AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
4,4/10
424
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaSharon Bell is back, this time she must stop a terrorist plot to smuggle Nazi nerve gas.Sharon Bell is back, this time she must stop a terrorist plot to smuggle Nazi nerve gas.Sharon Bell is back, this time she must stop a terrorist plot to smuggle Nazi nerve gas.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
Tommy Chang
- Kidnapper
- (as Thomas Chang)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
This got to be on of the worst movies ever. The plot was terrible, the action scenes boring and the whole thing totally crap. Good action films makes you forget that some things are unrealistic, like having 100 bullets in a gun. This movie is not like that at all. Here it just seems silly. And the ending is crap as well.
The only good thing is Lance Hendriksen who can actually act, otherwise do not waste your time on this movie.
The only good thing is Lance Hendriksen who can actually act, otherwise do not waste your time on this movie.
This is the perfect example of why you can't have too much of a good thing. When I randomly came across the first film in the series, No Contest about a year ago, it was more than just a pleasant surprise. It was awesome. I loved it. Essentially just a low-budget Die Hard ripoff, it ended up being one of the better ones in a sea of Die Hard ripoffs. In fact, it's damn near an identical clone! What was even more surprising, aside from it's impressive casting, was that it was directed by Paul Lynch, who's only real big credit was directing the very first Prom Night. He again returns in the director's chair, and again re-teams with star Shannon Tweed.
In this sequel, oddly re-titled Face The Evil here in the U.S., they bring along the always reliable baddie Lance Henrikeson, and Bruce Payne, who shockingly turns a good guy performance this time around. While not as impressive as the cast of the first film, they do solid work with what they have to work with.
Aesthetically, director Paul Lynch seems to kind of go-through-the- motions here. While a competent looking film, it's a far cry from his slick streamlined approach where he was channeling John McTiernan. Here he takes a much looser and more freestyle approach, meaning you won't find any of the impressive widescreen shots and slick camera-work that made the first one so good.
I have to admit. I had high hopes for this one. I mean, how could I not? The first one was just so fun and well made when I wasn't really expecting much to begin with. And knowing the same star and director were returning only got my excitement even hotter. But while the story, about a mad man who wants to release a chemical agent that kills instantly, was okay, the many sub-par fight scenes, action sequences, and less than stellar camera-work leave you let down.
While knowing full well that Shannon Tweed cannot possibly do most of the fighting and stunts in both of these films, it was easier to take seeing her stunt double the first time around simply because the first one was a much better and enjoyable film all around. Here though, it comes off as annoying when 90% of the time you see a stunt double with a bad blonde wig doing everything, even the simplest punches, kicks, or tumbles.
I think what this film does best is remind you how good the first film was, and if anything, get's you to go back and revisit that randomly surprising film.
www.robotGEEKSCultCinema.blogspot.com
In this sequel, oddly re-titled Face The Evil here in the U.S., they bring along the always reliable baddie Lance Henrikeson, and Bruce Payne, who shockingly turns a good guy performance this time around. While not as impressive as the cast of the first film, they do solid work with what they have to work with.
Aesthetically, director Paul Lynch seems to kind of go-through-the- motions here. While a competent looking film, it's a far cry from his slick streamlined approach where he was channeling John McTiernan. Here he takes a much looser and more freestyle approach, meaning you won't find any of the impressive widescreen shots and slick camera-work that made the first one so good.
I have to admit. I had high hopes for this one. I mean, how could I not? The first one was just so fun and well made when I wasn't really expecting much to begin with. And knowing the same star and director were returning only got my excitement even hotter. But while the story, about a mad man who wants to release a chemical agent that kills instantly, was okay, the many sub-par fight scenes, action sequences, and less than stellar camera-work leave you let down.
While knowing full well that Shannon Tweed cannot possibly do most of the fighting and stunts in both of these films, it was easier to take seeing her stunt double the first time around simply because the first one was a much better and enjoyable film all around. Here though, it comes off as annoying when 90% of the time you see a stunt double with a bad blonde wig doing everything, even the simplest punches, kicks, or tumbles.
I think what this film does best is remind you how good the first film was, and if anything, get's you to go back and revisit that randomly surprising film.
www.robotGEEKSCultCinema.blogspot.com
You get for what you pay, and l paid £1 for this in London, it`s not the best film l`ve ever seen but it certainly isn't the worse...
It's nice to see Bruce Payne as a `goodie` for once, Lance Hendrikson did a competent job and Sharron Tweed was ok, the story line..well we have seen it all before but what do you want..it`s a cheap film..and it passed time on while l was doing something else, thats how l like to see films...
It was ok, the story was l thought strong one...well written...pity all the acting did not match it..
But as l say you get what you pay for...
6/10
It's nice to see Bruce Payne as a `goodie` for once, Lance Hendrikson did a competent job and Sharron Tweed was ok, the story line..well we have seen it all before but what do you want..it`s a cheap film..and it passed time on while l was doing something else, thats how l like to see films...
It was ok, the story was l thought strong one...well written...pity all the acting did not match it..
But as l say you get what you pay for...
6/10
The first 'No Contest' had a bunch of recognizable faces, a decent budget and a simple charm. This action sequel sorely does not. Shannon Tweed returns as Sharon Bell and after the events of the first film has parlayed her success into an acting career.
She and a few crew members of her latest film find themselves at a museum near closing where Sharon's sister works. Scouting it as a potential filming location. Who else happens to be there? Lance Henriksen as the well known art collector Eric Dane. This flicks pretty obvious bad guy. I don't think I have to spell out the rest, but it turns out he's not who he seems, they're trapped inside and there's a biological weapon involved.
The story is weak and makes little sense if you think about it. Lance is one of my favorite actors and he can easily do bad guys justice but this script ain't it. While Tweed pulled off the action heroine the first time out, it's nowhere near as believable or exciting to see her do it the second time. The meager subplot with her sister is paper thin too.
Stuck in the "museum" for 95% of the time, everything feels cheap and rushed. Borderline boring. Definitely lower budget than the original. What little action there is doesn't satisfy and Bruce Payne (memorable as the villain of the Wesley Snipes flick 'Passenger 57') shows up in a wasted appearance.
In other circumstances, I would have tuned into a flick like this just for Henriksen. I actually turned out to be both surprised and entertained by the original 'No Contest'. Which made this piece a letdown in more ways than one.
She and a few crew members of her latest film find themselves at a museum near closing where Sharon's sister works. Scouting it as a potential filming location. Who else happens to be there? Lance Henriksen as the well known art collector Eric Dane. This flicks pretty obvious bad guy. I don't think I have to spell out the rest, but it turns out he's not who he seems, they're trapped inside and there's a biological weapon involved.
The story is weak and makes little sense if you think about it. Lance is one of my favorite actors and he can easily do bad guys justice but this script ain't it. While Tweed pulled off the action heroine the first time out, it's nowhere near as believable or exciting to see her do it the second time. The meager subplot with her sister is paper thin too.
Stuck in the "museum" for 95% of the time, everything feels cheap and rushed. Borderline boring. Definitely lower budget than the original. What little action there is doesn't satisfy and Bruce Payne (memorable as the villain of the Wesley Snipes flick 'Passenger 57') shows up in a wasted appearance.
In other circumstances, I would have tuned into a flick like this just for Henriksen. I actually turned out to be both surprised and entertained by the original 'No Contest'. Which made this piece a letdown in more ways than one.
Shannon Tweed is back fighting terrorists, but this time Lance Henrikson fills in for both Rowdy Roddy Piper and Andrew Dice Clay. I prefer the first one, even though I like Henrikson as an actor. This one is tedious to sit through and not nearly as fun as the film that preceded it. The fights are put together in such a haphazard way that those are boring as well. Giving a casual glance to both the writers on this film, I shouldn't be surprised at how bad it was, as neither writer has done ANYthing even remotely good. Skip the snooze-fest. Rent the original instead, or better yet just watch the vastly superior Die Hard for the upturn time.
My Grade:D-
My Grade:D-
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesReleased theatrically in Japan.
- Erros de gravaçãoWhen Eric Dane goes to shoot Steven Ivory in the leg, he first pulls the trigger but the gun doesn't fire. On the second attempt, it works.
- Citações
Jack Terry: [taking to Eric via a walkie talkie] Dengler?
Eric Dane: Yeah?
Jack Terry: Clearly you have a problem with your identity. Let me give you a tip. In the roulette of life, I'm Vegas.
Eric Dane: You're Vegas? Well, I'm the Jackpot! Jackpot!
- ConexõesFollows Risco de Morte (1995)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente