NOTE IMDb
6,5/10
82 k
MA NOTE
Afin de déterminer la situation actuelle à l'intérieur, un prétendu médecin et une équipe de la brigade d'intervention spéciale pénètrent dans le désastreux immeuble en quarantaine.Afin de déterminer la situation actuelle à l'intérieur, un prétendu médecin et une équipe de la brigade d'intervention spéciale pénètrent dans le désastreux immeuble en quarantaine.Afin de déterminer la situation actuelle à l'intérieur, un prétendu médecin et une équipe de la brigade d'intervention spéciale pénètrent dans le désastreux immeuble en quarantaine.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 5 victoires et 3 nominations au total
Jonathan D. Mellor
- Dr. Owen
- (as Jonathan Mellor)
Óscar Zafra
- Jefe
- (as Oscar Sánchez Zafra)
Rafa Parra
- Rosso
- (voix)
Avis à la une
Not as cohesive or frightening, as the first REC (which is one of my favorite modern horror movies), but still a tense and thrilling horror ride, more often than not. This is a direct continuation of the original, and happens in and around the same apartment building on the same night.
REC 2 takes the supernatural elements of the first movie and further explores them, which sets it apart from some similar zombie-type films. No complaints from me there, I enjoyed the expansion of the overall mythos and the added backstory/explanation for some of the people and events of the first film. On the negative side, I did find the new characters introduced in this one to be almost universally unlikable and annoying. Did that ruin the movie? No, but I definitely cared about the well-being and survival of these people less than those that came before. There's also a slight feeling of repetition that comes with using the same location again, but that's understandable considering the direct plot continuance.
REC 2 is basically more of the same, so if you enjoyed the first, there's no real reason why you shouldn't see this. It's not quite up to the same quality, but it's worth checking out to see the interesting direction the story goes in.
REC 2 takes the supernatural elements of the first movie and further explores them, which sets it apart from some similar zombie-type films. No complaints from me there, I enjoyed the expansion of the overall mythos and the added backstory/explanation for some of the people and events of the first film. On the negative side, I did find the new characters introduced in this one to be almost universally unlikable and annoying. Did that ruin the movie? No, but I definitely cared about the well-being and survival of these people less than those that came before. There's also a slight feeling of repetition that comes with using the same location again, but that's understandable considering the direct plot continuance.
REC 2 is basically more of the same, so if you enjoyed the first, there's no real reason why you shouldn't see this. It's not quite up to the same quality, but it's worth checking out to see the interesting direction the story goes in.
Rec 2 picks up just moments after Rec. Now a SWAT Team and a medical officer are being sent in to clear up any mess. It's a simple, but still a powerful premise. It was kind of nice touring the same building again, seeing the remains of the previous film. The SWAT team POV also sets up some fantastic 1st person shooting scenes. This has to become a game at some point. The attacks do become a bit repetitive, but the story is given an extra kick by expanding on the demonic possession themes. This sets it apart from other zombie/virus movies. It had plenty of jumps and did unsettle me. Wouldn't mind watching the two films back to back for an ultimate experience.
Good sequel, about as good as the original. I thought the camcorder-perspective might be a worn medium, but it is well and originally done here. Suspense is great, effects are good, plot is fairly original. Maybe too many twists, too many contrivances and other horror clichés, but it all works out OK in the end.
watching REC 2 made me realize how bad these directors and screen writers didn't want to make this sequel of REC 2 suck...meaning that it kinda felt like they were trying really hard to make a good sequel. the film turned out okay in the sense that it carried exactly from were REC finished and satisfied me with blood and jumping out of my seat scenes..but i really did't that much, also the demonic creatures, which we end up finding out about, thus creating the background story which wasn't very pleasing but fair. the camera view style was well done however the acting was a little over the top, sometimes i feel like hopping in the TV and telling them to shut up! Overall it did not surpass REC, but then again worth a watch if you want to see the story complete itself.
Getting to the main point of my LOVE and HATE that I have for rec, I think it was said best from a previous review that the main difference between these two movies....and this may be a semi spoiler behind the infection...is that the first one is more of a scientific infection while the second film is more of a religious infection. So with that said, I will write a summary of the film as well as two small reviews. One for die hard zombie fans and one for horror fans.
First, the summary of the movie as a whole. The second film begins exactly where the other one left off. A small SWAT team enters the building with another QUARANTINE type doctor and are asked to document everything. The camera work goes from one camera to numerous cameras such as another video camera and mini cams put on the SWAT member's helmets. I felt this was really cool giving us numerous shots and cuts without taking away from the first person view. In the middle of the film, we're introduced to a trio of teens who find their way into the building with a camera of their own. And then, as the first film, the group must fight to stay alive.
Second, the review for Zombie fans of the first film .If you're a zombie fan, you have to like the mass hysteria of the unknown, and that's something that the first film presents to us. What seems like a routine call at an apartment building turns out to be one of the first responses to an infection outbreak. The first film satisfies these rules of infection, aggressive attacks, and not knowing what exactly is going on to the T. The second film is a slap in the face to us zombie fans because it takes away from a disease that turns us into homicidal maniacs with the hunger for flesh, and changes it into possessed puppets of a demonic force. The infection turns out to be in fact demons traveling through people by way of bites. Possessed people can talk, are scared of the cross, can change voices and walk on walls. But they're not zombies. They're not infected with rage. They're not infected with mutated rabies . And again, this is truly a slap in the face for zombie fans. We don't go and see Vampire part 2, only to find out they're really mummies. And we don't see werewolf part 2 only to find out they're really vampires. This change of infection to possession may ruin the movie for some of us zombie fans and therefore, turn out to be a crappy sequel with a few scares. 4/10
Third, the review for Rec and horror fans ..If you're not a DIE HARD zombie fan, and loved the first one as a good horror movie, this film may be seen as a pretty cool sequel. The character development is no where near as good as the first film, but it's still pretty good. Right away, the scares are there. The power has gone out from the first film, so this time around, our characters are left in the dark, adding an edge to everyone's already big fear. The infection's back story .and again, semi spoiler for it's origins .is not in fact an infection, but possession. It's not often that possession doesn't look cheesy and funny thanks to spoof movies on the exorcists. These possessed people look scary as hell and the way they speak really scared me. On one of the first jump scenes, I screamed. Movies don't usually get me to scream so there you go. The movie is a very good follow up to an instant classic of a film. And I'm sure horror fans of Rec would definitely fall in love with it's sequel. 6/10
First, the summary of the movie as a whole. The second film begins exactly where the other one left off. A small SWAT team enters the building with another QUARANTINE type doctor and are asked to document everything. The camera work goes from one camera to numerous cameras such as another video camera and mini cams put on the SWAT member's helmets. I felt this was really cool giving us numerous shots and cuts without taking away from the first person view. In the middle of the film, we're introduced to a trio of teens who find their way into the building with a camera of their own. And then, as the first film, the group must fight to stay alive.
Second, the review for Zombie fans of the first film .If you're a zombie fan, you have to like the mass hysteria of the unknown, and that's something that the first film presents to us. What seems like a routine call at an apartment building turns out to be one of the first responses to an infection outbreak. The first film satisfies these rules of infection, aggressive attacks, and not knowing what exactly is going on to the T. The second film is a slap in the face to us zombie fans because it takes away from a disease that turns us into homicidal maniacs with the hunger for flesh, and changes it into possessed puppets of a demonic force. The infection turns out to be in fact demons traveling through people by way of bites. Possessed people can talk, are scared of the cross, can change voices and walk on walls. But they're not zombies. They're not infected with rage. They're not infected with mutated rabies . And again, this is truly a slap in the face for zombie fans. We don't go and see Vampire part 2, only to find out they're really mummies. And we don't see werewolf part 2 only to find out they're really vampires. This change of infection to possession may ruin the movie for some of us zombie fans and therefore, turn out to be a crappy sequel with a few scares. 4/10
Third, the review for Rec and horror fans ..If you're not a DIE HARD zombie fan, and loved the first one as a good horror movie, this film may be seen as a pretty cool sequel. The character development is no where near as good as the first film, but it's still pretty good. Right away, the scares are there. The power has gone out from the first film, so this time around, our characters are left in the dark, adding an edge to everyone's already big fear. The infection's back story .and again, semi spoiler for it's origins .is not in fact an infection, but possession. It's not often that possession doesn't look cheesy and funny thanks to spoof movies on the exorcists. These possessed people look scary as hell and the way they speak really scared me. On one of the first jump scenes, I screamed. Movies don't usually get me to scream so there you go. The movie is a very good follow up to an instant classic of a film. And I'm sure horror fans of Rec would definitely fall in love with it's sequel. 6/10
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesPablo Rosso, the camera from the original [REC] (2007), returns this time as the SWAT member Rosso.
- GaffesThe teenagers' video camera imprints the battery level indicator on the recording. Video cameras do not record the battery level with the video, they just display it through the viewfinder for the person operating the camera to see.
- Citations
[first lines]
Ángela Vidal: We have to tape everything, Pablo. For fuck's sake.
- ConnexionsFeatured in At the Movies: Venice Film Festival 2009 (2009)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is [Rec]²?Alimenté par Alexa
- Was this a direct sequel to [Rec]?
- Was the boy in the attic in the first movie explained in this film?
- How many soldiers are there?
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- [Rec] 2
- Lieux de tournage
- Barcelone, Barcelone, Catalogne, Espagne(Alcantarillado y depósitos de retención de aguas pluviales)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 5 600 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 27 766 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 8 191 $US
- 11 juil. 2010
- Montant brut mondial
- 18 853 164 $US
- Durée1 heure 25 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant