AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
4,3/10
706
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idioma10 years after the first Alien object (Torus) arose. Two more Torus appear causing havoc on a global level.10 years after the first Alien object (Torus) arose. Two more Torus appear causing havoc on a global level.10 years after the first Alien object (Torus) arose. Two more Torus appear causing havoc on a global level.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
Angel Boris Reed
- Sondra
- (as Angel Boris)
Dessi Morales
- Kellenworth
- (as Desislava Nikolova)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
Wooden acting and a non-sensical plot kill this remake. If you like the first one, skip this. Multiple plot lines all jumble together to no satisfactory conclusions. David Keith, one of my favorites, acts like he never read the script until just before they call "Action".
I wish I could've seen this high budget movie in theaters, i loved the first one, and it kept me interested throughout. The plot was very much the same as the first one mixed with a bit of Taken, but that isn't bad, very good in fact, the plot was good, the religious overtones worked real well like in the first movie. There was also good acting, David Keith was real natural in his role, and just about all the characters likable when supposed to be and dislikable when supposed to be. All in all, the best tho hours I've had in recent weeks. A good watch.
This is the FIRST film I have ever scene where, when a soldier gets shot and killed actually screams OWWWW!! or screams in pain when hit. Other than that, when any film brings in religion as a subtext...That is, in a SciFi film, it simply does not work. Even Faith Domergue would have never worn a cross on a chain in her cult classic films. Has anyone noticed that in the last 10 years of film-making the book of GENESIS seems to appear more and more? As an instance where religion DOES show its face is in the H.G.Wells 2005 version of WAR OF THE WORLDS with C. Thomas Howell which did mention the BOOK OF REVELATIONS in its script. In this film, which got some fairly good ratings from viewers when I saw it on the SYFY Channel, when people die, they also do not make any noise of pain when they die. I believe H.G.Wells was an Atheist or Agnostic in case the writers of this version read his book. If anyone has ever been around a real death or wounding of a human, you will remember audible screams of pain.
Quite literally, this movie was laughable. The acting is atrocious, my friends and I were busting up laughing in every single scene. It was fairly entertaining, actually, it is the sort of movie that will end up on Mystery Science Theatre 4000 in about 20 years. It looks like they blew all of their mid-level budget on the computer effects scenes, which are decent. The rest of the movie takes place in and out of various tents, and the Torus... which looks suspiciously like a laser tag arena that they rented for a few hours one afternoon. The plot is silly and obvious, the religious overtones are blatant to the point of being insulting. If you want to see a melodramatic cheesy sci-fi movie, this one delivers in spades.
The hero looks like the Fat Elvis version of David Hasselhoff. Enough said.
The hero looks like the Fat Elvis version of David Hasselhoff. Enough said.
The previous commenter got confused somehow.
There were two devices. The one in Paris healed people but the one in Russia killed people. The men that injured and killed and then stayed so were at the Russian site. I wonder why they didn't bring up this difference when considering which of the devices they should attack, but I suppose that is asking for too much from a movie like this.
Now if the poster wanted to talk about the bad things in the movie he could have brought up the dialog or perhaps the poorly thought out bad guys, or some of the other quick fixes the movie took. The bad guys didn't seem to have much reason for their decisions other than a fear of something different. They also seemed to miss a major plot point after all of their study.
So while the movie isn't that good it did at least stay consistent. I wonder if we will be seeing a third movie in a few years to help further explain/muddy the water.
There were two devices. The one in Paris healed people but the one in Russia killed people. The men that injured and killed and then stayed so were at the Russian site. I wonder why they didn't bring up this difference when considering which of the devices they should attack, but I suppose that is asking for too much from a movie like this.
Now if the poster wanted to talk about the bad things in the movie he could have brought up the dialog or perhaps the poorly thought out bad guys, or some of the other quick fixes the movie took. The bad guys didn't seem to have much reason for their decisions other than a fear of something different. They also seemed to miss a major plot point after all of their study.
So while the movie isn't that good it did at least stay consistent. I wonder if we will be seeing a third movie in a few years to help further explain/muddy the water.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesBefore the Torus is unlocked and entered, one of the displays used to monitor technical data is exactly the same display used in Catástrofe (2000).
- Erros de gravaçãoThe text graphic displayed when showing Manila, Philippines is misspelled "MANILLA"
- ConexõesFollows Portal da Morte (2001)
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
Principal brecha
By what name was Portal da Morte: Evolução (2003) officially released in Canada in English?
Responda