Holy crap, this was actually good! - Death Race 2 (2011) Discussion

[–] shaundee 13 years ago

It just needs a decent re-edit and some good music adding to it, other than that enjoyable trashy movie - nowhere near as good as original but watchable.

reply

[–] LostMonkeyBoy 13 years ago

What's important about this is the CAR ACTION and for that stuff, this movie delivers.

reply

[–] piaryu 13 years ago

It was a really decent Direct to DVD movie, better than I expected it to be. And CAR ACTION yes.

reply

[–] GavsSupplier 13 years ago

I think the film was meant to be released in theatres but they changed it to direct dvd at the last moment. i remember reading some interviews about it

reply

[–] hedbeeninfested 13 years ago

It would have done terrible in theatres...I thought this was a let down. I didn't like the main actor at all. It needed a bigger budget and a better script.

reply

[–] Sweet_and_Lowdown77 13 years ago

You're 100% wrong. Look at the first announcements of the film. It was developed and produced by Universal Home Entertainment. This was supposed to be Direct to DVD all the way. You never read anything about this being theatrical.

reply

[–] The-Kurgan 13 years ago

You never read anything about this being theatrical.

Well, that was just dumb. Of course he could've read it somewhere, and been completely honest in his confusion. Articles get posted all the time that contain assumptions and poorly researched "facts." Can't blame a guy from simply believing something he read and later scratching his head over what appears to be a contradiction when he stumbles onto the actual facts.

reply

[–] Sweet_and_Lowdown77 13 years ago

No. He could not have read it somewhere. He might've thought he read it somewhere. But this was always made directly for DVD by universal home entertainment. I never said he wasn't confused. I just know for a fact that he never read anything from universal about this being theatrical. His post to me readas a slight against the film. If it had been produced for theatrical release and then actually released on video, the perception is the film sux. Thats not the case here

I guess I should have clarified my comment. He never read any official announcements from universal about this being anything other than a straight to DVD film. Perhaps fan blogs and gossip sites might have said nonsense about theatrical

reply

[–] The-Kurgan 13 years ago

No. He could not have read it somewhere.

And you're making the same mistake again. Yes, he could have read it somewhere (this is getting ridiculous). Your intended contribution, despite the all-encompassing wording above, is that such a news piece would not have come from the official source, ie. Universal Home Entertainment. Ok, fair enough, but let's not make assumptions that that's who he was citing. Observe...

I think the film was meant to be released in theatres but they changed it to direct dvd at the last moment. i remember reading some interviews about it

See? He never said it was anything official. Hell, coulda been a fake write-up in some tabloid for all we know, or even some cast member relating what he thought was the situation, not realizing it wasn't intended for theaters.

I believe what you've said. I also believe that what the poster said about reading something was perfectly possible, albeit incorrect info that was presented. Happens all the time.

Anywho, can we move on from this? It's getting silly, and I've got a Rifftrax to watch! :)

reply

[–] Sweet_and_Lowdown77 13 years ago

Why don't you try reading past the 1st line I write? I clearly said he might have read a bogus website. I am simply setting the record straight and being truthful.

And how about instead of just "moving on" we figure this out, shall we?

Shocktilyoudrop broke the story about death race 2. Here is the very first article about the film being green-lit. Not only from shock, but from the producer and studio. This announcement was picked up by every online source. They all say the same thing.

http://shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=12786

So, it clearly says direct to DVD market. It also establishes he's 100% incorrect. It was never produced for a theatrical release. Let's have the other poster show us where he read the film was made theatrically, but then dumped to video.

If you support this film, I don't understand why you keep attacking me and not the other poster. He's implying this film was produced for theatrical release and then dumped to video. That is not correct. And I am simply setting the record straight. For the record, I am a fan of this film.

Instead of jumping all over me for telling the truth and setting the record straight, why don't you simply ask for the truth from him?

reply

[–] Sven_Hassel 13 years ago

I doesn't matter. This film was utter tripe.
Production-wise, it is okay but the DoP was also amateurish. It looked like a SyFy channel TV movie. There was not enough car action and the violence was incredibly tame.
Also, what is the purpose of doing an origin film when the subject matter is predictable! We all know that Frankenstein gets killed, I'm probably right in assuming that people will only watch a straight to DVD film if they have already seen the first one. Considering that the first one had Jason Statham and was a theatrical release there will be more exposure.
Why make an origin story about Death Race? Racing around in fast cars with guns attached isn't exactly a hard concept to muster up.

As a sequel, this movie fell short. It is a shame because the first one was an entertaining romp. The script was dire but at least it was fun.
This one felt like a quick cash in.

reply

[–] Sweet_and_Lowdown77 13 years ago

Which movie did you watch? Frankenstein did not "get killed" in DEATH RACE 2.

2008's DEATH RACE started with the race already being established and a driver named Frankenstein already being a very popular driver.

Why do an origin story? I think Universal thought there was more story to be told. A sequel seemed far-fetched because what are you gunna do, re-capture Statham and have him race again? The origin story shows you 2 main things 1) the start of Death Race, how it evolved and 2) Who the original Frankenstein is.

remember, in 2008's version, Joan Allen tells Statham that the Frankenstein that died in the opening scene isn't even the original one. So here, in the poorly titled DEATH RACE 2, we see who the original frankenstein is. Hell, they could make a sequel to this film and introduce an entirely different Frankenstein (not that I want them to, but they could).

By the reviews and comments, you seem to be in the minority. People seem to really like this movie. So did I.

Your comments are all over the place. try being more concise. It will help people reading your comments to comprehend them. It's okay to dislike a film and state your opinion as such (although it seems like you never actually SAW death race 2, you're just spewing against it). Most of what you wrote is non-sensical jibberish.

reply

[–] zipdraw 13 years ago

100% agree with this guy DonkeyKongKing (btw is yout name a reference to tokyo drift?)

reply

[–] purplefreak3-1 13 years ago

I think it did a good job for a prequel, it explained stuff well and connected future events. It also keep the cast members the same that you see in Death Race 1 such as frank's pit crew.

http://www.purplefreak3.com
http://www.beautifuljodelle.com

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ashyr-1 13 years ago

omg u people. this movie was utter trash. try watching the original. "deathrace 2000" . was so epic . *beep* wood tried to rip on this 2X and failed both times. FAIL MOVIE! IMO

reply

[–] SausagePourVous 13 years ago

I agree....I mean the title didnt make any sense,direct to DVD lowered my expectations...and it turned out to be the surprise of the year,as far as action goes,that is.

It´s not fun to watch Sean Beans career turn to crap but Í think he brought the movie some class as the antagonist....I liked the fact that the plot mostly was based on Kanes paranoia.

The cinematography.editing,the whole story...pretty good. In the first one,we were just tossed into this world,"in the future",blabla....so it was cool to see how it all developed,from fighting to racing.And maybe it´s because I think Statham is horrible but I preferred Goss. 7.5/10.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] GavsSupplier 13 years ago

the movie was pretty good, slightly better than expected but also could ahve been better had it had more original scenes and a better lead

reply

[–] Sweet_and_Lowdown77 13 years ago

More original scenes? Which scenes, in particular, were unoriginal? The plot of this film was entirely different than the 2008 version. So I'm curious as to what you found unoriginal

reply

[–] Sven_Hassel 13 years ago

DonkeyKongKing, I did want this film... otherwise why would I post on here?!
Idiot.

I watched this with a group of people and no one, I shall repeat; NO one actually thought this movie was any good. We're just not narrow minded enough to turn off a movie that is utter cack. I will watch a film through to the end no matter how bad.

There was no where near enough decent action for this film to be a worthy successor to Death Race. Even the first film wasn't that great but it was a fun romp with plenty of racing action and a little bit of ultra violence thrown in for good measure.

This one failed on so many levels but then again it wasn't supposed to be great. It was supposed to make a quick buck. Simple as that.

reply

[–] Sweet_and_Lowdown77 13 years ago

First off, there are a lot of people who post on these boards that never have seen the film. Commenting on films they haven't seen. It happens alot. Why? A pre-conceived hatred for a film or strong opinion about the film one way or the other. I protested the remake of LET THE RIGHT ONE IN. I posted on that board even though I never saw the film.

So the "idiot" comment was hardly called for.

Second, you're synopsis of the film was incorrect. You are making general comments now. But you post above did not have the correct elements of the film. I point those out, but you ignored them. And your comments here don't shed any more light on your knowledge of the film.

So I stand by my original comment about you not seeing the film. And now suddenly you saw it with a room full of others. But yet you still can't be specific. Not enough action? This film, I'd argue had as much if not more action than the original. Openign chase through the streets/opening prison riot/ two death match fights/ a meley fight before racing/ 2 races/ a 2nd riot, etc, etc. How much action was in part 1? An opening crash, 2 statham fight scenes (one in which he doesn't even fight and the 2nd in prison), then 3 races. That was it.

It's okay to not like a film, but you claim to have seen it, but your comments suggest otherwise.

reply

[–] Robyn_666 13 years ago

EPIC WIN... LOVED IT!

reply

[–] Sven_Hassel 13 years ago

How in anyway was my synopsis of the film was incorrect? The opening of the first Death Race film features Frankenstein dying. He may have been the Luke Goss incarnation? We don't know but we can safely presume that as semi-fact since there is no other evidence to suggest against it.

Unlike you I don't insult films before I've seen it so it is your choice to run into a debate without evidence. (I will moan about established fact eg, the rubbish name that the third Transformer film has).

As for the action, maybe I shouldn't have been so generalised in what I wrote. I never thought that there would be someone out there who enjoyed this rubbish!
In regard to the action in this movie, it is not even remotely on the same level as the first film. The action in the first film was handled with a certain level of flamboyancy and finesse whereas as this movie was definitely amateur. Therefore there wasn't as much action as the first film, the first film had quality over quantity and that is surprising as Death Race wasn't an amazing film in the first place.

The first film was a fan romp that felt like a ridiculous video game and Luke Goss (despite working relatively well with a crap script) isn't a replacement for someone like Jason Statham (a go to guy for hard man action leads).

One last issue... even the girls weren't as hot as in the first film. In fact, that works as a metaphor for this film.
Death Race 2 is just not as hot as the first film.

If it were a stand alone film that wasn't a sequel/prequel then this film wouldn't have registered. It wouldn't have as much generated exposure and digressing back to my earlier criticism... Death Race 2 is just a quick cash in on the first film.

reply

[–] bobmichigan1 13 years ago

Good movie end of story...all of you expect academy awards holy cow take it for what its worth....The acting was ok the story was ok and i loved my popcorn...great job

reply

[–] Marcus230 13 years ago

I was pleasantly surprised also. I enjoyed it and ended up watching the first one again as well. Tanit Phoenix is mega-fine and worth watching the movie for alone. The car stunts and action was great for a direct to dvd flick and the star power wasn't that bad either. Scott Adkins would have been cooler than Luke Goss but Luke was okay. Overall, I had the same holy crap reaction and so did my friends who watched with me.

reply