VALUTAZIONE IMDb
4,2/10
3436
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaIn a world ravaged by disease, he's the only cure... and the last hope for human-kind.In a world ravaged by disease, he's the only cure... and the last hope for human-kind.In a world ravaged by disease, he's the only cure... and the last hope for human-kind.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Topaz Hasfal-Schou
- Davis
- (as Topaz Hasfal)
Christopher Redman
- Daniel Haywood
- (as Chris Redman)
Recensioni in evidenza
In the future, all money has been obliterated in exchange for a chronic medicine which treats (but doesn't cure) a universal plague that everyone suffers from. However when an actual cure for the plague is produced, the government wants to kill the scientist due to the shock it would have on the economy, Christopher Lambert, Lou Diamond Phillips and Ron Perlman are aboard to make this more watchable than it would be. Absolon is a straight to video movie (Obviously) which I watched on the Sci-Fi channel, for some reason I have an uncanny ability to seek out the STV movies independent from them and some how avoid their made for Sci-Fi movies, consider it luck I guess. However this being said Absolon is a competently made B.movie but it is also clichéd, unexciting and dreary. Lambert is actually not too shabby and there are moments when you suspect that the movie is going to open up and get really interesting but alas it never does. It always comes close to a boil but it loses steam due to an uninspired gunfight or something gratuitous to it's plot. Had Absolon concentrated on it's futuristic dwellings this would have been good, however because it lacks atmosphere the movie feels ordinary and by the numbers. Still fairly watchable in a low expectations kind of way.
* * out of 4-(Fair)
* * out of 4-(Fair)
Exactly that, this film had potential to be good. Alas it sucked. Kelly Brook may be hot but her acting is luke warm. And why is it that lamberts voice never changes, totally mono.
Avoid the film unless youre planing on re-making it, becuase it has a good enough Sci-Fi story line to work with.
Avoid the film unless youre planing on re-making it, becuase it has a good enough Sci-Fi story line to work with.
As far as direct-to-video sci-fi, it hardly gets worse than Absolon, and that's saying a whole lot. As with about 97.9% of the people who have seen this movie, I rented it because Christopher Lambert was in it. This movie was bad even by Christopher Lambert direct-to-video standards. The plot is a ludicrous story of viruses and big business in the "future". This future doesn't look very futuristic, but this is explained away in the prologue by telling the viewer that because so many people died in a plague, the world's population has enough goods to last another 100 years. I guess that's why everyone drives 2001 Tauruses and Explorers then, not budget constraints, right? Lambert comes out OK here, as he once again rises above his awful material to give what is at the very least an acceptable performance. Other than that, watch out. Lou Diamond Phillips hams it up like never before, and even Ron Perlman is stunningly awful in his small role (I guarantee he wasn't on set for more than a day or two, as his character never leaves his desk, and about halfway through the movie he stops interacting in person with the other characters, instead using video conferencing). Additionally, I'm pretty sure that in this future, anyone can be a cop, because one of Lambert's fellow cops looks like she is about 10 minutes removed from a Ramones show (with dark red streaks in her jet-black hair) and another appears to be wearing some sort of Indiana Jones Halloween costume (fedora included). Kelly Brook is gorgeous as Lambert's love interest, although her acting talent is limited as is her willingness to do nude scenes apparently. I've never felt so teased by a female character's lack of nudity in my life.
The direction is awful, I'm sure half of the people that read this, if not more, could make a better movie. Barto uses some of the most ridiculous editing techniques I've ever seen, including an incredibly obnoxious fast-forward/slo-mo combination that hurts my eyes every time it comes on screen. Even worse than the direction is the music. It's one thing to have the John Carpenter-esquire simplistic synth score, it's quite another to try to make it sound complex. The score was obviously recorded entirely on a synthesizer on "Strings" setting to emulate an orchestra, and the effect is hilarious, giving every second of music in the film a Casio Keyboard quality. This is not the only problem with the sound, however, as I swear there was one point in a chase sequence when Brook moved her mouth as if speaking and no speech accompanied it.
One of the worst movies I've ever seen, and maybe THE worst, but I'm giving it 3/10 because it is unintentionally funny to the point of actually being watchable all the way through, if only to wait for the next misstep.
The direction is awful, I'm sure half of the people that read this, if not more, could make a better movie. Barto uses some of the most ridiculous editing techniques I've ever seen, including an incredibly obnoxious fast-forward/slo-mo combination that hurts my eyes every time it comes on screen. Even worse than the direction is the music. It's one thing to have the John Carpenter-esquire simplistic synth score, it's quite another to try to make it sound complex. The score was obviously recorded entirely on a synthesizer on "Strings" setting to emulate an orchestra, and the effect is hilarious, giving every second of music in the film a Casio Keyboard quality. This is not the only problem with the sound, however, as I swear there was one point in a chase sequence when Brook moved her mouth as if speaking and no speech accompanied it.
One of the worst movies I've ever seen, and maybe THE worst, but I'm giving it 3/10 because it is unintentionally funny to the point of actually being watchable all the way through, if only to wait for the next misstep.
OK - seen this one this afternoon with my girlfriend. As usual, Brad Mirman delivers an interesting Cyberpunk-like script (even if some plot- holes are "intriguing" - to say the least), as usual, Christopher Lambert is the only one in the cast to be a little bit involved. The photo is okay too and the score has its moments (even if the "Absolon Theme" by Howie B. is almost without interest). Some good FX (very few in fact).
But for his directional debut, David Barto overused already outdated effects (slow/fast effects in the editing for example), made some serious continuity mistakes (the car chase in the 2/3 of the movie for example) and directed it like a poor TV-movie. That's it : Absolon is no more than a (very cheap at times) TV-film : the female cast is terrible - even if enjoyable to see, Lou Diamond Philips looks like he's not really enjoying his part (he needs a new agent) and overplays it, Ron Perlman plays it simply bored (i'm sure he was on the set one day only : he always stays at the same place). Some secondary characters are far more better (dialogues, characterization), that is counter-balancing a little bit but not enough to save the film from oblivion.
I'm very sorry to type this but some things are definitely missing here : a cast, a budget (twice would have been enough i think - how much it cost : no more than 5M$ i'd say), some more concerned "stars" (with the exception of Lambert), a good editor and finally a director with some idea and motivation.
But for his directional debut, David Barto overused already outdated effects (slow/fast effects in the editing for example), made some serious continuity mistakes (the car chase in the 2/3 of the movie for example) and directed it like a poor TV-movie. That's it : Absolon is no more than a (very cheap at times) TV-film : the female cast is terrible - even if enjoyable to see, Lou Diamond Philips looks like he's not really enjoying his part (he needs a new agent) and overplays it, Ron Perlman plays it simply bored (i'm sure he was on the set one day only : he always stays at the same place). Some secondary characters are far more better (dialogues, characterization), that is counter-balancing a little bit but not enough to save the film from oblivion.
I'm very sorry to type this but some things are definitely missing here : a cast, a budget (twice would have been enough i think - how much it cost : no more than 5M$ i'd say), some more concerned "stars" (with the exception of Lambert), a good editor and finally a director with some idea and motivation.
I think this movie has enormous potential as a cult film. I was baffled by the first half of the movie. I found myself laughing out loud at the second half. You could almost hear the director coaching the lead actress - "Okay, in this scene you are once again feeling warm and feel the need to take off your jacket and arch your back." I half expected the actors to start laughing at themselves as they all seemed to be reading the terrible dialogue off cue cards. I would like to think this movie was made in under 24 hours and there was no time for writing, reading, or memorizing a script.
Even though the story was basically over after an hour, the plot dragged along - just to make this into the feature-length category. Even the actors and cameraman seemed bored with the actual plot. I have never seen a movie make more ridiculous use of sunglasses, hair extensions, and gratuitous chest shots.
I dare you to sit through the whole thing.
Even though the story was basically over after an hour, the plot dragged along - just to make this into the feature-length category. Even the actors and cameraman seemed bored with the actual plot. I have never seen a movie make more ridiculous use of sunglasses, hair extensions, and gratuitous chest shots.
I dare you to sit through the whole thing.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizDavid De Bartolome's first studio film.
- BlooperWhen Scott turns on the gas in Greer's apartment, he turns the valve perpendicular to the pipeline. That would actually turn a gas line off. The valve handle must be parallel to the pipeline to be in the on position.
- ConnessioniReferenced in Unikal'noe pozdravlenie (2014)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Absolon?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Absolon
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 8.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 7016 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 36min(96 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti