Recensioni degli utenti

Sure, Snake Plissken is a relic from the ultra-macho 80s action craze. Sure, Carpenter's use of effects is often obvious (though occasionally brilliant). Sure, the film is nothing but a slab of highly fragrant cheese, but it's FUN cheese. It's unapologetic cheese. It's the extra $1.50 of gooey, greasy, slimey mozza that you throw onto your 16" meat-lover's... sure, it's excessive--maybe even unhealthy--but it makes the pizza.

Escape From L.A. is pure, unabashed, old-fashioned fun. It's one of those movies that everyone claims they hate, but they really love in that deep place, way down in their mind, where belching contests are still fun. It doesn't pretend to be anything more than entertainment--and it's good entertainment at that. When I first saw the trailers for this film, I groaned. Kurt Russell's faux-Eastwood-does-pirate routine rubbed me the wrong way, and I was unfamiliar with John Carpenter's work. After having seen the original Escape, Halloween, The Fog, Vampires, The Thing and especially Big Trouble In Little China I know that Carpenter is interested in one thing: giving his audience an escape from reality, and this film is perfect for that. It doesn't make a lot of sense, and it takes a lot of suspension of disbelief, but in to paraphrase Roger Ebert: Who can hate a film where Kurt Russell and a transsexual Pam Grier swoop from the sky in hang-gliders firing automatic weapons at an amusement park compound?

Add to the mix a delightful turn by Steve Buscemi and an amusing (albeit unrecognizable) cameo by Bruce "Don't Call Me Ash" Campbell, and you have a really fun, really dumb, really cool MOVIE!

Recommended for the 10 year old boy in all of us.

Now "Escape from New York" is a darker, grim action thriller that suits the environment where the story takes place. When one thinks of New York, you think of a dark, seedy, big, bad city. This is not what comes to mind when one thinks of L.A. You would think sunny, plastic and strangely creepy. Hence the change in tone with this looser, tongue in cheek near self-parody. Now the reason why I say the film still works is Snake Plissken. The only character who is played completely straight against the stable of B-movie cliches and skewed Hollywood stereotypes. Maybe in a few years this film will gain the respect it deserves. Still, although I reasonably enjoyed the picture (especially a few choice cuts like the "Bangkok rules" scene) I must admit I liked the first one better too.

That sums up one of the most undeniable aspects about this flick: It is enormously reminiscent of the first. Whether or not that's a negative thing is up to the individual. It still holds great surprises, and is definitely a fun ride. There is more satire in this than the first. The tone of this is often overdone and campy, in stark contrast to how serious that of "New York" was, and there are those that will miss that. This is humorous, if a few gags and jokes fall flat. Everyone but Russell(who nails the part again) is newly cast, and the choices are all fitting. This has some rather memorable occurrences(a couple of them for sheer weirdness and imagination), and certainly puts several breathtaking visuals up on the screen. The effects vary, though there are excellent ones herein. Dialog has quotable lines, and is well-delivered. The music is cool. Cinematography and editing are marvelous. The acting holds good performances. While it does bear a striking resemblance to that of the original movie, the script of this is interesting, creative and well-done. It has a nice pace, and you gotta admit that it's packed with action. Each sequence is exciting and intense, and differs from the rest in some way. There is strong violence and language in this, as well as disturbing content. This is bigger than the '81 film. Unfortunately, it also cost a larger amount of money, and only made about half back. It's too bad that Carpenter's work has a tendency to not be appreciated by the masses(only the fans and/or cult following) when it is initially released. I recommend this to anyone who wishes to watch it, the two aforementioned groups in particular. 6/10

"Escape from New York" is by no means a classic film, but it's memorably dark, seedy, suspenseful and even funny. You might call it a worthy cult favorite. Alas, "Escape from L.A." is not nearly as memorable - in fact, it plays out like a tired remake of its far more amusing predecessor.

Both films have essentially the same premise; corrupt government officials send criminal tough guy "Snake" Plissken to infiltrate the ruins of a once-great city and retrieve some MacGuffin for them. In both films, Snake is reluctant to cooperate, but the government secures his compliance by threatening his life. So, Snake duly treks off to an urban wasteland, wasting thugs and meeting a variety of wacky characters on his way to completing his desperate mission.

Because the two films are so similar, I find "Escape from L.A." tedious - it simply doesn't break enough new ground. And, to make matters worse, this tepid sequel does everything worse than the original movie. The villain is inferior, the president is inferior, and even the special effects are inferior (note the positively laughable CGI when Snake pilots his submarine to L.A.; the approach to New York in the first film is infinitely classier.)

And, though both films are comedies (of a sort), I find that the jokes in the first are simply better. In "L.A.," there are some attempts at social satire, but by and large they don't work. For instance, the much-praised "plastic surgery" segment feels really isolated and pointless to me. It's a one-joke sequence that goes nowhere and contributes nothing to the plot. Ultimately, I think the first film has the edge in the comedy department because it was co-written by Nick Castle, who reportedly lightened up the script and was quite a wit in general (though Castle is credited on this movie, I believe it's only because he wrote the original film.)

Perhaps the crowning aggravation of "Escape from L.A." is its exceedingly preachy social commentary. Now, I happen to be fairly liberal, so I agree with some of this film's criticisms of the religious right - but I also find the presentation of these criticisms to be superficial, condescending, and obnoxious. To be perfectly blunt, this movie is not literate enough to have serious political aims. It's just too silly and in-your-face; it doesn't have the subtlety to work as a satire, and it certainly lacks balance. Suffice to say, if you're conservative, this movie will annoy you, and even if you're an open-minded liberal, it will probably still annoy you by representing your views so poorly.

Yeah, this is basically a dud, though I sort of enjoy the Luddite-like sentiments in the concluding scenes. It's got some good cameos, a few decent scenes, but in the end...it just ain't the original. What a waste of 50 million bucks!

So, recently if seen this amazing movie again, sitting on my couch and listening to this incredible genius made music. I really don't know, why most of the people prefer Escape from N.Y. When I first saw N.Y. it really didn't get me. But one must be said for sure: ESCAPE FROM L.A. DO HAVE THE BEST ENDING I'VE EVER SEEN IN A MOVIE MADE UNTIL NOW! So all of you, who haven't seen it yet, go get it!

PS: Sorry, if there are some gramatical errors, but my English isn't that good.

I don't care what you guys say I thought it was just as good as Escape from New York. It's not like the 2011 The Thing where I wish it didn't exist, this is perfect for when you watch Escape from New York and go "oh look there's more!!" (that's what I do anyway).

It did NOT - I repeat did NOT damage Kurt Russell's career, John Carpenter's career OR even damage the idea of Escape from New York. It was GOOD. The fact that it was done different to Escape from New York was FUNNY. It was a GOOD MOVIE and it deserves more love.

It's just as enjoyable as Escape from New York, so if you like Escape from New York then you should watch this. It's a nice experience, don't listen to what anyone else says.

An earthquake opens up new opportunity, to isolate an immoral community, those who break the rules and laws, do not fight for the good cause, they will not go unpunished, there's no impunity. Alas, things haven't gone to plan, as the President's daughter has upped and ran, and she's taken Sword of Damocles, into Los Angeles and joined their big cheese, we need recovery, and we've identified our man.

Good old Snake Plissken begrudgingly takes on another mission of recovery, although you may need some time to recover, after enduring the spectacularly awful special defects of the day, an awful script and some pretty tawdry performances all round. Not the directors best work.

Both Escape from New York and Escape from L.A. are decidedly anti-establishment films. They both have this cynical view of the government; in these films, the government is not to be trusted. There are terrorist attacks aimed at the government on both films. ESCAPE FROM L.A This second one is tongue in cheek every step of the way. Watching Escape from L.A. feels like watching a cheap Italian Rip Off like 2019: After the Fall of New York (1983), but with a bigger budget. Actually, Escape from L.A. has a lot of similarities with 2019: After the Fall of New York, so in a way, this is Carpenter's pay back for all those cheap Escape from New York rip offs that the Italians made. Ultimately, I love both Escape from New York and Escape from L.A. for different reasons. And for all the tonal differences between both films, they still have many similarities. No matter where, Snake Plissken will always be Snake Plissken, you can tell Russell has lots of love for this character. Plissken is what kept me watching. The opening and closing segments of the films are extremely similar as well. And here's where we get to the best part of the film, the ending. Not gonna spoil it don't worry, but I will tell you that it is the best thing about the movie. Russell himself came up with it and I applaud him for it, it encapsulates everything Snake Plissken is in terms of attitude. That idea that maybe the world would be better off if we simply started again, from scratch, screw the way things are, let's try something new! Welcome to the human race my friends, welcome to the human race.t does criticize fascist forms of government, it also criticizes rebellious leaders who instigate their followers towards committing violent acts. So it doesn't side with anyone. On this film, both sides are wrong. The film pleads for a new beginning, it's asking governments to forget their old grudges and start from scratch. Snake himself says it in one scene: "I shut down the third world, you win, they loose. I shut down America, they win, you loose. The more things change, the more they stay the same" This is one of the ideas presented in the film that I truly liked. The idea that both sides should just call it quits and bring on the peace, bring on the freedom. Again, this last bit demonstrates how much of Kurt Russell's Libertarian views are on this film. After all, he wrote a lot of it himself along with John Carpenter and Debra Hill. These are three life long buddies writing a movie they would find amusing, which makes this film a labor of love. This is probably why the film has a more laid back, 'were having fun here' vibe to it.

Snake, the man with the patch is back doing his thing in what used to be LA and he strolls down what is left of Wilshire Boulevard and takes time to shoot hoops at the Coliseum. Snake, (Kurt Russell) enters into the 9.6-quaked Los Angeles of 2013 in order to retrieve a black box which is a sort of end of the world device. Snake has friends and foes, Steve Buscemi, Peter Fonda, Stacy Keach, Cliff Robertson and a good actress Pam Grier. There is also plenty of action where Snake dive-bombs a Happy Kingdom theme park. The ending of this film is perfect and I enjoyed this film as much as Escape from New York. John Carpenter & Kurt Russell did a great job in the production and directing. Enjoy

How some top actors agreed to appear in this nonsense is a mystery. Utterly terrible from first frame to last. It's not 'funny bad' or 'so bad it's good' it's just rubbish.

When I think of John Carpenter's best work, it basically boils down to the years of 1978's Halloween to 1988's They Live.

I suppose part of why I feel these were Carpenter's best years was that I was in my late pre-teens when Halloween came out and at the end of my teens when They Live was released. A lot of Carpenter's stuff during that decade seemed to resonate best with adolescent males, of which I was one. Thus, I just LOVED Escape From New York...in part, I suppose, because I was still young enough when that came out that movies had the ability to transport my imagination. I was still young enough back then that I hadn't yet became cynical and was totally able to buy into the premise of that movie without wondering about the ton of plot holes that seemed so obvious decades later.

Plot holes ably pointed out by the hosts of my favorite youtube movie-centered channel (really, the only youtube movie-centered channel I watch so I suppose it is by default my favorite) RedLetterMedia, such as 1) why would one of the most valuable pieces of real estate on the planet, Manhattan Island in NYC, be turned into a prison? And 2) why would the President of the United States be played by an English actor with an English accent? And on and on.

However, the guys at RedLetterMedia also pointed out that whatever else on could say about Escape From New York, the one thing that was true was the cast and the production treated the material seriously. Escape From New York was clearly a B-movie, but one where all the performances were acted seriously. Which I think is another part of why Escape From New York worked as well as it did.

Which brings us to Escape From L. A.

Even though I was in my late-20s when it came out, I was looking forward to Escape From L. A. I was hopeful it would be a neat blast backward to the Carpenter style I had enjoyed in my early teens. Kurt Russell looked like he had kept himself in reasonable physical condition. Carpenter, Russell and Debrah Hill all had written and produced the movie, with Carpenter back behind the camera directing. Surely if anybody could get a sequel to Escape From New York right it would be John Carpenter, Kurt Russell and Debrah Hill...

Well...

I think part of the problem as to why Snake Plissken's jaunt to the West Coast came up a bit short had to do with Escape From L. A. being a bit TOO much like Escape From New York in terms of the plot points or beats of the movie. Whereas Escape From New York felt like an original premise back in the early 1980's, Escape From L. A. circa 1996 in terms of general storyline structure came off a bit too much like an intentional copy of Escape From New York. As such, throughout the viewing of Escape From L. A. everything feels too familiar. Like Carpenter, Russell and Company were too afraid to deviate from the original New York formula. Comes across as playing it safe.

The other part of the problem is that unlike Escape From New York most of the cast in Escape From L. A. are either underplaying their parts or hamming it up and going over the top. Outside of Russell, nobody else in the L. A. cast feels like they're taking the material seriously. Thus, as a viewer, I found it impossible to suspend disbelief and take the movie seriously.

Finally, Escape From New York demonstrated an effective use of matte paintings, miniatures, animation and the like to create a believable movie world environment. Escape From L. A. had a much larger budget than Escape From New York did, yet somehow having more money seemed to work to the detriment of the sequel re: world building. A lot of the settings looked far more synthetic and professionally set dressed than those in New York. And there was a lot of very, very clunky CGI in the sequel which looked as bad in 1996 as it does in 2024. One might say CGI in 1996 was still in the early stages, yet the first film in 1981 managed to get the job done better without the aid of any CGI.

In the end, Escape From New York had an underlying sense of menace. Escape From L. A. was just a bit too cartoonish. Not the worst sequel I've ever seen but fell a bit short of the mark. Some good moments here and there...I dunno. Maybe the whole Snake Plissken premise was only bound to work well once the first time around.

Kurt is back and he is better than ever, as is the movie.

I just reviewed Escape from New York after rewatching it.

Funny people make exactly the wrong claims it aged much worse than LA.

This movie has an amazing support cast and they all deliver.

The over use of 90scgi actually work and make this movie an early 4th wall finger.

These effects are a bit dated and show but are better than the goofy stuff in NY.

The plot is much better and more believable.

The "WORLD" a fallen LA yes even worse than current LA is much deeper and more engrossing.

I won both movies and will watch LA at least once a year.

The ending is also much better and needs to be seen.

Ignore critics they are probably not smart or cool enough to get it.

Kurt is a tiny bit less in the sport light and he is still better than when he carried all of NY on his back.

The Thing. Escape From New York. The Fog. They Live. Halloween. And THIS?! I'd be willing to cut Carpenter some slack if this film wasn't so tragically lousy on every level.

Should be required viewing for all first year film students, serving as a cautionary study in how the seduction of technology can turn even the brightest talents into boiling fecal fudge. I'm actually angry that this film exists.

Aspiring Dictators and other practitioners of mechanically inhuman torment should welcome the news that film DOES in fact exist. Escape From L.A. will certainly find its way (along with the theatrical release of Highlander 2: The Quickening) into the dens of filth & suffering utilized by those most cruelly ambitious men.

If Christ were alive today, he might submit to a viewing of Escape From L.A. to save us from our sins.

Yes, I thought this movie was a bit better than New York. Not by much mind you, but this one has a much lower score so I know I have chosen the wrong one to like. Snake is back, and Kurt Russell once again really brings life to the character. I am sure even those who did not care for this movie can at least say he did a credible job. The plot is a bit different a bit the same. The president's daughter has joined in with a criminal from LA, which is somehow an island now and a maximum security prison just like New York. America is now ruled by strange laws combining the worst of conservatism and liberalism. Add to that the fact other countries wish to invade the US and are using what the president's daughter has to try and make their plans work. What does she have you ask? Some sort of device that controls satellites that can cut power off to all machines and such. It can do this to any region or even the entire earth. Well once again Snake has been captured and once again he is duped into going into LA and retrieving the data, but not the president's daughter. So off he goes with a cool new outfit and some nice weapons and gadgets and just like the first one things almost immediately. He gets caught a couple of times in this movie, once by a strange bunch of people addicted to plastic surgery. He also has to play a deadly game of basketball and fly off with his "allies" in a strange helicopter. Hell, there is even a crazy surfboard scene with Peter Fonda. The movie is a bit goofy compared to New York, but I rather like the over the top way this movie is done. The effects are hit and miss, the actors are hit and miss and so is the action, but overall I think this movie is rather cool. Of course, I may think that only because Snake is back.

Believe me I have seen some corkers of movies yet this is the worst. I must admit I enjoy some of the clichéd lines from films but this has some of the worst cringing ones, delivered by the terrible(in this film) Kurt Russell('My name's Plissken')also the basketball scene is awful, in fact all the scenes are awful, recently I have been trying to write summaries on some of my favorite films but it has proved extremely hard, as for drivel like this its easy....1/10

Snake is back, and they shouldn't have tried to f*** with him. This movie is one of the best sci-fi movies these years, because first it's not serious at all, we see that John Carpenter is one of the most creative directors in the world in general and in USA in particular, that's why this movie didn't work, he doesn't have limits to his purpose, to the characters, he dose what he wants, and that's why he's not appreciated as he ought to be. That's also why he's appreciated here in France, we appreciated the character, Snake Plissken, very independent, not like those fake heroes as in ID4 or "Armageddon", Snake Plissken is a kind of anarchist, nobody can make him do what he doesn't want to except if his life depends on it. He's called to save the world, he says f*** off. The end of the movie is one of the best ends of a movie in these last years. The cast is really good, with of course Kurt Russell, Steve Buscemi and Pam Grier (wow!) in a different role than "Jackie Brown" but the end is why I loved this movie, I didn't know that there were still free men as Carpenter in art creation in the USA.

In 2000, when a powerful earthquake hits Los Angeles, the decadent city turns into an island. Then the criminals and outcast of the moralist laws created by the American president (Cliff Robertson) are deported permanently to the island.

In 2013, the daughter of the president, Utopia (A. J. Langer), is seduced by the terrorist Cuervo Jones (George Corraface) and flees to Los Angeles to meet him with a remote control capable to use satellites to destroy all electronic devices in any country that opposes to USA and allows the president to dominate the world. Now Cuervo is threatening to attack USA with Third World forces using the satellite control.

Snake Plissken (Kurt Russell) is ready to be deported to Los Angeles and the president offers him full pardon if the recovers the remote control. Further, he infects Plissken with a virus to force him to accept the mission.

"Escape from L. A." is another entertaining adventure of the anti-hero Snake Plissken by John Carpenter. The storyline is very similar to "Escape from New York" but with different and funny situations and dialogs. The action scenes are excellent, and this sequel is worthwhile watching. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Fuga de Los Angeles" ("Escape from Los Angeles")

Note: On 04 March 2025, I saw this time again.

It's been a long time since I watched a movie that has vied for my personal "Worst Movie of All Time" award. I had the displeasure of watching Escape From LA recently, and in spite of the fact that I was watching an astonishingly awful movie, I had to keep watching to find out if the movie would keep plummeting on it's downward spiral. Rest assured, it did.

I am admittedly a fan of the original Escape from New York. The original was dark and somewhat believable with an admirable supporting job by Lee Van Cleef. Escape from LA is essentially the same movie, moved to the west coast, and with the special effects possible in this day an age.

Note to self (and anyone else): Spending money on special effects does not equal a better movie.

One last word on this movie - I think Escape from LA has one of the worst single scenes in any movie I've ever seen. I thought Jean Claude van Damme punching a snake (and knocking it unconscious) in "Hard Target" was bad, but watching Snake Pliskin ride a tsunami on a surfboard, then jumping into the back of a speeding car, may be worse.

I'd advise watching this movie once, just to enjoy just how simply bad it is. But consider yourself warned.