Beastmaster 2: Attraverso il portale del tempo
Titolo originale: Beastmaster 2: Through the Portal of Time
VALUTAZIONE IMDb
4,1/10
3673
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaDar is a warrior who can talk to the beasts. He is forced to travel to Earth to stop his evil brother from stealing an atomic bomb and turning their native land from a desert into, well - a ... Leggi tuttoDar is a warrior who can talk to the beasts. He is forced to travel to Earth to stop his evil brother from stealing an atomic bomb and turning their native land from a desert into, well - a desert.Dar is a warrior who can talk to the beasts. He is forced to travel to Earth to stop his evil brother from stealing an atomic bomb and turning their native land from a desert into, well - a desert.
Lawrence Dobkin
- Adm. Binns
- (as Larry Dobkin)
Steve Donmyer
- Police Officer
- (as Steve Donmeyer)
Richard L. Duran
- Guard #1
- (as Richard Duran)
James Patten Eagle
- Soldier
- (as Jim Eagle)
Trama
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe subtitle of the film is "Through the Portal of Time," but the plot doesn't involve travel through a time portal. The characters travel through a portal to a parallel universe where the 1991 Earth exists.
- BlooperIn the first film, Dar's symbol is on his left hand. In this film, it's on his right hand, as seen in the battle against the creature, at about 19:20.
- ConnessioniFeatured in The Making of 'Beastmaster 2: Through the Portal of Time' (1991)
Recensione in evidenza
First of all: Remember that this genre was quite popular in the beginning of the 90's, as well during the 80's of course. Many out there who're voting, and never seen this before, tend to compare this with modern movies and their film techniques and not seeing it for what it is. Not going to say masterpiece here, nor a work of art, but well above average. Actually, there's one part of this movie-series that are in some fashion a work of art, and that'd be the work they did with the animals. No you say? How do you get a friggen tiger to behave, the ferrets (Of which we won't get to see too much, except for in the beginning, as they "acted" in the first movie. That eagle, how do you train one to begin with? Let alone getting it to lay almost dormant on the ground for that period of time until Dar picks him up?
Then there's that nostalgic feeling of the 90's vs. a parallel world without modern technology. That part I like, and also am missing the 80-90's when ppl. were more friendly (Started to become worse during the 90's though) and not like today were we're screwing one another over something as trivial as monetary issues, or even worse, status. I'm not saying that y2k is when it all started or anything, 'cos it did way before that, I'd say like the 70's or something like that, probably before that, but what I'm saying is that it has escalated enormously since technology grew into what it is today when it's easier to hide behind a computer instead of socialize as we did 'back then'.
With this I want to point out that "thanks" to science we've become increasingly obsessed about, or should I write picky about how well a movie is made, what funding it had, how good the directors (status) are etc. This is what passes for good movies nowadays. Yeah, sure, a lot of them ARE good, but that's most likely because they (Companies behind them) were well funded and all of that ballet. Back in the old days the filming-crews were experimenting with new cameras, lenses, and generally improvised whenever something difficult to shoot came up. They didn't have the same kind of funding either, as the the investors weren't aware whether it'd be a success or not. And by saying that, they also didn't have that much insight into the technical stuff (A.k.a. - This is how the movie will turn out to become!).
It bothers me that ppl. are ignorant of such things, as well as clanking down on actors ("Bad" movies in general), when it's really the (casting-) directors fault, or just a bad written script. It's rarely ppl. take a movie for what it is and how much heart has been put into it.
This movie I think they mostly did for fun, and because we ppl. always have it in for cultural hick-ups and also we like it when disasters happen and all that jazz.
I gave this 6 out of 10 just because it's fun, retro, and I like Mark Singer (Mostly from V-series really) as an actor.
Then there's that nostalgic feeling of the 90's vs. a parallel world without modern technology. That part I like, and also am missing the 80-90's when ppl. were more friendly (Started to become worse during the 90's though) and not like today were we're screwing one another over something as trivial as monetary issues, or even worse, status. I'm not saying that y2k is when it all started or anything, 'cos it did way before that, I'd say like the 70's or something like that, probably before that, but what I'm saying is that it has escalated enormously since technology grew into what it is today when it's easier to hide behind a computer instead of socialize as we did 'back then'.
With this I want to point out that "thanks" to science we've become increasingly obsessed about, or should I write picky about how well a movie is made, what funding it had, how good the directors (status) are etc. This is what passes for good movies nowadays. Yeah, sure, a lot of them ARE good, but that's most likely because they (Companies behind them) were well funded and all of that ballet. Back in the old days the filming-crews were experimenting with new cameras, lenses, and generally improvised whenever something difficult to shoot came up. They didn't have the same kind of funding either, as the the investors weren't aware whether it'd be a success or not. And by saying that, they also didn't have that much insight into the technical stuff (A.k.a. - This is how the movie will turn out to become!).
It bothers me that ppl. are ignorant of such things, as well as clanking down on actors ("Bad" movies in general), when it's really the (casting-) directors fault, or just a bad written script. It's rarely ppl. take a movie for what it is and how much heart has been put into it.
This movie I think they mostly did for fun, and because we ppl. always have it in for cultural hick-ups and also we like it when disasters happen and all that jazz.
I gave this 6 out of 10 just because it's fun, retro, and I like Mark Singer (Mostly from V-series really) as an actor.
- Micke_Eriksson
- 12 mar 2009
- Permalink
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Beastmaster 2: Through the Portal of Time?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Beastmaster 2: Through the Portal of Time
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 6.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 869.325 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 381.889 USD
- 2 set 1991
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 869.325 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 47 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Beastmaster 2: Attraverso il portale del tempo (1991) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi