Post apocalypse is a difficult genre. Visually beautiful, worth a view, but overall: no.

Fully expected to hate it, but found it watchable, apart from the rampant yellow-face, and non subtitled patois; so glad I didn't read the book. Great editing. It's long, but worth it. Pictured: David Gyasi. 

Michael Fassbender is fabulous, and it looks great: that's enough for me. If you want to see a really good Ridley Scott movie, watch his first film, THE DUELISTS (1977.)http://www.prometheus-movie.com/

If you don't mind an ambiguous and crappy ending, then you might enjoy this low budget attempt at psycho / time-travel / cultdom infiltration. The end is first surprising, then infuriating. Like a selfish lover who teases you to the brink of a mild yet satisfying orgasm, and leaves you hanging to go listen to bad music... 
http://www.soundofmyvoicemovie.com/index2.html

Zac, Joss; why over forty minutes to get moving? You can label it "an installment" but it's a sequel: and it's too long. When half of your characters are flat & zombie-esque, especially the females, that means you might have too many characters. Some thrilling scenes... plenty of propaganda. 

Yes, you should see it: it's great!

Low budget Spanish sci-fi comedy, not very funny. Nah...

Too weird, and chauvinistic: I'd rather watch James Caan in Rollerball, again.