Opiniones de usuarios

A new twist to the Wishmaster story in that the Djinn must gather 1000 souls before granting the waker the three wishes. Andrew Divoff returns as the Djinn which is a perfect role for him. Divoff looks so evil with the voice to go along with it. When granting a wish, his reply is an unemotional "done" which can cut right to the hearts of many people that make a wish. In the first film the waker was a likeable woman but in this one it is a woman that kills when committing robbery. Someone that is not likely a person that can defeat the Djinn. She enlists the help of a priest which was her one good choice in life. The Djinn goes into a prison for 200 souls. Where can a Djinn get another 800 souls? A place where people wish for something that they don't have. A place that people are so concerned about wishing that they do not realize that their soul is now required? This place is so logical that when you realize it, it becomes a place where you better not wish. Who knows if an evil Djinn is waiting for you?

This is yet another re-watch, ,I have seen this movie 3 times now, as I saw this before seeing the original.

I really loved this movie, I found it to be a lot of fun but not as fun as the Original.

This as some really nice gory deaths, which I really liked, effect are so fun to watch and some were just playing weird, even for the Wishmaster series.

Andrew Divoff is outstanding playing the Wishmaster, his face just give you the creeps.

The lead actress went bit over the top with some of her acting , some of cast were really bad in this, the most of them were decent, they could have done better.

I loved the last scene in the movie, thought it's was so funny!,

I didn't like some of the effects , near the end, I don't think it fitted well with other gory effect, that worked really well with the rest of the movie.

Not as good as the first , still a fun to be had in this gory sequel.

6 out of 10

Not as good as the first one, but still a better horror sequel than most horror series. The Djinn is still a scary villain and the deaths are still creative. I don't even want to watch Wishmaster 3 or 4 because Andrew Divoff isn't the Djinn anymore, and he is what makes the first two films fun.

Campy, Tongue-In-Cheek sequel brings back the Wishmaster from the '97 original. Remains entertaining enough from beginning to end, and has a wider sense of humour, with campy situations replacing the original's gore. Andrew Divoff's performance as the Wishmaster is a must see, he alone makes the film worthwhile.

***

I have seen the 1999 movie "Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies" maybe three or four times now. And I have to say that the movie sort of pales in comparison to the 1997 first "Wishmaster" movie.

Sure, it was nice to see Andrew Divoff return to reprise the role of the djinn, and he still does bring a lot of wicked charm and dark humor to the character. He actually makes the djinn character very memorable.

However, the storyline in "Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies", as written by Peter Atkins and Jack Sholder, just sort of never gets up into a thrilling pace. The movie sort of trots on monotonously throughout the course of the 96 minutes that it runs for. And it is a shame, because there are some fair enough scenes and moments here and there. But hey, it is still a watchable movie, just don't expect it to be on the same level as the 1997 "Wishmaster" movie.

The acting performances in "Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies" are fairly okay. This was, again, Andrew Divoff's movie, hands down. But the movie also have the likes of Paul Johansson, Robert LaSardo and Tom Lister Jr. On the cast list, so there are some familiar faces.

Visually then "Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies" was a mixed bag of nuts. Generally, the special effects in the movie are good, and I liked the effects in the movie, because they certainly helped to keep the otherwise bland storyline afloat. And then there was the scene with the insects in the casino. That was seriously the worst CGI I have ever seen, as in ever. You have to see how abysmally bad it is to believe it.

While we are on the effects, then I have to say that the wishmaster costume and appearance in "Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies" is really great. I like how much we get to see of the djinn creature throughout the entire movie. Lots of nice details to the costume, and the creature design is just fantastic.

Watchable for what it is, as Divoff makes it bearable to sit through. But "Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies" was not a masterpiece.

My rating of director Jack Sholder's 1999 "Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies" movie lands on a five out of ten stars.

I wish I could get the hour and a half (or whatever) of my life back that I WASTED watching this horrendous sequel! The first 'Wishmaster' was imaginative, original and fun. It had excellent effects (by KNB Efx Group) and a great storyline. Unfortunately, this sequel didn't offer any of that. The only thing it did offer was some laughable dialogue. And there's nothing sadder than a horror movie that's unintentionally funny! I almost feel sorry for Andrew Divoff (who plays the djinn) for having to act in it! He was the only person who worked on the original who returned for this sequel. Too bad. Maybe if Robert Kurtzman had directed again and they'd had the same writers, it might not have been so incredibly awful.

The story is pretty similar to the first movie, but I still find it entertaining. While the actual plot has the same plot points like the first movie, there's a few new ideas in it like the pureness of heart can defeat the Djinn. I like mention before the movie is still enjoyable with the scenes with Djinn and the climax of the movie is pretty entertaining with it being set in a casino. I also like the side plot about Morgana try to bring back her pure heart in order to defeat the villain.

Another flaw I have is the cheap jump scares that sometimes appears in Morgana dreams which is predictable and pretty obvious.

Will somebody please explain to me how the very same Jack Sholder who was responsible for the superb "The Hidden" in 1987 has ended up directing utter crap like Wishmaster 2? The actors all act as if all they're thinking of is to go home and have coffee, and they really can't be blamed since the story and dialogue appears to have been written by a five-year-old. I wish I had never watched this film.

If you enjoyed the first Wishmaster then you would probably like this, its pretty much exactly the same story ... awaken the jjin have him kill some people before the complete butchery at the final scene before he is stopped, enjoyable and better then half of the horror rubbish today...could have done more then just rip the originals plot though :(

Unlike the first Wishmaster, there are no Horror Icon cameos here, which is kinda disappointing but then it's also something of a relief because there's a chance that any cameos they DID have might have been wasted...on the plus side, the movie does have Vyto Ruginis - who's always fun to watch - AND the incredible icon that is Tiny Lister Jr - in a relatively unique role for him as a prison guard rather than a random thug-type character. The real draw, however, is of course Andrew Divoff doing exactly what Andrew Divoff does - knowing his role, knowing his character, and committing fully to what that role and that character need. I will never knock back a chance to see this man work, and it's a shame he's not widely regarded as being on the same level as Robert Englund, Kane Hodder, Tony Todd and the rest, because he IS on their level, his movies just don't have the wider appeal that everyone else's do.

The story is...meh...but then you're not REALLY here for a top-tier story, you're here to see Jack Sholder and Andrew Divoff work the magic that they work so well. So it's not really that big a deal that they change the lore so much from the first movie I guess - mainly in the number of souls the Djinn needs to collect - because it's secondary to everything else. And everything else works pretty bloody well.

It could have been better, but...

If you've read my review of Wishmaster then you'll know that I really enjoyed it. This sequel was just as good.

Again, it was interesting to see what people wished for. And that evil Djinn caused havoc everywhere-in jail and particularly at the casino towards the end. The wishes were truly great in this film but I won't spoil them for you. I was quite amused by what happened to a lawyer in the film.

It's rare that a horror sequel is good as the first but this was. The Djinn came back and was twice as nasty (if that's possible). This was a great film which I urge any horror fan to see.

I know "Wishmaster" was never really that popular with the horror fans, but I think it's a guilty pleasure for some, and you have to got to admit that these were the deadliest wishes ever! I loved seeing how the Djin twisted the wishes and loved all the gory scenes, they were just great. I have to say that the actor who played Nathanal, his face must've hurt that entire movie. :) I think if you liked the first Wishmaster, you would get a kick out of this one.

Basically, a group of thieves take art from a gallery, including the Djin stone, when a girl, Morgana, is stopped by a security guard, he shoots her and she shoots back killing him, but the bullet that hit her was stopped by the stone, releasing the Djin. The boyfriend of Morgana tells her to run, she does so, and the Djin takes the rap for the gang going to prison granting wishes upon wishes. He has to gather 1,000 souls and grant 3 wishes to Morgana before his hell will reign on Earth!

I thought the wishes were extremely cool, I think my favorite one was with the lawyer and how he "did" himself, it was very funny in a sick way, you've got to admit that it was original. I think horror fans will get a slight kick out of the second Wishmaster and I'm looking forward for the next sequel.

4/10

The original Wishmaster film was a pleasant surprise. Director Robert Kurtzman and writer Peter Atkins cleverly married very traditional old-school horror movie plotting and contemporary FX laden gore-splattering. The film benefited from a sense of humor, and had a fairly rapid pace that kept one distracted from any flaws.

The direct-to-video sequel, by contrast, shows no savvy at all in it's plotting, its (very limited) use of FX, or its pacing. For most of the film, the monstrous Wishmaster is confined (in his human form) in a prison, where it takes the longest time for him to get anyone to ask for a wish. This prolonged prison scene might have been salvageable if the dialogue were witty, but it basically reduces to:

Wishmaster: "I grant any wish, ask for something." Prisoner (or Guard): "F*** you!" Wishmaster: "No really, just ask."

If such is your idea of snappy dialog, this movie's for you.

Holly Fields is mighty pleasing to look at, but there's nothing much for her to do, so they decide to toss in some "inspirational" Christian redemption drivel into a story involving ancient Persian mythology - huh? - oh, never mind, it's not worth the effort.

Andrew Divoff, who did a fine job in the first Wishmaster film, stumbles around looking for something interesting to do, can't find it, and stands around and sulks instead. We would certainly feel pity for him if we hadn't grown numb from boredom.

This is a pretty good sequel to Wishmaster with some okay effects (and some bad ones). I like the Wishmaster, he has some funny lines (and always walks around with a cool grin on his face).

Watch it if you liked the first one, 6/10.

I wonder who had the brilliant idea to release a video movie in the theaters, at least in France, even if horror movies are back with a vengeance in Phroggyland ("The Faculty" just gained a huge success). The first one was an aw-shucks job, this one is just boring and seems to drag endelessly (And I thought Jack Sholder was a good action director !) None made any sense, though considering the budget, the look of the movie was pretty classy. As many pointed out, Divoff went the same way John Voight did in "Anaconda" : the kind that might as well wear a t-shirt that says "I'm the bad guy". The characters were terrible, the religious angle stupid. Since this turkey was barely released in four parisian theaters, it was probably just to pump up the TV/Video rights. The only good thing in two hours was the teaser for "The Blair Witch Project" in the beginning.

Without Wes Craven, this movie does lack that certain "dream-evil" that Craven has made so popular, but that in no way means that this movie is a waste of time. It basically tells the same story as the first, and I'm definately up for that. Once again, I couldn't believe how well Andrew Divoff fit the part of Nathaniel/The Dijnn. The special effects of the actual monster were amazing (Loved the tattoos). Missing a bit of plot, but who cares? The witty way The Dijnn makes wishes come true more than makes up for that. Another excellent night-time scare.

I first saw this in the late 90s on cable tv. Revisited it on a dvd which I own. Director Jack Sholder (Alone in the Dark n The Hidden) failed to revive this series. In this film, the demon is once again set free accidentally but the conclusion of the first part made sense while the conclusion of this part is jus a convenient way to end a lousy sequel. The only new twist is that the demon has to collect 1000 souls before granting the three wishes to the awaker n for this he lands himself in a prison where it's an easy way for fellas to ask for wishes. In fact, the demon visits a casino to cash in on the remaining souls. The kills r nothing compared to the first part, except for the lock up scene where an inmate has to pass thru a metal barricade. Ther is a sex n shower scene minus the nudity. The gothic girl suddenly becomes chaste even after sleeping with a priest. Maybe fornication with a priest is ok when u want to be pure n clean.

Many people didn't like this movie due to low budget and hardly any big actors. But I was entertained by this film, and Andrew Divoff, had me laughing through the whole thing. Even his smirk and his lines crack me up, no matter how ordinary his lines are its just the tone he delivers his speech.

I just hope Divoff returns for a third installlment if offered.

The Djinn breaks free of his prison inside the Ahura Mazda statue during a burglary resulting in a shoot-out. He confesses to the burglary and murder, despite obviously being innocent. Why? Because inside the prison walls, plenty of men have desires just waiting to be fulfilled...

This film picks up exactly where the first left off, with Andrew Divoff reprising his role as the Djinn. The gore effects seem slightly nastier here, at times appearing almost like something from a Cronenberg film.

It was written and directed by Jack Sholder, probably best known for directing "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2" in 1985 (14 years prior). I hate to say it, but in many ways this film exceeds Robert Kurtzman's original vision.

Of course, some liberties are taken with when the Djinn can use his powers, but I suppose that is not new. And after Andrew Divoff left the series, I don't even know why they kept making sequels.

I am someone who loves horror films, especially corny horror films such as Leprechaun and the Critters films. Being a huge fan of the first film, and buying the collection on Blu-Ray recently, I was excited about seeing the other films, bad or not I was ready to be entertained. Of course I had seen the rating on IMDB at 5.1, not a bad rating for a straight to video sequel. Maybe that was my problem, I went in with high hopes and walked away with nothing. The story line is pretty decent, not really sure if it follows the first movie or if it's a stand alone sequel like Leprechaun 2. The acting wasn't great, but I didn't expect Academy Award winning. The first problem I noticed in this film was very early on when we are introduced to the Wishmaster played by the great Andrew Divoff...well not so great in this one. For some reason this version of Wishamaster didn't sound like he did in the first one, it didn't have that creepy quality. I didn't mind that the Wishmaster looked a little different, still keeping in line with the first film.

The kills this time around, albeit corny, as not really that interesting. The special effects looked childish, especially in the casino scene towards the end. There is not much to say about this film. I didn't enjoy it anywhere near as much as I did the first, but I don't regret watching it and I'm sure someday down the road I will watch it again...just not any time soon.