NOTE IMDb
5,1/10
1,3 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA creature of demonic nature, too hideous to have a name, once again terrorizes the college kids that summoned it.A creature of demonic nature, too hideous to have a name, once again terrorizes the college kids that summoned it.A creature of demonic nature, too hideous to have a name, once again terrorizes the college kids that summoned it.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
August James
- Mary Wilkinson
- (as August West)
Mike Gordon
- Joshua Winthrop
- (as Captain Mike Gordon)
Avis à la une
This sequel to "The Unnamable" (1988) is actually a bit more interesting, as it's much more a mixture of things than the original was (it combines two Lovecraft stories this time, 'The Unnamable' & 'The Statement of Randolph Carter'). It flirts with quantum physics and other silly theories, even adding some comedic scenes to the events (which oddly enough do work). John Rhys-Davies is amusing as always, but lasts only half the movie. The always reliable David Warner has a cameo. Being a creature feature, the creature design (worn by actress Julie Strain) lives up to the expectations. The story picks up right after the events of the first film and meanders in slightly different directions this time. Just like the first film, which was much more a slasher-orientated effort, this sequel's hardly a masterpiece. But it's got some spirited moments, a handful of nasty kills and it remains a fun, entertaining watch nonetheless. The beautiful Maria Ford steals most of the show here, as she's walking around completely nude during half of the movie's running time. Furthermore, "The Unnamable II" stays true to the spirit of Lovecraft with a lot of amusing inside references to his works. So fans should be pleased, since a lot worse Lovecraft adaptations have been made throughout the years.
Not sure if I missed this movie back in the 90s or if it wasn't memorable. But here I am in 2014 watching a 90s movie that looks more like an 80s movie.
Something happened in a house. Bodies are being dragged away. A guy named Howard survived and now he has visions of a creature. A guy named Carter was standing nearby so he's a witness. But he investigates into the house and discovers a scary past, involving the Necronomicon. He enlists another professor and of they go into a cave beneath the house. Howard is also with them but he stays outside.
Inside the cave they find a creature, that's a pairing of a woman--the daughter of the former house owner--and a demon. They manage to separate the two. Carter takes the girl with him to the university. The scholar stays behind researching the demon, which ends up killing him. But the girl feels that the demon is going to come after her. And sure enough the demon appears and Carter, the girl, some friends, the cops all have to face the demon.
This movie can be credited with one achievement, a very questionable one though: it stars Maria Ford and Julie Strain in 1992 and yet shows no nudity. Ford is not wearing clothes for a good part of the movie, but a huge wig covers up her body. It would have been even a greater annoyance in the 90s when the two ladies where in their soft-core heyday.
Aside from that major weakness, the movie is of course slow, 15 minutes longer than it needs to be. It feature some good acting and some poor acting. It has good physical gore and prosthetic effects, and some cheesy visual effects. The story is alright but more could have been made of it. And of course a lot more could have been done with such a cast.
Something happened in a house. Bodies are being dragged away. A guy named Howard survived and now he has visions of a creature. A guy named Carter was standing nearby so he's a witness. But he investigates into the house and discovers a scary past, involving the Necronomicon. He enlists another professor and of they go into a cave beneath the house. Howard is also with them but he stays outside.
Inside the cave they find a creature, that's a pairing of a woman--the daughter of the former house owner--and a demon. They manage to separate the two. Carter takes the girl with him to the university. The scholar stays behind researching the demon, which ends up killing him. But the girl feels that the demon is going to come after her. And sure enough the demon appears and Carter, the girl, some friends, the cops all have to face the demon.
This movie can be credited with one achievement, a very questionable one though: it stars Maria Ford and Julie Strain in 1992 and yet shows no nudity. Ford is not wearing clothes for a good part of the movie, but a huge wig covers up her body. It would have been even a greater annoyance in the 90s when the two ladies where in their soft-core heyday.
Aside from that major weakness, the movie is of course slow, 15 minutes longer than it needs to be. It feature some good acting and some poor acting. It has good physical gore and prosthetic effects, and some cheesy visual effects. The story is alright but more could have been made of it. And of course a lot more could have been done with such a cast.
OK i remember watching this movie when i saw this on video back when i was like 17 and i thought it was a good movie and they tried to take off where the last film ends but the only thing that they messed up on was that they said the creature was born from Joshua Winthrop daughter but that is false he was born from Joshua Winthrop wife in the first film, that really was the only error i found in the movie. The movie was a good overall sequel, i wish they could of had a little more blood and guts, let you know what happened to Tanya from the first film. She was just seen driving off in the police car and was really not mention again. Otherwise not a bad movie
This sequel picks up directly where part one left off and finds the two main characters from the original film seperating the human half from the demon half of part one's monster. They flee with the human half, but the demon eventually escapes from her prison and seeks out the human part to her and killing anyone in her way. Sometimes exciting, sometime scary, slightly better then part one, but bland.
Rated R; Violence, Brief Nudity, and Profanity.
Rated R; Violence, Brief Nudity, and Profanity.
Classic horror movie of the early 90's. This movie is actually one of the movies that stand out in my memory back from the early 90's when I watched it for the first time on VHS. I just had to purchase it on DVD when I had the chance.
I loved the story and found it to be thrilling and good. It drew from the Lovecraft universe in a good way, and I was nailed to my chair throughout the entire movie (and it still does whenever I put it into the DVD player).
I have watched this movie maybe 5 or 6 times over the years, and never gotten tired of it. Of course, a certain amount of time have to pass before you put this one in the DVD player again.
When I watched this for the first time, I was fairly unfamiliar with John Rhys-Davies, but found his acting here to be believable and good. And this movie also introduced me to Maria Ford, which I must say is a plus for this movie.
The atmosphere of the movie is dark and brooding, which works well throughout the entire feature. Of course the effects are sort of bad in today's standards, but back then they were great. Especially for a fairly low budget movie. I liked the make-up on the creature, and were surprised to find out that it was Julie Strain underneath it.
If you like the work of Lovecraft and have a taste for the movies based on Lovecraft's work, then you should not let this movie pass you by. Even today, this movie is worth watching. Even though Jeffrey Combs is not in this Lovecraft-based movie, it is still providing good entertainment. It has a good, solid story, no real boring moments throughout the length of the movie, and I think it is a must have in any horror fan's DVD collection.
I loved the story and found it to be thrilling and good. It drew from the Lovecraft universe in a good way, and I was nailed to my chair throughout the entire movie (and it still does whenever I put it into the DVD player).
I have watched this movie maybe 5 or 6 times over the years, and never gotten tired of it. Of course, a certain amount of time have to pass before you put this one in the DVD player again.
When I watched this for the first time, I was fairly unfamiliar with John Rhys-Davies, but found his acting here to be believable and good. And this movie also introduced me to Maria Ford, which I must say is a plus for this movie.
The atmosphere of the movie is dark and brooding, which works well throughout the entire feature. Of course the effects are sort of bad in today's standards, but back then they were great. Especially for a fairly low budget movie. I liked the make-up on the creature, and were surprised to find out that it was Julie Strain underneath it.
If you like the work of Lovecraft and have a taste for the movies based on Lovecraft's work, then you should not let this movie pass you by. Even today, this movie is worth watching. Even though Jeffrey Combs is not in this Lovecraft-based movie, it is still providing good entertainment. It has a good, solid story, no real boring moments throughout the length of the movie, and I think it is a must have in any horror fan's DVD collection.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesShot in five weeks.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Joe Bob's Drive-In Theater: Fit to Kill & The Unnamable II (1994)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Unnamable II: The Statement of Randolph Carter?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Créature des ténèbres
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée1 heure 44 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was The Unnamable II: The Statement of Randolph Carter (1992) officially released in India in English?
Répondre