushrooms, and asked them to come up with the motivation for the bad guys.

But Good Guys shooting bad guys is always good and so are explosions. If you ignore the channeling of Nancy Pelosi, then you might get your money's worth at a matinée showing.
299 out of 585 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
to break the chain of cynical "wannabe critics"
a_ko176 July 2013
is it just me or has ALL the movies out lately for the past few years since the internet was made available to cynical people who hates every little thing receive only 3 out of 5 stars in IMDb and other "movie- rating" sites ?

it seems nothing is good enough for these "wannabe critics", and just like any wannabe critic who want to feel important, would only have praises for "timeless classics" made in the early to mid 1900s, of course, no "critic" would dare bash on these "timeless classics" no matter how uninteresting they may be to certain individuals given their difference in taste and interest, it's because they're afraid to be bashed themselves by other "critics" for not following the golden rule of being a "movie critic"

"thou shall only have praises for classic films, any film made after the 70s is nonsensical, dumb, loud, poorly acted, poorly produced, poorly directed and other infraction we might or might not see but will mention anyway"

if the internet already existed when these "timeless classics" were shown, i bet all of my life savings that these "critics" would the first ones to insult every little detail of the movie from the entire production set to the punctuality of the person delivering the donuts to the director
33 out of 67 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The second best "White House has been captured" movie of 2013.
slicedbread11716 December 2013
If you couldn't tell by my title, there was another movie released in 2013 before White House Down with the exact same premise as this film. Being the second best movie of two with the same super-clichéd plot doesn't fare well for any film, including White House Down.

There is arguably no bigger cliché than the most secure building on Earth being overrun, so a movie that adapts this premise needs to make sure they know what they're doing and unfortunately, WHD does not. The plot never makes itself clear, at least in terms of the bad guys and there are twists that overall make the film a sometimes puzzling piece of work. I believe that it is the script itself that has too many holes thus creating a movie with several holes as well. The overall concept behind this film is pretty dull to say the least.

Obviously a movie like this is going to have a plethora of action, and there is plenty of it here. The action can be viewed in two ways: if you try to take the movie seriously, then the action is painfully dull and clichéd, to a point where it leaves the "it's so bad it's good" realm. However, if you end up watching the film with the notion in mind that this is one big dumb action movie that you can laugh at, then sure, it could have a lot of entertainment value. I love a good action movie that turns clichés into awesome, bad ass moments, but WHD fails to deliver that with poorly edited action all around.

Channing Tatum and Jamie Foxx give the film a couple high profile names, but the chemistry just isn't there to provide the movie with any extra sense of emotion or depth. Tatum's character is sometimes just not the action hero you want to see, but also can be a pleasant surprise and show some entertainment. As the President of the United States, Jamie Foxx also does a okay job, providing some laughs but overall not very interesting.

It's not easy to compete head-to-head with another similarly themed movie in the same year, with White House Down having to go up against "Olympus Has Fallen". While there might be some flashes of solid entertainment value, White House Down's poor script, undeveloped and uninteresting characters and action that overall isn't that great gives Olympus the edge in the year's "which White House movie is better?" debate.

6/10
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Loud, Dumb and Overlong
trublu21529 June 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Now, this seemed like the perfect summer blockbuster. Two huge stars, an expensive budget and a director with a knack for action. What could go wrong? By the end of it, instead of what could go wrong, you'll be asking yourself what went right. The answer....barely anything. White House Down is not only dumb, it is downright idiotic. The plot is preposterous, the action sequences sub par and the acting is atrocious. Channing Tatum does his best Bruce Willis impression while Jamie Foxx turns in the worst performance of his career. The supporting cast lead by Maggie Gyllenhaal saves the terrible leads and are the sole reason I am not giving this a 1. Overall, this film is loud, long and boring, so much so, I can't imagine any adult with a functioning brain to enjoy this. I highly recommend to stay away from this stinker. If you want a great action film featuring the destruction of the White House, tune into Olympus Has Fallen.
337 out of 665 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A True Action Movie Fan's Wet Dream
DareDevilKid11 July 2013
Rating: 3.7/5 stars Reviewed by: Dare Devil Kid (DDK)

Loved every minute of it. To hell with all the naysayers and the (obvious) comparisons with "Olympus has fallen" and the PG-13 rating gripe. Like me, if you enjoyed "Olympus Has Fallen", you'll definitely relish this action bonanza too. In fact, I'll go even further and state that it's even better and slightly more coherent, if not realistic, than the former.

Tatum as usual is cool and breezy like in all his action roles and together with Foxx, makes for an entertaining combo. The direction does admittedly get a tad clichéd at times and might venture into overtly patriotic territory. But then, with a title that screams: "White House Down", this was naturally expected, and those who aren't pleased are either completely delusional or else they have seen way too few action movies. Boasting of pulsating action sequences, brilliant set designs, witty one liners, decent comic relief, a plausible plot, believable plot narration, and one of the most outrageous car chase scenes to boot, this movie has got it all.

Sci-fi and action movie Director Roland Emerich might never be regarded in the same breath as similar genre auteurs like Spielberg, Cameron, Nolan, John McTiernan, or Richard Donner, and for good measure. But nobody can deny one thing, the man knows how to create an entertaining and adrenaline-pumping blockbuster, unlike some hacks (ref., Bay).

Ultimately, "White House Down" delivers everything you can hope for in an exciting action movie. So sit your butt down, strap up, and enjoy this no-holds-barred action fiesta.
28 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Potential Not Realized
tabuno16 January 2019
14 September 2013. White House Down starts with a lofty humanistic developing story that has substantive drama, but unlike its contemporary cousin Olympus Has Fallen (2013) becomes more a derivative of John McTiernan's action thriller Die Hard (1988). The result is an uneasy attempt at light humor along with a more darker plot that literally destroys a national American symbol. The plot elements in this deliberately twisting action thriller sometimes fails logic and later descends into a more chaotic and at times manipulative story.

Even with a rather ingenious double, double cross there is the over simplified demise of one of the more colorful villain, action scenes that seem to become more cluttered confusion and literally driving around in strange circles that defies believability. Even with the sincere and poignant if not manipulative scene with the daughter towards the climax of the movie, there are just too many moments where escape plans are abruptly and conveniently and contortedly altered.

While the beginning of the movie offered a polished and genuinely felt corridors of high power well folded as a solid backdrop to the humanity of the developing characters and an interesting liberal conspiracy theory embraced by the President himself, the tone of the movie becomes uneasy. Unlike Olympus Has Fallen which takes itself more thoughtfully seriously both the take over of the White House, the rebellious counter measures, and the consistent appealing emotive tone, White House Down just can't bring the same level of dry humor and entertainment as Die Hard.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
I Spent How Much on This?
melvisu-724-17768228 June 2013
I will start with the pros. This movie is packed with excitement, action, and CGI effects - almost start to finish. Now the cons: a blatant ripoff of both Die Hard and Olympus Has Fallen (which was a blatant ripoff of Die Hard); the most implausible story EVER; the absolute worst acting EVER with Jamie Foxx taking the lead. This movie should be reason enough to finally burn that guy's SAG card once and for all. And Channing Tatum, whom I normally like, was a close second. In fact, the only actor to give a good performance was the little girl who played Tatum's daughter.

Believe the reviews you read here. They are not exaggerations. If you must watch this, wait for Redbox!
219 out of 428 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed