497e39180f A Seattle detective and a biologist are on the run from a dangerous invisible assassin gone rogue. In Seattle, after the mysterious death of the scientist Dr. Devin Villiers, Detective Frank Turner and his partner Det. Lisa Martinez are assigned to protect Devin's colleague Dr. Maggie Dalton. Lisa is killed while protecting Maggie, and Frank presses her to tell what is happening. She discloses that a veteran soldier called Michael Griffin was submitted to an experiment with the objective of creating the ultimate national security weapon, an undetectable soldier. However, the experiment failed, with horrible side effects due to the damage to the cells caused by the radiation. Michael is chasing Maggie to get the necessary buffer to survive. My advice is..Don't spend your time and money on this movie if you have any another way to do this. First part was good and i enjoyed it. It was typical "better than average" Hollywood movie for me, someway interesting and entertaining . Unfortunately can't say this for the second one. Boring and unconvincing acting,"Made in toilet" storyline.. and so on. It looks like the only mission of this film is a "continuation of financially successful idea". WellI said don't try this at home until you have one of those "nothing to do" evenings or you are hungry for any hollowman-based action…and sorry for my English if it too bad :) Despite the critical and commericail reaction to the original HOLLOW MAN, it's a film that I actually really love. It's one of those pictures that just came out at the right moment in my life. As sillyit sounds, HOLLOW MAN was one of the first movies to be released that made me realize what I wanted to do: not be involved in motion pictures specifically, but to be able to tell an interesting and intriguing story. As a young teenager, I was not entirely familiar with the Invisible Man stories. I was captivated by the premise, amazed by the special effects, and in awe of Kevin Bacon's deliciously evil performance. Much older and wiser now, I see the flaws of HOLLOW MAN, it isn't the masterpiece that I once saw it as, though I maintain it is still an underrated and fascinating science fiction horror film. With that in mind, I wasn't thrilled with the idea of HOLLOW MAN II. By the time the project was announced, HOLLOW MAN was almost half a decade old, barely remembered by genre fans, and a sequel seemed (and still does seem) pointless. The story that Paul Verhoeven wanted to tell had already been told. Any sequel would just servea rehash. As expected, HOLLOW MAN II is a rehash of the first one, the basic story remains the same, key scenes from the predecessor repeated, and a been there/done that atmosphere permeates throughout the entire 90 minute running time. As a sequel to one of my childhood favorites, it is pretty weak. However,a direct-to-video sequel, especially one compared to the likes of Road House 2 and Starship Troopers 2, HOLLOW MAN II is spectacular. Competently directed with a fair amount of visual flair, better than expected performances (Villain Christian Slater is greatusual) from most of the cast, and a finale that's cooler than anything I have seen in a theatrical release all year make for a fun home theater experience. Had the number of clichés been excised, the story more original, and a slightly larger budget been available, HOLLOW MAN II could have been a worthy follow-up. As it is, it's certainly watchable and one of the best direct-to-video sequels ever produced. 6/10
menvechilmulg Admin replied
344 weeks ago