Michael Ledo If you have seen the original "Coma" and were not in a coma during the first 10 minutes of the film, you should have it fairly well figured out except for some slight nuances.Susan Wheeler (Lauren Ambrose) is a third year hot shot medical student and now an intern. Her grandfather was the legendary Dr. Wheeler who is remembered by the older staff. She quickly discovers something wrong is going on the hospital, the only question that remains is who can she trust. This should have been a a movie that examines the moral and ethical questions of "death panels", the common good, and embryonic stem cell research. Instead it only glosses over the topic and then inanely makes a mockery of the whole thing.It is really ashamed because they had good actors to support this script and failed to deliver the goods. They managed to turn scenes which should have been shocking into the mundane.Made for TV, TV-14 This should be a free film for Amazon Prime. I predict it will soon make the bad horror film muti-packs.

SceneByScene What a shame: all but the last 30mins or so of this drama are classic TV movie: badly scripted & fundamentally disjointed.The trailer promised cameos by a range of superb actors. This boded well . . . but the performers were then completely wasted. A few key phrases and 'masterful' TV-drama looks, and they were gone. What a shameful squandering of the talents of James Woods, Richard Dreyfus, etc. I can't say I was surprised. Few TV movies make 'the grade' in storytelling. And few remakes (big-screen or otherwise) ever match the quality of the original. So a drama that fits into both categories has much to fight against to attain any form of success; which this TV remake does not.The one redeeming feature of this version of 'Coma' may be for those viewers who haven't seen the excellent 1978 film original. The Genevieve Bujold version sticks in my mind over 25 years since I first saw it! For those new to the story this drama may hold its own. After all, it will have no alternative against which to be measured.But I still feel that, whereas in the 1970s the concept of this kind of scientific experimentation was unknown & shocking to the layman, to a modern audience it is all too familiar & newsworthy. So the shock level of the story is lost; which is after all the mainstay of the plot.The usual mistakes of cheap movie-making occur: story threads are left incomplete, the plot continuity has gaping holes in it, and the character development is threadbare. One character {I will leave the name left blank here: to avoid spoilers!} is in one scene adamant that they want to continue their affair with their lover, then in the very next scene are suddenly keen to throw that affair over: with no real explanation to the observer for such a key change of heart. More 'jumping' occurs when the role of at least two of the 'baddies' is left unclear. Overall there is too much left unexplained. Another character turns 'tail' in loyalties at the end with – again – no in-depth explanation to the viewer as to the reason for his change of heart. This film is simply a case of too many characters & not enough characterisation.Yet another example of a poorly put together TV film for which one cannot blame the actors. It is the material they are working with that is at fault, not their acting performance.There is also a signature of TV movie 'dross': an extended stalking scene. It is ridiculously long, and is neither necessary nor well made. In the same scene there is even a long-winded monologue – over an intercom! – by one of the 'baddies'. It made me think of a plagiarised Jack Nicholson in 'The Shining', without being anywhere near as riveting or chilling.Geena Davis is given a lot of screen time, but the camera seems to just dwell on her pretty face rather than let her get to grips with what could have been a more in-depth role. Another wasted talent.The script is patchy; not as bad as it might be perhaps – and it may well be another skill area in the production process that causes this problem in the end product – but the screen play is not good enough to link the scenes together and make a substantial movie of this.In the last hour or so we finally get to see what is going on 'behind the scenes'. And the pace becomes more appropriate, with the scenes finally beginning to connect a little more. But it is too little, too late. And, being a TV movie, of course we get to see too much blood & guts in the final moments; in place of the necessary development of the back plot. Lots of gory: not enough story.We never get to hear more than a few words of explanation of the ethics of the experiments, or the motivation for it. This is crucial to the whole storyline. We need to hear the psychology & drive behind what is going on. But there is none told to the viewer. Sadly, there seems little if no thought behind this film. It is, frankly, just superficial popcorn drivel.Bizarrely, the credit sequence at the end is the best part of the whole production!: original & stylish.The 1978 film was quietly intelligent. This remake, sadly, is empty of any style or substance – and 'loudly' so. What a shame that those two greats – the Scott Brothers – couldn't leave well alone. After all, if it ain't broke, don't mend it! I only assume, being producers, that they had little to do with the creative process. So I shall leave 'Blade Runner' & 'Top Gun' as happy memories to remind me what skilled film-makers they can be.

Stuart Whyte When making Trainspotting Danny Boyle described the film as something of 'a remix' of the source book to allay any fears of viewers who had read and would perhaps feel allegiance to the cult phenomenon of the Irvine Welsh novel. To corrupt that same analogy, this production of Coma is like a bad 80's 12" version of the (rather schlocky) original 70s film. Some scenes are very faithfully/slavishly reproduced to seemingly mimic the original film. I know the source material is the same but exactly the same shots are employed without further thought or creativity. So there is familiarity in places for those who've seen the other one. But the over-riding feel is one of jarring cliché, unrealistic 'lifestyle gloss' applied to the characterisation and art direction and most problematically a lot of condescending exposition and spoon-feeding of plot without any regard for tension or pacing. The cumulative effect is of an overlong, corrosively hallucinatory 'bad trip' with dialogue and acting that create an oppressive air of malevolence that is both reductive and exploitative of the audience.

bmsears All these negative remarks and reviews, people are so blind and up their own tails. You have no idea of a good movie or show if you thought this was bad. I absolutely loved it. I didn't discover it was a series until after the first sequence ended and my brother and I were thirsty for more. This was great. People keep turning their backs on material like this and wondering why Hollywood keeps pushing out crappy films. You are the reasons. This was amazing, and i highly recommend it. I haven't seen the original, but maybe that's why people are blabbing out negativity. This show was suspenseful, it drew you in, it had all the elements of a great suspense. If you love investigation shows, like Csi, Er, or House, this show had all those great shows wrapped up in one. I wish they would make more of the series. I love love love it.