GHOST RIDER : ESPRIT DE VENGEANCE (2011)

Eh bien, c'est juste un de ces jours où une suite à un mauvais film vient ensuite. Cependant, regarder ce film je peux comprendre qu'un budget inférieur a été utilisé.

Nicolas Cage est le seul acteur pour reprendre son rôle. Il a parcouru sans escale et réside en Europe de l'est. Il semble ne montrer aucune raison de faire partie de l'histoire, mais il est chahuté en elle de toute façon. Sa dernière mission est donc de récupérer un jeune garçon, qui a été choisi comme une réincarnation d'un démon. Il voit que partout où il va qu'il n'est pas sûr parce que le mal doit découler de sa part.

Le premier film fait preuve informatique lisse, surtout avec les flammes. Mais ce film a été très mauvaise à cause de la mal rendu CGI. Je dois être franc, le travail de l'ordinateur tout regardé comme si collage papier était attaché au véhicule, ou si les flammes ont été coupées et collées sur le dessus de la séquence. Ce qui est pire, c'est que le Ghost Rider est carbonisé, vers le haut, contrairement à avant.

L'histoire dans le premier film est mémorable. dans ce film, qu'il n'est pas. Je ne peux pas encore suivre adéquatement à moins que j'ai regarder et raconter pour identifier ses failles. Rien d'intéressant n'arrive jamais, et j'ai comme un spectateur perdrait la mise au point dans la séquence des événements.

Prendre des notes de l'ouverture et le générique de fin de chaque film, vous remarquerez que le premier était pittoresque, tandis que le second était juste fade. Dans ce film, vous aurez alors ici monologue de fade et terne de Johnny Cage quand il explique les événements qui ont eu lieu dans le dernier film. Ces producteurs ont été si bon marchés qu'au lieu de réutiliser les images du dernier film, ils font moches photo des travaux de ces événements (dont un qui personne ne voudrait rappeler). Ce n'est pas aidé quand monologues plus venir et ineptes diaporamas sont joués le long du chemin expliquant le deal ou quelque chose d'autre hors de propos.

Si j'ai exprimé l'avis que par intérim de la Cage était terne la dernière fois, alors j'aurais été impulsif parce que dans ce film sa nomination intérimaire est Harmand vers le haut.

Et permettez-moi de parler davantage de la Ghost Rider : je ne pas comme son image un peu. Il a l'air brûlé vers le haut comme une tête d'allumette ; sa veste est brûlé ; Il a un soufflet trop de fumée. Grâce à un budget restreint, nous ne voyons pas lui utiliser son regard de flamme toute-puissante.

Ce film souffre d'un budget trop insuffisant à la hauteur des attentes de son prédécesseur. C'est un de ces cas de ' une suite trop. » S'il y a une raison de réduire le budget, alors il est préférable d'abandonner le projet pour une suite plutôt que d'aller de l'avant avec elle.

Ghost Rider: Spirit Of Vengeance (2011)

 

Well, it is just one of those days where a sequel to a bad movie comes next. However, watching this movie I can understand that a smaller budget was used.

 

Nicolas Cage is the only actor to reprise his role. He has traveled non-stop and resides in Eastern Europe. He seems to show no reason to be a part of the story, but is heckled into it anyway. So his latest mission is to retrieve a young boy, who has been chosen as a reincarnation of a devil named Rourke. He sees that wherever he goes he is not safe because evil must arise from him.

It is not as though I should care about the devil but compared to him in the last movie, he is a downgrade. I was not even aware if Rourke was the devil because he was just more of a mere man. In the first movie he was called Mephistopheles; the name itself so demonic that no man on earth would undermine it as human. In this movie he answers a human name, he resorts to worldly transportation and harnesses a human body. Mephistopheles could appear anywhere in the world with ease but Rourke must resort to cellphone communication and land transport, which are slower. This is what convinced me that Rourke was just a mere mortal instead of a devil.



The first movie demonstrated smooth computer technology, especially with the flames. But this movie was unwatchable because of the unevenly rendered CGI. I have to be frank, the whole computer work looked as though collage paper was attached to the vehicles, or if the flames were cut and pasted on top of the footage. This cheap computer work resembles comic book sketches overlapping the live work. Closely observing every shot I can see some well rendered CGI on one side, and poorly rendered CGI on the other.

 

The story in the first film is memorable; in this movie it is not. I cannot even follow it adequately unless I watch it and retell it to pinpoint its faults. Nothing interesting ever happens, and I as a viewer would lose focus in the sequence of events.

Taking notes of the opening and closing credits of each film, you will notice that the first was picturesque while the second was just bland. In this movie, you will then have to hear Johnny Cage's bland and dull monologue when he explains events that took place in the last movie. These producers were so cheap that instead of reusing footage from the last movie, they make lousy picture work of such events (including one which nobody would want to recall). This is not helped when more monologues come up and inane slide shows are played along the way explaining the deal or something else irrelevant.

 

There is something else that I find so bothersome: there is this guy Carrigan--a Deacon Frost knock-off--with the power of decay, and when he touches his victims the very shot plunges into pitch black for no apparent reason. I guess that means his victims see darkness as they decay and die. But there are other visual distortions in the form of a layer of film as though the images were exposed to the elements after production.
Speaking of decay, Carrigan touches everything but not every material decays.

 

If I opined that Cage's acting was dull last time, then I would have been impulsive because in this movie his acting is hammed up. I was aghast at how money was wasted on giving Cage so many facial distortions on camera rather than the full transformation into the hellspawn as was presented in the last movie. Many critics remarked this as a ploy to convert Cage into a cartoon character.

 

And let me talk more about the Ghost Rider: I do not like his image one bit. He looks burnt up like a charred match head; his jacket is burned out; he bellows too much smoke, and his speech is just a whisper made so incoherent; and his chain is charred. Thanks to a lower budget, we do not see him use his all-powerful pennant stare. Perhaps this is why we see more of Johnny Blaze for the rest of the film and less of the Rider himself.

 

 
This movie suffers from a budget too insufficient to live up to the expectations of its predecessor. It is one of those cases of 'one sequel too many.' If there is a reason to lessen the budget, then it is better to abandon plans for a sequel rather than press ahead with it.

 

Ghost Rider (2007)

Marvel spawns a movie based on one of its horror antiheroes, Ghost Rider. It is a tale of a daredevil biker who sells his soul to save his dying father, only to be cheated by a devil and lose his father. He is summoned when Blackheart emerges into earth to find the Contract of San Vanganza and unleash hell on earth.

 

So what has this movie done to attract a considerable amount of hype. First there is its prologue: the caretaker opens up with his narration, telling us a story of the Ghost Rider. One thing that starts to baffle me is that this Ghost Rider outran the devil (not Satan) because he knew the Contract is far too powerful to fall into his hands. Yet the devil does nothing about it: he does not drain the curse, nor does he kill him.

 

Now Johnny Blaze (Nicolas Cage) is the protagonist in the movie. I don't know about the bio of his comic book counterpart, but I don't think Cage was any closer to his character than was Wesley Snipe to Blade. In my opinion, he was dull and uninspiring, even if he turned into the monster at night. He definitely made a right mess of himself in that scene with Roxanne Simpson (Eva Mendes): he is live on camera and deliberately defaults answering questions to him. I would not even expect him to be any more intimidating than his enemy Blackheart.
By the way, this movie blatantly rips off Blade (1998), especially in the ending. Watch out for any similarity between the two movies. 
 

Speaking of Blackheart, he looks more like Elvis Presley. One would also wonder if the actor playing him was a correct choice. However, since he is not human because of the greyish-blue tone and trace of the demonic animation, I would prefer not to say much about the actor.

 

The first time I watched his motorcycle transform into his blazing machine, I thought it was wicked. But taking a closer look I was cringing because there were appendages that look as though they were stroking the body. That part was very creepy and caused my skin to crawl. But at least the fire created by enhanced CGI added more features to the vehicle from hell.

 

There are moments in this movie which I think are so laughable that they would not define the character who has lost his father to a deal with the devil, Mephistopheles. A man such as himself would be too depressed or anguished to be watching ridiculous monkey shows on TV on one side, and be reading grossly disturbing books on the other. I guess Matt (Donal Logue) was right to ask what going on through Johnny's mind.

 

The Caretaker--his real name revealed to be Carter Slade--he is old and uncharismatic. He knows a lot about being a Ghost Rider and is the one hiding the Contract. One bad thing about this guy is his word of caution to Blaze: "Go with God." Light and darkness never go together, and that advice is hollow.
He is the original Ghost Rider from the prologue, yet he does not in anyway aid Blaze in confronting Blackheart. How can that curse of his just run out after all those years?! It's not like some fuel from a gas station which is finite. It might have made more sense for Mephistopheles to just drain the curse from him rather than let it run out for however-long it takes. That following score sums it up as sad and disheartening.

Perhaps the biggest hiccup in this movie is the time it takes to see Blaze morph into his alter ego. It does get heavily boring watching one moment unfold after another; with Johnny and Roxanne's weak love triangle, his hurdles as a celebrity daredevil, and his dad's battle with cancer.

This movie is hard to watch with Cage on the screen. His delivery is wooden; his acting is pathetic; not to mention his characterization of the protagonist. What has happened since Blade, X-Men and Spider-Man? I am pretty sure they were successful because they adhered to the comics and staged a decent cast. So what about this? Well the only good thing about this film is the CGI work. I think this is the main reason for its success at the box office. The amount of time, money and work put into, most particularly, the fire around the Rider and his bike, can never be overlooked; not to mention his escapade typical with every antihero in any comic book universe. But a mediocre script and flimsy direction can lead this movie into a brick wall.