AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
4,7/10
4,5 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaWhen he double-crosses a drug kingpin, Darkman must free himself of his remote-control clutches.When he double-crosses a drug kingpin, Darkman must free himself of his remote-control clutches.When he double-crosses a drug kingpin, Darkman must free himself of his remote-control clutches.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
Roxann Dawson
- Angela Rooker
- (as Roxann Biggs-Dawson)
Joel Bissonnette
- Mayo
- (as Joel Bissonette)
Christopher Bondy
- Gibson
- (as Chris Bondy)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
Dr Peyton Westlake continues to live in the City's sewer system, hiding his disfigured face and working on his synthetic skin. When he steals money from a criminal gang to buy more medical equipment he draws the attention of Peter Rooker. Rooker uses Dr Thorne to get to Westlake and work out how he has become so strong. With Rooker planning to create a small army of `Darkmen' Westlake must learn to trust again to overcome Rooker's plan.
Despite the fact that this was another direct to video sequel and that it was shot at the same time as Darkman 2, it is actually quite good. In terms of the basic story it could have been better (creating super strong street thugs) but really there is plenty in the plot to enjoy. Westlake posing as Rooker and finding joy in Rooker's family life etc brings more humanity to the film than was done in part 2. Obviously the plot does has weaknesses it's very short for one, it's quite clichéd for another, although there are nice touched around Rooker.
The use of OTT visuals and nightmare vision scenes is retained and very like Rami's style in fact some of the shot almost mirror the first film. While Westlake lacks some of the craziness that he had in the first film he is still a tortured soul it's just a shame that this is mixed with the image of him as a sort of Batman figure.
Vosloo (best know as the Mummy) isn't as good as Neeson and sounds like he's reading some of his voice over lines. However he still does OK, but it's pertinent that he takes second billing behind Fahey. It's not Vosloo's fault that his character has become an ill-conceived Batman type. Fahey may well be playing an one-dimensional character but he does it well. He's not a great actor but he can hold his own in TVM's and video movies! The rest of the cast are OK but suffice to say you're never in any doubt that this never saw the inside of many cinemas.
Overall it's not brilliant but it's actually quite good certainly better than the second. Basically you know what know what you're getting and it doesn't let you down. Also it's got a really cool title .'Die Darkman, Die' B-movie homage or what!
Despite the fact that this was another direct to video sequel and that it was shot at the same time as Darkman 2, it is actually quite good. In terms of the basic story it could have been better (creating super strong street thugs) but really there is plenty in the plot to enjoy. Westlake posing as Rooker and finding joy in Rooker's family life etc brings more humanity to the film than was done in part 2. Obviously the plot does has weaknesses it's very short for one, it's quite clichéd for another, although there are nice touched around Rooker.
The use of OTT visuals and nightmare vision scenes is retained and very like Rami's style in fact some of the shot almost mirror the first film. While Westlake lacks some of the craziness that he had in the first film he is still a tortured soul it's just a shame that this is mixed with the image of him as a sort of Batman figure.
Vosloo (best know as the Mummy) isn't as good as Neeson and sounds like he's reading some of his voice over lines. However he still does OK, but it's pertinent that he takes second billing behind Fahey. It's not Vosloo's fault that his character has become an ill-conceived Batman type. Fahey may well be playing an one-dimensional character but he does it well. He's not a great actor but he can hold his own in TVM's and video movies! The rest of the cast are OK but suffice to say you're never in any doubt that this never saw the inside of many cinemas.
Overall it's not brilliant but it's actually quite good certainly better than the second. Basically you know what know what you're getting and it doesn't let you down. Also it's got a really cool title .'Die Darkman, Die' B-movie homage or what!
"Darkman III" is probably the poorest film in the series, yet it still has some intriguing moments, and it deserves some praise for at least TRYING to develop the themes that the series had already introduced, instead of simply copying them like most sequels ("Jaws 2" or "Predator 2", for example) do. The gruesome unpleasantness of the original "Darkman" is toned down, like it had been in the first sequel (the best film in the series). But that sequel had much more action, and it also had Larry Drake, who is SORELY missed here, since the villain is played by a narcissistic Jeff Fahey. Even with its weak points, however, "Darkman III" is no worse than "average".
This movie in fact is probably every bit as good as the second sequel.One of my complaints about this movie is the change in the character of Peyton Westlake/Darkman. In the first movie he was a tortured man battling strong demons within himself, whereas in this movie he seems to be fully developed into a wise-cracking comic book type character. We only get a small hint of Darkman's emotional state throughout the entire film and that's about it.
I think this movie's was made as an action movie rather than anything else. The action sequences aren't bad either.
Also Jeff Fahey's character, Rooker is good but feels somewhat shallow, as if more of the character needed to be developed before we could believe he was truly evil. Arnold Vosloo is an interesting choice to play Darkman and brings his own style to the character. Add to this the plight of Darkman falling in love again and having to painfully remember that he can never share his feelings with another person and you have the makings of a good movie.
Maybe they should have spent more time on the characters than the action. Maybe this would have made the movie better. But nevertheless it is still quite an entertaining movie and works well if you don't stop to think about it. 6/10
I think this movie's was made as an action movie rather than anything else. The action sequences aren't bad either.
Also Jeff Fahey's character, Rooker is good but feels somewhat shallow, as if more of the character needed to be developed before we could believe he was truly evil. Arnold Vosloo is an interesting choice to play Darkman and brings his own style to the character. Add to this the plight of Darkman falling in love again and having to painfully remember that he can never share his feelings with another person and you have the makings of a good movie.
Maybe they should have spent more time on the characters than the action. Maybe this would have made the movie better. But nevertheless it is still quite an entertaining movie and works well if you don't stop to think about it. 6/10
it's not really bad for a third in the series,, and yes i know that this one was supposed to be the 2nd and all , and return of Durant was supposed to be the third,, but tha't s not why i'm here to discuss this movie,, first off Jeff fahey, is pretty damn good as a villain,, almost as good as Jeff fahey, and in this one you also have a villainess fahey 's assistant,, darlanne fleuggel,, few of you probably remember her from the TV show ,, HUNTER with Fred dryer / ex NFL player.. well storyline goes , that dark man rips off the bad guys shipment, and uses proceeds to further his research . darlanne fleugel's character is very charming and believable as she tries to schmooze our hero,, will she succeed ? will dark man be overcome by her beauty charm and seductivness only can only watch and find out.
This starts out the only way they knew how to open an entry in this series... introducing the villain and building up how tough and ruthless he is(this time, a new guy, thankfully... I love Durant, but a third outing would have been pushing it). Rooker is the name, and he deals drugs(because that's what 90's bad guys do), and... er... he's a fanatic about physical strength(albeit he isn't a muscled beast)... even though he uses no less than two guns(well, only once), even firing one immediately after talking about how you can't make a point with such. Huh. Well, for all the personality he doesn't have, Jeff Fahey, common to B-movies, certainly gives a nice, over-the-top performance(as does someone else, I won't name them here... but maniacal laughter is had, and it is good). Darkman... still hasn't taken up vigilantism(beyond taking revenge), he continues to try to improve his liquid skin(seemingly having forgotten the breakthrough of the second one... yeah, there's no continuity between these), and this time, struggles with caring about regular people again, after all he's lost(not a bad arc, if there is no real thematic in this one). Once the two meet, a hefty battle ensues, which is exactly what we want to see(why didn't we get that in II? Right, because that one's padded like crazy), and the first one only had half the movie to get into that, since it was also the origin story. Still not an actually good movie, this is much more entertaining than the one before it. It emulates the fast pace of the '90 one(still lacking the visuals), with plenty of twists and turns(most of which make reasonable sense, though, sadly, several don't make a lasting impact), keeping it moving nearly constantly throughout the 83 minute running time(sans credits). There is a ton of action(some of those scenes being completely gratuitous!), that tend to be quite cool. This is tense, and genuinely makes you care. Roxann Dawson, of Voyager, really helps as the not-taking-it-anymore wife of aforementioned mobster. Her acting is the most sincere, and she has to deal with a lot of exposition(...which, I guess, makes her perfect for Star Trek). Vosloo remains a fine choice for the titular anti-hero. FX are decent. There is some bloody, gory(finally!) violence and a little moderate to strong language in this. I recommend this to fans of the Raimi take on it who are willing to settle. Not one you'll remember for long; however, it is quite enjoyable during the viewing. 5/10
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesFilmed simultaneously with Darkman 2: O Retorno de Durant (1995) between November 15, 1993 and December 20, 1993, but not released until going direct-to-video on August 20, 1996.
- Erros de gravaçãoIn Darkman II, Peyton learns how to extend the 'life' of the synthetic skin from 99 minutes to over 150 minutes. This technology, while apparently so simple Peyton is surprised he never thought of it in the previous film, is never seen again.
- Citações
Johnny Lee: I don't get it, Rooker. Your organization handles coke, weed, crank. But you - you show up to supervise a two-bit shipment of steroids.
Peter Rooker: I'm not into drugs.
Johnny Lee: [chuckling] What the fuck do you call this shit?
Peter Rooker: Strength.
- ConexõesEdited from Darkman: Vingança sem Rosto (1990)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Tempo de duração1 hora 27 minutos
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.33 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente