NOTE IMDb
6,3/10
83 k
MA NOTE
Un sergent de police doit rassembler policiers et prisonniers pour les protéger le soir du Nouvel An alors que des policiers corrompus rôdent autour du poste avec l'intention de tous les tue... Tout lireUn sergent de police doit rassembler policiers et prisonniers pour les protéger le soir du Nouvel An alors que des policiers corrompus rôdent autour du poste avec l'intention de tous les tuer.Un sergent de police doit rassembler policiers et prisonniers pour les protéger le soir du Nouvel An alors que des policiers corrompus rôdent autour du poste avec l'intention de tous les tuer.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire et 2 nominations au total
Avis à la une
Jean Richet's remake of the Carpenter thriller Assault on Precinct 13 is surprisingly entertaining. Assault on Precinct 13 (2005) loses the Carpenteresque weirdness and soundtrack, and tells the story of a remote, run-down police precinct under assault using more conventional cinematography and production. This is an achievement, but not because of the difficulty of following in the footsteps of Carpenter - because the film entertains without doing so, and because the narrative - just like all of Carpenter's films- manages to keep going without regard for the improbability of the plot. In other words, the Director kept a straight face and made the film entertaining enough to allow for a certain amount of suspended disbelief.
Strong, fast, characterization - part of the legacy of Carpenter's film - makes a big difference early on. The cast is uniformly excellent and the main characters - unusual for this genre - are all unique, believable and consistent. Fishburn plays a big bad guy incarcerated by fiat in the small, run-down Precinct 13. Hawke is the Sergeant in charge of the precinct - a man with psychological and drug problems associated with a traumatic event which opens the film. These two improbable allies must pool their resources to defend the precinct against... who?
The film is first and foremost an action film. The action is typical for the genre as of 2005 - i.e. - much of what takes place is only believable because of its entertainment value and internal consistently. Suspense is well constructed throughout the film, and the pace of the film reaches a frenetic level about 1/3rd of the way through, never letting up. The cinematography is surprisingly dissimilar to the original. Richet's film is more of a standard suspense thriller than anything bearing Carpenter's signature.
Recommended for its entertainment value, solid cast, and well-constructed (though somewhat ridiculous) plot.
Strong, fast, characterization - part of the legacy of Carpenter's film - makes a big difference early on. The cast is uniformly excellent and the main characters - unusual for this genre - are all unique, believable and consistent. Fishburn plays a big bad guy incarcerated by fiat in the small, run-down Precinct 13. Hawke is the Sergeant in charge of the precinct - a man with psychological and drug problems associated with a traumatic event which opens the film. These two improbable allies must pool their resources to defend the precinct against... who?
The film is first and foremost an action film. The action is typical for the genre as of 2005 - i.e. - much of what takes place is only believable because of its entertainment value and internal consistently. Suspense is well constructed throughout the film, and the pace of the film reaches a frenetic level about 1/3rd of the way through, never letting up. The cinematography is surprisingly dissimilar to the original. Richet's film is more of a standard suspense thriller than anything bearing Carpenter's signature.
Recommended for its entertainment value, solid cast, and well-constructed (though somewhat ridiculous) plot.
I hate movies that have potential and fall on their proverbial faces, and this movie came very close to biting the dust. The writing was blasé, the acting was blasé (although Laurence Fishborne was by far the least offensive), the directing was horrid ... it just wasn't done real well. The action was fine but nothing stupendous. A solid "C" if there was one ... and I have to say Ethan Hawke and Drea de Matteo really bit it with their quasi-acting in this movie - although I will have to say that I'm not sold that it was all the actor's fault, as a great deal of the wasted effort was definitely in the writing.
A solid rental. Not for box office.
A solid rental. Not for box office.
On a snowy New Year's Eve, a police station where a bus full of convicts has been jailed comes under attack from corrupt policemen, forcing a police sergeant with a cloudy past (Ethan Hawke) to team with a ruthless mob boss (Lawrence Fishburne) to try to keep them at bay.
The original was a pretty good film so I'm still confused about the need to remake it. Yes, it was a little outdated but the film still worked fine. I was expecting the remake to be really bad since the trailer looked lackluster and Ethan Hawke isn't that good of an actor. However, this update turned out to be a decent film. It doesn't approach the original in quality but at least it doesn't insult the original either. They do change some things from the original though that didn't really bother me. Actually, it's kind of better that they tried it in a different way instead of doing it exactly the same (paging Psycho) and there was more reason to remake it.
The performances were okay, nothing special. Ethan Hawke was okay as Roenick. He would sometimes go over the top and he was a little weak at some points. Laurence Fishburne was better than Ethan but still only average. Ja Rule actually gives a good performance for a rapper though he doesn't get a lot of screen time. John Leguizamo was okay, kind of dull. Maria Bello gave the best performance out of everyone and she is a pretty underrated actress. Gabriel Byrne was just meh while Drea de Matteo was clearly there for eye candy and nothing more.
Jean-François Richet does a decent job at directing and he manages to create some suspense. However, he does keep the film simple and most of the twists are obvious. The script is generic and weak with a lot of clichés and little in the way of originality. The action sequences are slick and enjoyable but they are also kind of sparse. The movie also becomes dull from time to time even though the film isn't really that long. There is also little character development so it's hard to feel sorry for some of these people. The remake is really just a semi-enjoyable, generic action film. It fails to surpass the original in most categories but it still stands as a decent film. In the end, Assault on Precinct 13 is a decent action film and it's worth checking out. Rating 6/10
The original was a pretty good film so I'm still confused about the need to remake it. Yes, it was a little outdated but the film still worked fine. I was expecting the remake to be really bad since the trailer looked lackluster and Ethan Hawke isn't that good of an actor. However, this update turned out to be a decent film. It doesn't approach the original in quality but at least it doesn't insult the original either. They do change some things from the original though that didn't really bother me. Actually, it's kind of better that they tried it in a different way instead of doing it exactly the same (paging Psycho) and there was more reason to remake it.
The performances were okay, nothing special. Ethan Hawke was okay as Roenick. He would sometimes go over the top and he was a little weak at some points. Laurence Fishburne was better than Ethan but still only average. Ja Rule actually gives a good performance for a rapper though he doesn't get a lot of screen time. John Leguizamo was okay, kind of dull. Maria Bello gave the best performance out of everyone and she is a pretty underrated actress. Gabriel Byrne was just meh while Drea de Matteo was clearly there for eye candy and nothing more.
Jean-François Richet does a decent job at directing and he manages to create some suspense. However, he does keep the film simple and most of the twists are obvious. The script is generic and weak with a lot of clichés and little in the way of originality. The action sequences are slick and enjoyable but they are also kind of sparse. The movie also becomes dull from time to time even though the film isn't really that long. There is also little character development so it's hard to feel sorry for some of these people. The remake is really just a semi-enjoyable, generic action film. It fails to surpass the original in most categories but it still stands as a decent film. In the end, Assault on Precinct 13 is a decent action film and it's worth checking out. Rating 6/10
I haven't seen Carpenter's original version but the remake seems like a very solid modern action crime/thriller with an interesting cast. Ethan Hawke may never be recognized as a great young actor by the vast majority of moviegoers but in my opinion he hasn't made a serious flop in his career so far.
The rest of the cast did equally well if not better at times. A special praise goes to Laurence Fishburne who gave the best performance in the movie.Overall the film has enough to offer to be considered worthy of a second view but it still lacks a few factors that could boost it further from the mass of similar movies.
...... 3/5 ......
The rest of the cast did equally well if not better at times. A special praise goes to Laurence Fishburne who gave the best performance in the movie.Overall the film has enough to offer to be considered worthy of a second view but it still lacks a few factors that could boost it further from the mass of similar movies.
...... 3/5 ......
A remake of John Carpenter's superior film of the same title from 1976, Assault on Precinct 13 concerns a siege on a largely abandoned police station, which is related to the presence of a notorious criminal, Marion Bishop (Laurence Fishburne). It's left up to a ragtag group of police employees and criminals to defend themselves.
I should start by noting that I absolutely love Carpenter's original film. In my view it is one of his best, perfectly capturing the suburban desolation of 1970s Los Angeles, and exquisitely suspenseful and horrifying, even though it's not really a horror film. Despite that, when this remake of Assault on Precinct 13 began, I had high hopes for it. The first scene is well directed, well shot, with excellent dialogue. It turns into an intense action scene at just the right moment, and results in some realistic, gritty deaths. The opening is as good as anything in the Carpenter film.
Unfortunately, Assault on Precinct 13's excellence ended right there. It's not exactly a bad film--I enjoyed it more often than not, but it does have more than its share of flaws. In the end, my rating average out to a 7 out of 10. Recommendable, but with reservations.
The first problem is that director Jean-Francois Richet tries to do too much--too much backstory, too many characters, too many over-the-top characters, too many quick cuts, too much shaky hand-held camera work, too many "big action moves", too many explosions, too many settings, and it's too dark. That the film is often so quickly edited and dark makes it too often difficult to see what's going on in the action scenes. Carpenter's film succeeded by being very taut, economical, sober and logical in its directorial style. Richet tries to one-up the original by forgoing all of those qualities. By the second or third scene, I was fairly confused. Superfluous characters were popping in and out, people were mumbling dialogue, and there was a whole complex backstory being hinted at and not spelled out very well.
The brutal shooting near the beginning of the original film, which sets off the whole sequence of events, was dropped--that thread was completely removed from the film. It was lamentable in that this new Assault loses much of the simple, sensible drive the thread provided, and it was surely a decision based on political correctness. Likewise, Bishop is not allowed to be a clear-cut bad guy here. That saps some of the effectiveness out of his cooperation. In this film, he might be mostly tough talk. The other criminals in the film are either left largely unexplained or guilty of only petty or consensual crimes. I find this kind of political correctness in films reprehensible, although I realize it's primarily a studio decision.
On the positive side, the villains here were cleverly conceived, and their nature makes them much more menacing physically. On the negative side, however, Richet lost the Night of the Living Dead (1968) zombie-like nature of the marauders, which saps suspense from the attacks. The logistics of the defense of the police station and details of their dilemma are not very clearly scripted or staged, either, which doesn't help. Another flaw is that some intruders seem to inexplicably hesitate. Another positive, though, is that Richet's film brings back a few small details, such as the capture of the criminal at the beginning of the film, and a substance addiction in one of the heroes leading to a character transformation, found in Rio Bravo (1959), the film that in conjunction with Night of the Living Dead, was the main inspiration for Carpenter's original film.
Also on the positive side, this Assault has a skilled (and much more well known) cast. Even though Richter occasionally directed them to be a bit too over-the-top, the performances hit many very interesting notes. And a few of the additions to the original film, such as a Mexican standoff and a couple later scenes outside the police station were excellent. The increased firepower here may also be to some viewer's liking.
A viewer less fond of the original, or even unfamiliar with the original, may like Assault better than I did. I may have even liked it better if the original were not so fresh in my memory (I just watched it again it recently--a review is forthcoming). There are enough redeeming aspects for action fans to make it worth at least a rental or a viewing on cable, but approach the film with lowered expectations.
I should start by noting that I absolutely love Carpenter's original film. In my view it is one of his best, perfectly capturing the suburban desolation of 1970s Los Angeles, and exquisitely suspenseful and horrifying, even though it's not really a horror film. Despite that, when this remake of Assault on Precinct 13 began, I had high hopes for it. The first scene is well directed, well shot, with excellent dialogue. It turns into an intense action scene at just the right moment, and results in some realistic, gritty deaths. The opening is as good as anything in the Carpenter film.
Unfortunately, Assault on Precinct 13's excellence ended right there. It's not exactly a bad film--I enjoyed it more often than not, but it does have more than its share of flaws. In the end, my rating average out to a 7 out of 10. Recommendable, but with reservations.
The first problem is that director Jean-Francois Richet tries to do too much--too much backstory, too many characters, too many over-the-top characters, too many quick cuts, too much shaky hand-held camera work, too many "big action moves", too many explosions, too many settings, and it's too dark. That the film is often so quickly edited and dark makes it too often difficult to see what's going on in the action scenes. Carpenter's film succeeded by being very taut, economical, sober and logical in its directorial style. Richet tries to one-up the original by forgoing all of those qualities. By the second or third scene, I was fairly confused. Superfluous characters were popping in and out, people were mumbling dialogue, and there was a whole complex backstory being hinted at and not spelled out very well.
The brutal shooting near the beginning of the original film, which sets off the whole sequence of events, was dropped--that thread was completely removed from the film. It was lamentable in that this new Assault loses much of the simple, sensible drive the thread provided, and it was surely a decision based on political correctness. Likewise, Bishop is not allowed to be a clear-cut bad guy here. That saps some of the effectiveness out of his cooperation. In this film, he might be mostly tough talk. The other criminals in the film are either left largely unexplained or guilty of only petty or consensual crimes. I find this kind of political correctness in films reprehensible, although I realize it's primarily a studio decision.
On the positive side, the villains here were cleverly conceived, and their nature makes them much more menacing physically. On the negative side, however, Richet lost the Night of the Living Dead (1968) zombie-like nature of the marauders, which saps suspense from the attacks. The logistics of the defense of the police station and details of their dilemma are not very clearly scripted or staged, either, which doesn't help. Another flaw is that some intruders seem to inexplicably hesitate. Another positive, though, is that Richet's film brings back a few small details, such as the capture of the criminal at the beginning of the film, and a substance addiction in one of the heroes leading to a character transformation, found in Rio Bravo (1959), the film that in conjunction with Night of the Living Dead, was the main inspiration for Carpenter's original film.
Also on the positive side, this Assault has a skilled (and much more well known) cast. Even though Richter occasionally directed them to be a bit too over-the-top, the performances hit many very interesting notes. And a few of the additions to the original film, such as a Mexican standoff and a couple later scenes outside the police station were excellent. The increased firepower here may also be to some viewer's liking.
A viewer less fond of the original, or even unfamiliar with the original, may like Assault better than I did. I may have even liked it better if the original were not so fresh in my memory (I just watched it again it recently--a review is forthcoming). There are enough redeeming aspects for action fans to make it worth at least a rental or a viewing on cable, but approach the film with lowered expectations.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesIn the original movie, Bishop was the police officer and the Caucasian actor was the criminal.
- GaffesAfter Roenick comes in from the fight he had with the guy in the bus, he has a bloody lip. After this point, it appears and reappears through out the movie, until it eventually is gone altogether.
- ConnexionsFeatured in HBO First Look: Assault on Precinct 13: Caught in the Crosshairs (2005)
- Bandes originalesWinter Wonderland
Written by Felix Bernard and Richard B. Smith
Performed by Dean Martin
Courtesy of Capitol Records, Inc.
Under License from EMI Film & Television Music
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Assault on Precinct 13?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Masacre en la cárcel 13
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 30 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 20 040 895 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 7 000 000 $US
- 23 janv. 2005
- Montant brut mondial
- 35 294 470 $US
- Durée1 heure 49 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Assaut sur le central 13 (2005) officially released in India in Hindi?
Répondre