AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
4,1/10
3,3 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Numa América pós-apocalíptica, um médico/cientista infectado com uma nova estirpe de parasita acaba numa pequena cidade desértica, tentando encontrar uma cura.Numa América pós-apocalíptica, um médico/cientista infectado com uma nova estirpe de parasita acaba numa pequena cidade desértica, tentando encontrar uma cura.Numa América pós-apocalíptica, um médico/cientista infectado com uma nova estirpe de parasita acaba numa pequena cidade desértica, tentando encontrar uma cura.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
Joanelle Romero
- Bo
- (as Joannelle Nadine Romero)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
Problem with this movie is that it's being a quite boring one to watch. It picks a totally serious approach, while the story is just far from interesting or well written. There is hardly anything spectacular happening in it and as a science-fiction/horror or post-apocalyptic movie, it's a severely lacking one.
It's funny how this movie is supposed to be a post-apocalyptic movie. Once the movie starts off there is nothing to indicate that this movie is supposed to be set in a near future, in which the entire world has supposedly gone to waste, due to some kind of atomic war, presumably. But the movie simply looks like an 1982 movie set in 1982. There are only some lasers featured in it, to indicate that this movie is not being set at present time.
But to be frank, there are far more movies like that out there, that are still not being half as bad as this one though. Problem really is that this movie takes itself far too serious and tries to be more of a realistic movie, though the story has absolutely nothing clever or original in it to justify this approach. The movie really doesn't work out too well because of this. It instead makes this movie work out as a boring one, also since it doesn't have any redeeming characters or some fun or good tense horror-like moments in it.
It's actually quite amazing how bland and totally uninteresting the movie its story is, while its concept itself doesn't sound that bad at all. Seriously, this is all they could come up with? I'm surprised that a person green-lighted this project at the first place.
The characters absolutely don't work out at all, also due to its poorly and unimaginative written story. The actors also come across as bad ones because of this, since the movie features some real poor dialog as well. Doubtful that this is a movie Demi Moore is still very proud off. This movie was one of the very first ones she ever appeared in and to be honest, she was absolutely horrible in this, which is, as I said, more due to the writing and perhaps directing as well, than her actual acting skills.
But to name a good thing about this movie; it has some quite confusing looking effects and special effects make-up. No big surprise though, once you see that Stan Winston's name is attached to this.
This movie is too much of a bore and there is no reason to recommend it to anyone.
4/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
It's funny how this movie is supposed to be a post-apocalyptic movie. Once the movie starts off there is nothing to indicate that this movie is supposed to be set in a near future, in which the entire world has supposedly gone to waste, due to some kind of atomic war, presumably. But the movie simply looks like an 1982 movie set in 1982. There are only some lasers featured in it, to indicate that this movie is not being set at present time.
But to be frank, there are far more movies like that out there, that are still not being half as bad as this one though. Problem really is that this movie takes itself far too serious and tries to be more of a realistic movie, though the story has absolutely nothing clever or original in it to justify this approach. The movie really doesn't work out too well because of this. It instead makes this movie work out as a boring one, also since it doesn't have any redeeming characters or some fun or good tense horror-like moments in it.
It's actually quite amazing how bland and totally uninteresting the movie its story is, while its concept itself doesn't sound that bad at all. Seriously, this is all they could come up with? I'm surprised that a person green-lighted this project at the first place.
The characters absolutely don't work out at all, also due to its poorly and unimaginative written story. The actors also come across as bad ones because of this, since the movie features some real poor dialog as well. Doubtful that this is a movie Demi Moore is still very proud off. This movie was one of the very first ones she ever appeared in and to be honest, she was absolutely horrible in this, which is, as I said, more due to the writing and perhaps directing as well, than her actual acting skills.
But to name a good thing about this movie; it has some quite confusing looking effects and special effects make-up. No big surprise though, once you see that Stan Winston's name is attached to this.
This movie is too much of a bore and there is no reason to recommend it to anyone.
4/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
It isn't necessarily fair to begin making judgments about a movie within its first minutes, but sometimes it's very easy, for good and for ill. By the time one-quarter of the length has elapsed plot still hasn't shown up (and it won't meaningfully show up for a good while yet), and half the scenes we've gotten up to that point were rendered in slow motion. The obvious 3-D gimmick, which never survives in a picture beyond its initial release, just comes off badly. Charles Band's direction is so lethargic generally that it's a wonder the cast weren't falling asleep in the middle of the shoot. We are shown the world, and some characters in it, and we're given small pieces of information, but even as we close in on the halfway mark there still hasn't been any significant explanation, and we can only accept the goings-on at face value. "Insufficient" might be the best word to describe the writing in all regards, but "weak" is a fair one, too. Despite their overall reputation, the Band family has made some genuinely enjoyable, good films every now and again. 'Parasite' isn't one of them.
It's not until we're five-eighths through the runtime that substantial plot really shows up, by the way. In fairness, it's not like this is all bad. I see the skill that did go into it. The cast are very much limited by the material and Band's direction, but they try to make the most of it - including a fledgling Demi Moore, and Cherie Currie. The crew turned in good work generally, including effects and special makeup, sets, and costume design. The story may take a long time to truly show up, but there are some fun sci-fi horror vibes to be had all the same. Richard Band's original music isn't half bad. And hey, there are actually some splendid idea in the screenplay; there was real potential here. Would that the direction carried more vitality, and more than that, that the writing had bothered to give us any reason to care until the title was already more than half over. There's value here, but it's condensed and miniaturized, and presents as sloppily and with as little excitement as it possibly could. All the best efforts of the cast and crew can't overcome writing and direction this meager.
Really and truly, this could have been a good movie. I see what it does well. It flounders in some crucial ways, however, and for far too much of its length, so the entertainment that it can ultimately offer is just all too little. I'm glad for those who like 'Parasite' more than I do, and for that matter I want to like it more than I do; then again, maybe I'm being too kind. One way or another it's hard to especially recommend this except for those who are diehard fans of the genre or someone involved, or those who are direly curious. Oh well.
It's not until we're five-eighths through the runtime that substantial plot really shows up, by the way. In fairness, it's not like this is all bad. I see the skill that did go into it. The cast are very much limited by the material and Band's direction, but they try to make the most of it - including a fledgling Demi Moore, and Cherie Currie. The crew turned in good work generally, including effects and special makeup, sets, and costume design. The story may take a long time to truly show up, but there are some fun sci-fi horror vibes to be had all the same. Richard Band's original music isn't half bad. And hey, there are actually some splendid idea in the screenplay; there was real potential here. Would that the direction carried more vitality, and more than that, that the writing had bothered to give us any reason to care until the title was already more than half over. There's value here, but it's condensed and miniaturized, and presents as sloppily and with as little excitement as it possibly could. All the best efforts of the cast and crew can't overcome writing and direction this meager.
Really and truly, this could have been a good movie. I see what it does well. It flounders in some crucial ways, however, and for far too much of its length, so the entertainment that it can ultimately offer is just all too little. I'm glad for those who like 'Parasite' more than I do, and for that matter I want to like it more than I do; then again, maybe I'm being too kind. One way or another it's hard to especially recommend this except for those who are diehard fans of the genre or someone involved, or those who are direly curious. Oh well.
I saw this movie when I was 9 years old. My father brought me and my brother as just a day at the movies. My brother couldn't sleep for weeks. The special effects in this movie were incredible for its time. There are two scenes I will never forget. This guy gets a lead pipe put through him and as the blood drips out the 3D kicks in and the blood is dripping on your lap. The other is one of the parasites totally blows out of this ladies face. This will always be one of my favorite movies. I just wish you could get 3D on your TV at home.
3D was very short lived but for those movies that were made in this way, they will never be forgotten.
3D was very short lived but for those movies that were made in this way, they will never be forgotten.
No, this is not a very good movie at all. However, I saw it when it was first released in 1982 in 3D, and not once since then, and I still remember some creepy scenes. The big gross-out in the movie -- when the dripping parasite falls down on you from the ceiling in 3D!! -- had me squirming in my seat in 1982.
I saw a number of films during the short-lived 3D revival of the early '80's, and, believe me, there were very few kick-ass uses of the 3D effect anywhere, but Parasite had one of the better ones. (Most of the other good 3D moments are in House of Wax with Vincent Price. Even Hitchcock couldn't figure out what to do with the gimmick.)
By the way, in 1982 no one had ever heard of Demi Moore. Did we predict big things for her after seeing her in this? Yeah, right.
I saw a number of films during the short-lived 3D revival of the early '80's, and, believe me, there were very few kick-ass uses of the 3D effect anywhere, but Parasite had one of the better ones. (Most of the other good 3D moments are in House of Wax with Vincent Price. Even Hitchcock couldn't figure out what to do with the gimmick.)
By the way, in 1982 no one had ever heard of Demi Moore. Did we predict big things for her after seeing her in this? Yeah, right.
I saw this movie in the theater and still have the funny little 3-D glasses with the creature's face printed on them that came with the movie. Maybe that gives me a soft spot for the film, which was totally forgettable in almost every other way. I have written in my 1982 notes to avoid the 3-D version unless you like double vision - so maybe those stupid glasses weren't very good. Poor editing made the movie a bit hard to follow - not that it really has anything worth following, though. The most notable thing about the film is the queasy feeling that you got from the monsters, which gave me the creeps in the same way that I get when I see leaches. I suppose that means that the movie did at least something right. I rated it a "5".
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesIn October 2019, Demi Moore stated (in The Late Late Show with James Corden) that this was the worst movie she has ever been in.
- Erros de gravaçãoWhen the first gang member gets infected by the parasite, they refer to it several times as 'that thing on his arm' despite the fact that it is on his chest.
- Citações
Patricia Welles: I could've gone to the city when my father died, but they'd just put me in one of those work camps, put a tattoo on my arm. I'm still a whole lot better off here.
- Versões alternativasDue to Ascot targeting a "Not under 16" rating, the German theatrical version was cut for violence by 28 seconds to achieve such rating. Uncut version was released on VHS unrated, but later got BPjM indexed due to Germany's strict policies on movie violence at that time. The movie has since been removed from the index list in 2012, and all current German video releases since then are completely uncensored now with a "Not under 16" rating.
- ConexõesEdited into Sci-Fi Slaughter (2005)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Parasite?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Parasite
- Locações de filme
- Vasquez Rocks Natural Area Park - 10700 W. Escondido Canyon Rd., Agua Dulce, Califórnia, EUA(Scenes near unique shaped rock formations.)
- Empresa de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 800.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 2.270
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente