AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
5,2/10
7,2 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Após um acidente, Rose fica irreconhecível e resolve participar de um tratamento de células ainda em fase de testes. Mesmo funcionando, o tratamento acaba trazendo efeitos colaterais mortais... Ler tudoApós um acidente, Rose fica irreconhecível e resolve participar de um tratamento de células ainda em fase de testes. Mesmo funcionando, o tratamento acaba trazendo efeitos colaterais mortais.Após um acidente, Rose fica irreconhecível e resolve participar de um tratamento de células ainda em fase de testes. Mesmo funcionando, o tratamento acaba trazendo efeitos colaterais mortais.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 1 vitória e 3 indicações no total
Avaliações em destaque
I'm not the biggest fan of remakes or reimaginings but i wanted to watch a movie in the evening and i thought let's give Rabid a chance, since it's based on the work of Cronenberg. I thought it was really well made for the first 45 minutes, i thought it was going to be an arthouse movie since they focused so much on the main character (and her struggle) who suffers from facial deformity which was caused by an accident. And then came the moment where they came up with a great scene which definitely pays tribute to Cronenberg's Dead Ringers, which is one of my favorite scenes from Rabid. After that the movie slowly turns into mediocrity, i love horror but i didn't expected that they would ruin the second half of the movie by turning it into a zombie movie. A real turn off if you ask me, any work of Cronenberg doesn't deserve to be treated like this. There were a few interesting points towards the end but it doesn't save the movie as a whole, what a shame.
I'm not a huge fan of the Soska sisters. Their most acclaimed movie, American Mary, doesn't do anything for me other than show some potential, and I usually don't like remakes, so as you can see, I'm not the target viewer for this film. I must say that it started horribly, terrible directon, terrible make up, the rhythm was completely off, and the performances were at soap opera level (which I blame on the directors). But after a while the movie started getting some momentum and things started getting better, with some genuinely good shocks and some nice make up effects (I especially like the face after the accident), but that was not enough to salvage the movie and it ended on a sour note with a pretty bad ending. Overall, the low budget and bad direction don't allow this to be more than a mediocre experience of a totally unnecessary remake.
So what did I actually watch? I really don't know. I was hoping this movie would be at least a decent remake, or a good B movie. However, at the end I was just wondering WTF it was supposed to be. It's quite different from the original, but not as good, or thoughtful or provocative (I mean, the original lead was an adult movie actress, the new one is a beautiful, established soap opera actress pretending to be ugly).
It's shot well, features good SFX and gore, but many scenes look like their from a telenovela or CW YA TV show. The acting was atrocious at times, the story too convoluted. The last 20 minutes are totally bonkers, unexpected and, in my opinion, unnecessary. But I gotta give the Soskas respect for doing their own thing. Unsuccessfully, but still, they tried. I enjoyed their first feature 'Dead Hooker in a Trunk' a lot more.
It's shot well, features good SFX and gore, but many scenes look like their from a telenovela or CW YA TV show. The acting was atrocious at times, the story too convoluted. The last 20 minutes are totally bonkers, unexpected and, in my opinion, unnecessary. But I gotta give the Soskas respect for doing their own thing. Unsuccessfully, but still, they tried. I enjoyed their first feature 'Dead Hooker in a Trunk' a lot more.
I thought it was important to watch the original. I couldn't do that beforehand, but only after I watched the Soska sisters remake. But it is different in many aspects so it wasn't too bad doing it this way (I usually like to watch an original first and then the remake if I can). The effects here obviously up the ante, but the original had some great ones too.
One of the main differences here is that we get to learn our main actress first, before the inciting incident. This may feel like time wasted or as a nice little touch. Let's go for the latter. The Soskas do have an affinity for Cronenberg and you can tell. They also assembled a nice cast overall, even though someone like CM Punk (can't recall his real name) is quite a cardboard cutout and very cliche for example. But you can tell he has fun with his litle role as is anyone else involved.
The Soskas did change enough for it to make sense to watch both movies. So if you are into horror movies, and don't mind a bit of social commentary thrown in for good measure, you could do worse
One of the main differences here is that we get to learn our main actress first, before the inciting incident. This may feel like time wasted or as a nice little touch. Let's go for the latter. The Soskas do have an affinity for Cronenberg and you can tell. They also assembled a nice cast overall, even though someone like CM Punk (can't recall his real name) is quite a cardboard cutout and very cliche for example. But you can tell he has fun with his litle role as is anyone else involved.
The Soskas did change enough for it to make sense to watch both movies. So if you are into horror movies, and don't mind a bit of social commentary thrown in for good measure, you could do worse
They might be rabid horror fans, but the Soska sisters were a poor choice for directors of the first-ever remake of a David Cronenberg movie. Cronenberg is a true innovator of horror, having directed more than a few genuine classics; the Soska Sisters, (or 'Twisted Twins', as they like to market themselves) have one decent film to their name(s) - American Mary - the bulk of their output ranging from the mediocre (slasher sequel See No Evil 2) to the downright awful (Tarantino inspired exploitation trash Dead Hooker In A Trunk). Rabid is possibly their worst film yet.
Set in the world of high fashion, Rabid 2019's central character is Rose (Laura Vandervoort), an aspiring designer hoping to get her work noticed by her boss, Günter (Mackenzie Gray). One night, while leaving an event, Rose is involved in an accident that leaves her face horribly disfigured; however, after volunteering for revolutionary stem cell treatment, Rose's natural beauty is restored, and better still, Günter chooses her designs for his latest show. Life would be perfect if it wasn't for Rose's strange hallucinations, her newfound hunger for blood, and the vicious tentacle that lives in her armpit.
Clumsy direction, gimmicky editing, an overlong running time, obnoxious characters, a ham-fisted tribute to Cronenberg's Dead Ringers, and weak make-up effects all contribute to a hellish viewing experience, but what made this film really unbearable for me were the fashionistas and the models, all of whom could have come straight out of cult comedy Zoolander (or worse still, Zoolander 2). If I thought for a minute that the Soskas were going for giggles, then I would probably think better of the film, but I don't think this is the case: any laughs seem to be purely unintentional. Günter is an embarrassingly bad caricature -- Will Ferrell's Mugatu is positively normal by comparison -- and the scene where Rose slashes at a dress with scissors to realise her boss's vision would be genius if this were a satire. But it's not.
I honestly think that the Soska's believe their own hype, but as the film descends into asinine zombie territory, it becomes clearer and clearer that the twins have bitten off way more than they can chew. The final scene, in which Rose discovers the true horror of her condition, is let down by more terrible make-up effects and the directors' misguided belief that they have crafted a truly shocking movie. The only thing that is shocking about this film is that it got made in the first place.
Set in the world of high fashion, Rabid 2019's central character is Rose (Laura Vandervoort), an aspiring designer hoping to get her work noticed by her boss, Günter (Mackenzie Gray). One night, while leaving an event, Rose is involved in an accident that leaves her face horribly disfigured; however, after volunteering for revolutionary stem cell treatment, Rose's natural beauty is restored, and better still, Günter chooses her designs for his latest show. Life would be perfect if it wasn't for Rose's strange hallucinations, her newfound hunger for blood, and the vicious tentacle that lives in her armpit.
Clumsy direction, gimmicky editing, an overlong running time, obnoxious characters, a ham-fisted tribute to Cronenberg's Dead Ringers, and weak make-up effects all contribute to a hellish viewing experience, but what made this film really unbearable for me were the fashionistas and the models, all of whom could have come straight out of cult comedy Zoolander (or worse still, Zoolander 2). If I thought for a minute that the Soskas were going for giggles, then I would probably think better of the film, but I don't think this is the case: any laughs seem to be purely unintentional. Günter is an embarrassingly bad caricature -- Will Ferrell's Mugatu is positively normal by comparison -- and the scene where Rose slashes at a dress with scissors to realise her boss's vision would be genius if this were a satire. But it's not.
I honestly think that the Soska's believe their own hype, but as the film descends into asinine zombie territory, it becomes clearer and clearer that the twins have bitten off way more than they can chew. The final scene, in which Rose discovers the true horror of her condition, is let down by more terrible make-up effects and the directors' misguided belief that they have crafted a truly shocking movie. The only thing that is shocking about this film is that it got made in the first place.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesDr. William Burroughs is named after writer William S. Burroughs. As Rose is healing from the procedure, Dr. Burroughs actually listens to a recording of "Advice For Young People", in which the author William S. Burroughs talks about psychic vampires: "If, after having been exposed to someone's presence, you feel as if you've lost a quart of plasma, avoid that presence. You need it like you need pernicious anemia. We don't like to hear the word 'vampire' here. Trying to improve our PR. 'Interdependence' is the keyword. Enlightened interdependence. Life in all its rich variety. Take a little; leave a little. However, by the inexorable logistics of the vampiric process, they always take more than they leave."
- Erros de gravaçãoDr. Keloid says the accident punctured Rose's abdomen, but the bandages are on her chest.
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Rabid?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Rabid
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 5.000.000 (estimativa)
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 47 min(107 min)
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente