CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.6/10
7.4 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Los hombres capturan a la criatura de la Laguna Negra y la convierten en una atracción de acuario, de la que se escapa.Los hombres capturan a la criatura de la Laguna Negra y la convierten en una atracción de acuario, de la que se escapa.Los hombres capturan a la criatura de la Laguna Negra y la convierten en una atracción de acuario, de la que se escapa.
Charles Cane
- Captain of Police
- (as Charles R. Cane)
Loretta Agar
- Woman on Boat
- (sin créditos)
Bill Baldwin
- Patrol Boat Dispatcher
- (voz)
- (sin créditos)
Jere Beery Sr.
- Photographer
- (sin créditos)
Ricou Browning
- The Gill Man (In Water)
- (sin créditos)
- …
Diane DeLaire
- Miss Abbott
- (sin créditos)
Mike Doyle
- Cop
- (sin créditos)
Clint Eastwood
- Jennings
- (sin créditos)
Jack Gargan
- Skipper
- (sin créditos)
Charles A. Gibbs
- Cop
- (sin créditos)
Brett Halsey
- Pete
- (sin créditos)
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
In all fairness this movie should be judged for what it is .... a 1950's B Monster movie flick. I give it high marks in this area. It may not have the shock and scare value as it predecessor "The Creature of the Black Lagoon" but I find it to be a good representative of it's genre. A lot of this film was shot at Marineland in Florida at a time before there ever was a Sea World. As a kid I was amazed at some of the scenes in the film such as "The Creature" over turning a car as he was escaping the Aqua Park, and jumping out of a huge aquatic tank to attack the audience. Recently I talked with Ricou Browning (who played "The Creature") and determined that Universal Studios used wires to turn over the car that was supposedly thrown by the Creature. Wires were once again used to pull the Creature out of the large tank at Marineland as the Creature attacked actor, John Bromfeld. Seconds later he was attacking the Marineland crowd. As a young theater goer I found this fascinating. This film has been taking a lot of heat from some of your web site critics. I think it is well worth watching to see how the old Hollywood crowd use to scare us at the Drive-In. If nothing else it serves as a pleasant stroll down "memory lane".
More like revenge of the director.
Maybe it's the smug aura of John 'what is it I don't know' Agar, but this one seemed less like a horror flick and more like an inaugural presentation for Sea World. Wouldn't that have been a a great match up: Gill Man vs Shamu! This orca ain't no alligator you can snap in half.
Helen Dobson is a nice distraction from the relenting slow pace quite apparent in the film. Her expertise in ichthyology is most impressive especially in that white swimwear. Can you really blame the Gill Man for trying? Give this movie credit for the creature's special effects. Keeping in mind this was made in 1955, the articulate detail for Gilly adds this other worldy effect and it's so bizarre seeing any scene where his gills flap in and out.
Poor GM, he was just misunderstood. How would you react to repeated cattle prodding?
Maybe it's the smug aura of John 'what is it I don't know' Agar, but this one seemed less like a horror flick and more like an inaugural presentation for Sea World. Wouldn't that have been a a great match up: Gill Man vs Shamu! This orca ain't no alligator you can snap in half.
Helen Dobson is a nice distraction from the relenting slow pace quite apparent in the film. Her expertise in ichthyology is most impressive especially in that white swimwear. Can you really blame the Gill Man for trying? Give this movie credit for the creature's special effects. Keeping in mind this was made in 1955, the articulate detail for Gilly adds this other worldy effect and it's so bizarre seeing any scene where his gills flap in and out.
Poor GM, he was just misunderstood. How would you react to repeated cattle prodding?
The Creature from the Black Lagoon is back! This time he's captured by scientists and transported to an aquarium in south Florida...
Jack Arnold returns as director, and he has brought Ricou Browning back as the creature. 1950s science fiction lead John Agar is also here, making this a pretty solid sequel. (And who can be opposed to a film with Clint Eastwood in it?)
I guess a lot of people harp on this film. Mike Mayo calls it "insipid" and "a joke." Howard Maxford calls it "run-down". Well, I like it better than the original. I really, truly do. I feel more happens and the plot is more developed. I would have to watch both again to make a definitive statement, but I watched them both back to back and was bored by the first compared to the second.
Jack Arnold returns as director, and he has brought Ricou Browning back as the creature. 1950s science fiction lead John Agar is also here, making this a pretty solid sequel. (And who can be opposed to a film with Clint Eastwood in it?)
I guess a lot of people harp on this film. Mike Mayo calls it "insipid" and "a joke." Howard Maxford calls it "run-down". Well, I like it better than the original. I really, truly do. I feel more happens and the plot is more developed. I would have to watch both again to make a definitive statement, but I watched them both back to back and was bored by the first compared to the second.
Director Jack Arnold and company took great care in this one to make the 3-D effects look more natural. While there are no chairs or spears thrown at the camera, there are still plenty of thrilling moments when the creature advances into view and even a couple of false frights, as when a threatening shadow turns out to be no more dangerous than Lori Nelson's hand.
Admittedly the screenplay has its weak links. Depending largely on unlikely co-incidences, the storyline pays scant regard to consistency or logic, while the dialogue is not only trite and banal but seems to go out of its way to provide a persistent assault on the viewer's intelligence by explaining what we can actually see for ourselves. No-one can walk to the bathroom in this film without someone providing a running commentary. Worse, the characters prove little more than pasteboard figures which indifferent actors like Agar and Nelson struggle to bring to life. Miss Nelson is further handicapped by the large amount of make-up she was forced to wear for the 3-D cameras. True, the effect seemed not only attractive but perfectly natural when the original film was projected through a 3-D filter and then viewed through polaroid glasses. She still looks great when framed through a Marineland window, but in bright sunlight the effect now looks ridiculous.
Of course, the Creature himself seems far less menacing (and far more obviously a stuntman in an ill-fitting rubber suit) when exposed to the glare of flat, over-bright 2-D scrutiny.
Nonetheless, the skill of Jack Arnold's direction, particularly in his efforts to disguise obvious 3-D tricks and use depth to produce shock in a seemingly more realistic way, gives the movie sufficient interest and vigor to overcome all script and histrionic short-comings.
Production values benefit from location filming and it's good to see Scotty Welbourne handling all the photographic chores on this one, both underwater and main unit. Of course, in 2-D the picture looks over-lit as it was lensed with 3-D's 20% light reduction firmly in mind.
Admittedly the screenplay has its weak links. Depending largely on unlikely co-incidences, the storyline pays scant regard to consistency or logic, while the dialogue is not only trite and banal but seems to go out of its way to provide a persistent assault on the viewer's intelligence by explaining what we can actually see for ourselves. No-one can walk to the bathroom in this film without someone providing a running commentary. Worse, the characters prove little more than pasteboard figures which indifferent actors like Agar and Nelson struggle to bring to life. Miss Nelson is further handicapped by the large amount of make-up she was forced to wear for the 3-D cameras. True, the effect seemed not only attractive but perfectly natural when the original film was projected through a 3-D filter and then viewed through polaroid glasses. She still looks great when framed through a Marineland window, but in bright sunlight the effect now looks ridiculous.
Of course, the Creature himself seems far less menacing (and far more obviously a stuntman in an ill-fitting rubber suit) when exposed to the glare of flat, over-bright 2-D scrutiny.
Nonetheless, the skill of Jack Arnold's direction, particularly in his efforts to disguise obvious 3-D tricks and use depth to produce shock in a seemingly more realistic way, gives the movie sufficient interest and vigor to overcome all script and histrionic short-comings.
Production values benefit from location filming and it's good to see Scotty Welbourne handling all the photographic chores on this one, both underwater and main unit. Of course, in 2-D the picture looks over-lit as it was lensed with 3-D's 20% light reduction firmly in mind.
After the success of "Creature from the Black Lagoon", Universal Studios figured audiences would want to take another dip with the Gill Man and they were right. This time, marine biologist Bromfield hires the same boat captain that took the first set of scientists to the lagoon and sets out to capture the creature. After bombing the place (and killing all the fish....apparently ecology was but a thing of the future!), he captures the comatose creature and ships him to Florida to be an attraction and an experiment at an aqua park. He is joined by researcher Agar and student Nelson (looking and sounding far more mature than her 22 years!) who attempt to train the creature to respond to human commands. When the Gill Man has had enough of being chained to the floor of a huge aquarium and being prodded and tormented by his captors, he breaks loose, nabs Nelson and leads the police on a massive chase along the Florida coastline. This second entry (with one more sequel to come) doesn't have the same creepy atmosphere of the original, but it more than makes up for it in campy, unintentionally humorous ways. Agar gives a very routine performance, smiling idiotically at various points, then reverting to stoicism. Nelson runs hot and cold, too. In her first scene, when she witnesses a man being attacked by the creature, her expression is along the same lines as discovering that her soufflé fell while she was gabbing on the phone. She improves as it goes along, but is given some goofy things to say and do. She is hardly a match for the divine Julie Adams in the original, though her dress at the end is lovely and she gets to do what had to be a partial inspiration for Alfred Hitchcock's shower scene in "Psycho". Bromfield, not long after having frolicked with Esther Williams in "Easy to Love", has a more difficult swimming partner this time as he continuously wrangles the Gill Man. His tan, beefy looks fill out his teeny swim trunks beautifully, though his role eventually becomes a bit of a throwaway. (Fortunately, the baggy shorts the men wore in the first movie have been replaced by dinky, tight speedo-like ones here.) Future stars Eastwood and Halsey appear in bit parts. Eastwood has the most lamentable role as a sort of backward lab technician who can't keep track of the four mice he's been placed in charge of. Halsey has it better as a college student who has a run-in with the creature. The film is chock full of dry, now-hilarious moments of drama and bizarre plot details that make little or no sense. Nelson befriends a dog that roams into the aqua park and then has it living in her hotel room? The creature can track Nelson on land from the ocean? A police dispatcher feels it necessary to announce that she's a "pretty" student when detailing her kidnapping. When the monster goes on his rampage, a woman blithely lets go of her daughter who then falls at the feet of the creature. Miraculously, though he has mauled and killed men beforehand, he lets the mother kneel down and protect the child. In this film, more than in the original, audience sympathy leans towards the creature. After all, he was dragged form his home and then placed on display. The "training" sequences are remarkably cruel. Nelson places a box of food near him and as he reaches for it, Agar stabs him with a bull prod! Nice! Then she does the same thing with a ball. She entices him to play with it and then here comes the prod again! (Incidentally, the whole prod issue seems unlikely to work the way it is shown.) It does, however, turn a bit funny when the Gill Man retreats and sits on a rusty anchor. As in the original, there's an underwater swimming sequence, this time with Agar and Nelson canoodling while the creature lurks. Gill Man could have easily snatched her and gone off, but then there'd be no film. Even amongst all the goofiness, a modicum of suspense makes its way into the movie. Again, the monster gets some surprising mobility and speed underwater and is pretty threatening. This film draws from past classics ("King Kong"), yet inspired future movies as well ("Jaws 3-D", "Orca".) Far from a true classic, it entertains in spite of itself.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaActor and stuntman Tom Hennesy almost drowned during filming. Playing the Creature, he grabs Helen Dobson (actually stuntwoman Ginger Stanley) on a pier and jumps with her into the water. The scene was shot at night, and when Hennesy and Stanley hit the water, they discovered it was full of jellyfish. In addition, a freak current started to pull them both down. Hennesy let go of Stanley, who swam to the surface, but Hennesy's inflexible Gill-Man costume had become waterlogged and too heavy to fight the current. He was rescued by two local boys who happened to be watching the filming from a nearby boat, and quickly raced over and pulled him in.
- ErroresThe scientist puts the Gill-Man into a saltwater tank filled with sharks, sea turtles etc. The Gill-man came from a freshwater lagoon in the Amazon.
- Citas
George Johnson: What I'd give for a tall, cold beer.
Joe Hayes: A short, warm blonde.
- Créditos curiososin 3-D Horrorscope
- Versiones alternativasThis movie was originally released in 3-D
- ConexionesFeatured in Adventure Theater: Revenge of the Creature (1977)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Revenge of the Creature
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productora
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 1,100,000
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 22 minutos
- Color
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
By what name was El regreso del monstruo (1955) officially released in India in English?
Responda