AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
5,3/10
28 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
A humanidade é dizimada por uma força misteriosa e uma ameaça sinistra domina o mundo. Um filme ambientado em Barcelona que expande a história do sucesso "Bird Box".A humanidade é dizimada por uma força misteriosa e uma ameaça sinistra domina o mundo. Um filme ambientado em Barcelona que expande a história do sucesso "Bird Box".A humanidade é dizimada por uma força misteriosa e uma ameaça sinistra domina o mundo. Um filme ambientado em Barcelona que expande a história do sucesso "Bird Box".
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 2 indicações no total
Jorge Asín
- Marcial
- (as Jorge Asin)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
The first movie was insultingly stupid filler, made watchable by Sandy Bullock. But Georgina Campbell is in this one and I thought she might bring something fresh to the screen. I was wrong. It's a basic retread, with all the same logical brain-hurts of the first movie, only brain-hurtier.
Mario Casas, a good actor, plays a boring man who is boring. He is escorting a kid through the post-apocalyptic streetssjc#'gch... sorry, I got bored of typing. You know the plot. It's Plot Number 1 from the Big Book of Plots - a bunch of generic humans stumble through derivative scenes until one of them gets yeeted in a flourish of Adobe After Effects plugins.
Do not expect suspense or horror. The director does not know what these things are. The sci-fi elements are completely ignored, so if you've seen the first one, there's nothing new here.
The score is shockingly bad, ever-present and thematically stagnant throughout the entire runtime. The dual-language Spanish setting could have worked well, but they do absolutely nothing with it.
The whole thing reeks of tax breaks. Somewhere, in a Netflix boardroom, people with expensive habits are very pleased with themselves.
Mario Casas, a good actor, plays a boring man who is boring. He is escorting a kid through the post-apocalyptic streetssjc#'gch... sorry, I got bored of typing. You know the plot. It's Plot Number 1 from the Big Book of Plots - a bunch of generic humans stumble through derivative scenes until one of them gets yeeted in a flourish of Adobe After Effects plugins.
Do not expect suspense or horror. The director does not know what these things are. The sci-fi elements are completely ignored, so if you've seen the first one, there's nothing new here.
The score is shockingly bad, ever-present and thematically stagnant throughout the entire runtime. The dual-language Spanish setting could have worked well, but they do absolutely nothing with it.
The whole thing reeks of tax breaks. Somewhere, in a Netflix boardroom, people with expensive habits are very pleased with themselves.
Not sure what I watched or why.
1. There is no one to root for. It is hard to have a movie where there is no one to care about or root for. It removes all the stakes. There is no true protagnoist and you spend the movie watching random characters appear on screen then die.
2. The 'twist' does not help the movie but starts it down the frustrating path.
3. Stupidity. All you need to to to survive is close your eyes, that simple. You could VERY EASILY open your eyes for a split second to see where you are going and close them again. Just because you open your eyes does not mean you have to keep them open, looking around, and do not react when the 'creature' is near. These are experienced survivors yet they are making first day mistakes for no reason at all outside of this being a bad movie.
4. The acting is surprisingly good.
5. The storyline/plot is stupid, not really explained ,with story being borderline criminal.
1. There is no one to root for. It is hard to have a movie where there is no one to care about or root for. It removes all the stakes. There is no true protagnoist and you spend the movie watching random characters appear on screen then die.
2. The 'twist' does not help the movie but starts it down the frustrating path.
3. Stupidity. All you need to to to survive is close your eyes, that simple. You could VERY EASILY open your eyes for a split second to see where you are going and close them again. Just because you open your eyes does not mean you have to keep them open, looking around, and do not react when the 'creature' is near. These are experienced survivors yet they are making first day mistakes for no reason at all outside of this being a bad movie.
4. The acting is surprisingly good.
5. The storyline/plot is stupid, not really explained ,with story being borderline criminal.
The problem with this movie is that it shouldn't be a movie. If this was a show with a proper start (like the first movie), an interesting twist with character development (like the 2nd movie) and a finale (a potential 3rd movie) it would've been a straightup banger. But because it's not a complete story, leaves too much story out and has no proper direction to go in other than the characters in both movies sharing the same goal of reaching a safe location.
Things they could've done to make it better:
What I liked about the movie:
I feel like it had a lot of potential and hype but didn't deliver since both movies were extremely mediocre in the end.
Things they could've done to make it better:
- Made a 12 episode show out of it instead with a start and ending;
- More interesting character progression;
- More backstory;
- More interesting villain(s).
What I liked about the movie:
- Concept is good;
- Lots of suspension;
- Great locations;
- Good videography.
I feel like it had a lot of potential and hype but didn't deliver since both movies were extremely mediocre in the end.
Funnily enough, I already knew from the beginning that this film couldn't be nearly as good as the first part. I was actually looking forward to it because I found the subject matter from the first part exciting. However, my fears turned out to be true and the film is extremely boring. Somehow it still has a fascination for me, because the seen was excitingly tried to implement, but it is just never exciting. The actors are all ok and completely mediocre, no one stands out from the crowd like Sandra Bullock did. I think it's a pity that they didn't take the chance to create a film on par with the first part. Because of all the boredom and the almost 2 hours running time, I can unfortunately only give the film 3/10 stars. According to my rating scale this means "not worth seeing". Everyone must decide for himself whether he does not prefer to watch something else in these 2 hours 🤷♂️.
So while this film isn't quite as good as the first, its not a bad follow up from Spain to the 2018 original US film by any stretch.
There are some instances of bad CGI and the story progression to the overall universe was quite minimal and these two factors certainly explain some of the lower reviews by critics and viewers alike, but overall I'd award this film a solid 65.
It does drag on a little and the conclusion was a bit predictable but overall I was satisfied by how they deepened the lore and story with the additions they made. I won't get into spoiler territory here but I liked how they told another story which coincided with the events from the first film and told from another part of the world. I'll certainly be in the circle of people interested to see what the next addition to this franchise will be - I think there's a solid cult classic in the making here.
65/100, would recommend.
There are some instances of bad CGI and the story progression to the overall universe was quite minimal and these two factors certainly explain some of the lower reviews by critics and viewers alike, but overall I'd award this film a solid 65.
It does drag on a little and the conclusion was a bit predictable but overall I was satisfied by how they deepened the lore and story with the additions they made. I won't get into spoiler territory here but I liked how they told another story which coincided with the events from the first film and told from another part of the world. I'll certainly be in the circle of people interested to see what the next addition to this franchise will be - I think there's a solid cult classic in the making here.
65/100, would recommend.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesMichelle Jenner (Dr Liliana) also stared as Keila in Berlin, the Netflix Money Heist spin-off series.
- Erros de gravaçãoIt is not necessary to take a cable car to the Montjuic Castle. You can easily get there by several roads and walking paths.
And it is not a remote place at all. They don't say where the main quest starts, but is seems to be somewhere within l'Eixample part of Barcelona. From the farthest point in l'Eixample, to the north, it would be less than a three hour walk to get to the castle.
- ConexõesSpin-off from Caixa de Pássaros (2018)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Bird Box: Barcelona?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- Países de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- Lồng Chim: Barcelona
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 52 min(112 min)
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 2.35 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente