I fiumi di porpora 2 - Gli angeli dell'apocalisse
Titolo originale: Les rivières pourpres II - Les anges de l'apocalypse
VALUTAZIONE IMDb
5,9/10
22.289
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Pierre Niemans affronta la minaccia dell'apocalisse mentre esamina una serie di omicidi rituali.Pierre Niemans affronta la minaccia dell'apocalisse mentre esamina una serie di omicidi rituali.Pierre Niemans affronta la minaccia dell'apocalisse mentre esamina una serie di omicidi rituali.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Nikita Lespinasse
- Mathilde - l'Infirmière
- (as Nikita)
Recensioni in evidenza
...like in the first part. Only the location is different. Like the basic "Les rivieres pourpres", unconvincing story, too much in different forms. As virtues - presence of Magimel and Christopher Lee. As weak part- the less performances, the not the most inspired explanations and plot. The unrealism in too huge doses. And the childish simplicity of details. Not the worst movie, but one who you see only for the effort of actors to save a bad script.
Jean Reno's detective Niemans is back hunting the mind behind a bizarre series of murders and disappearances, all with a religious overtone. It all begins with a bleeding wall in a monastery and goes from there as twists seem to be leading us toward the end of the world.
I would like to report that this is at least the equal of the earlier film (One of the best thrillers of the past five or six years), but I can't. This is a film that has too many characters and too much plot with the result that you're hard pressed to work out whats happening. Characters such as Mary, a religious expert, or Christopher Lee's ominous business man are never more than cyphers. We get to know nothing about them. There are plot twists or points that are never fully explained. Watching this I had the sense that this was suppose to be about an hour longer but that it had been chopped up to its shortest possible running time. I'm led to believe this by the fact that whats on screen alludes to more than we're seeing, this is a film thats alive off the screen. I wish that they had taken the time to explain more.
None of it is really bad, although the acrobatics of the killer(s) in monks robes are much too far over the top for the films own good.
In the end as a rental or on cable this is okay, but but given a choice I'd watch the first one again over this.
Should Luc Besson read this: Please do another-and better- film with Reno's character. He's too good a creation to die after only two outings.
I would like to report that this is at least the equal of the earlier film (One of the best thrillers of the past five or six years), but I can't. This is a film that has too many characters and too much plot with the result that you're hard pressed to work out whats happening. Characters such as Mary, a religious expert, or Christopher Lee's ominous business man are never more than cyphers. We get to know nothing about them. There are plot twists or points that are never fully explained. Watching this I had the sense that this was suppose to be about an hour longer but that it had been chopped up to its shortest possible running time. I'm led to believe this by the fact that whats on screen alludes to more than we're seeing, this is a film thats alive off the screen. I wish that they had taken the time to explain more.
None of it is really bad, although the acrobatics of the killer(s) in monks robes are much too far over the top for the films own good.
In the end as a rental or on cable this is okay, but but given a choice I'd watch the first one again over this.
Should Luc Besson read this: Please do another-and better- film with Reno's character. He's too good a creation to die after only two outings.
I've noticed that in French films the "enemies" are too often the Germans. Enough with them! Find someone else. The whole film was unrealistic. Whatever drugs those soldiers might have taken a bullet remains a bullet, not to mention the jump from that height. The climax is reached in the ending though. How the hell did they manage to survive??? They had one chance in a million.
Whatever... I wanted to say I really liked the first one, it was much more intriguing and both Niemans and the other supporting detective were more committed to the case.
I guess it's not easy to make a good acting performance when the plot doesn't inspire you, so i'm not commenting on them.
Whatever... I wanted to say I really liked the first one, it was much more intriguing and both Niemans and the other supporting detective were more committed to the case.
I guess it's not easy to make a good acting performance when the plot doesn't inspire you, so i'm not commenting on them.
I loved Les Rivieres Pourpres. I thought it was atmospheric, dark and a bit sinister. But then how can you go wrong with Kassovitz as the director? Well, this sequel is just as atmospheric, but the story is complete crap. It has to do with an ancient order of monks, a member of the German ministry (Christopher Lee speaking flawless French), and a lot of running around. Benoit Magimel is great to watch. He has a lot of pent up hunky angst, which makes for great cinema, and man can he run! Jean Reno is fabulous - as always. The problem with this film is it is so obtuse. It's as if the writer - Luc Besson, need I say more - thought "hmmm I'll add in some ritual killings, some religious references, some fight sequences but leave out logic and any semblance of meaning." I finished watching the film and just scratched my head. WHAT THE F***? The first film makes you scratch your head in a GOOD way. This one just defies purpose. It's as if a chunk of the script was left out. Watch it if you like pseudo-religious thrillers - there's a lot to choose from these days - but if you really need something deeper; something Oh I don't know sensible, forget this stinker. It looks good. It just doesn't make a lot of sense.
Rivières Pourpres 1 was better than 2 because in the first there were much more suspense elements. Here we come quick to the action and so surprises were limited in this average story. It's no doubt a fast paced mystery thriller with lots of special and sound effects. There is a scene that is better than Spiderman. The soundtrack is very strong. The setting places of the monastery or the Ligne Maginot were nice shot. Jean Reno made a solid job in his part as the cop Niemans and cool role of the horror legend Christopher Lee. Don't expect a top thriller but if you want to spend an entertaining evening this one works. Fortunately it's not too long. Will they decide to make part 3? I have some doubts. For these reasons our vote is 6/10.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizSir Christopher Lee accepted his role mainly because he wanted to work with Jean Reno.
- BlooperThe shadow of boom mic is visible just after the army go to the monastery, at the bottom left corner, in the forest.
- Citazioni
Reda: You still never told me.
Commissaire Niemans: What?
Reda: The name of your dog.
Commissaire Niemans: I found an interesting name, a dangerous dog's name.
Reda: For a Yorkshire?
Commissaire Niemans: Yes, I called him... Reda!
- ConnessioniFollows I fiumi di porpora (2000)
- Colonne sonoreI Wanna Be Your Dog
Performed by The Stooges
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Crimson Rivers 2: Angels of the Apocalypse?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- Crimson Rivers 2: Angels of the Apocalypse
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 30.000.000 € (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 152.148 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 46.376 USD
- 6 set 2004
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 40.152.148 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 40 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was I fiumi di porpora 2 - Gli angeli dell'apocalisse (2004) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi