IMDb > Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2011) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 34:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 333 reviews in total 

179 out of 267 people found the following review useful:

A tale of fantasy and wild stupid debauchery

Author: jonhamms from Canada
20 February 2012

To be honest, i was really looking forward to see this movie, the trailer itself was eye-candy and highly exaggerated.The story is as bad as the actors' performance. Nicholas Cage is going a very , very bad road, his lasts movies , ''season of the witch'' and ''drive angry'' were as thin and dreadful as this one. The action in this movie was unjustified and plain crazy bad, the way ''Blaze'' was written, the laughable dialogues and dumb facial expression of Cage didn't helped at all. The 3D effect on this movie is overrated, everything is too much and fake. Idris Elba was probably the only reason why i went to watch this but even then his role was thin and futile, On the whole, it's messy , funny and plain bad, i pray to god there is not a third one

Was the above review useful to you?

182 out of 279 people found the following review useful:

Loved the first Ghost Rider, this one was TERRIBLE

Author: solutionpw from United States
20 February 2012

I was real excited about a sequel to Ghost Rider. I liked the first one. I was very disappointed. Everything is horrible about this movie. The plot, the writing, the acting, and especially the special effects. In the first move, the flaming skull was sharp, the bike was great, the riders expressions were great. In this movie, the flaming bike looked broken down, the skull wasn't sharp, and the jacket charred. The chain never lit up on fire either. And the penance stare was different. He didn't say look into my eyes or anything. Not to mention again that the writing and the plot were garbage. Don't waste your money on this one. 3d can't help this stink pot. Wait for cable.

Was the above review useful to you?

77 out of 82 people found the following review useful:

A mindless CGI-fest that's so bad it's kind of funny.

Author: Andrew Gold from United States
29 April 2015

Okay, I'm a Nic Cage fanboy. Let's get that out of the way. I'll watch anything the guy does no matter how terrible the reviews are, and sometimes I'll be pleasantly surprised, as was the case with "Seeking Justice", "Drive Angry", and "Kiss of Death". The guy has some hidden gems in his career. Is Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance one of them? Hell no.

The first Ghost Rider was campy and stupid, but it was a watchable popcorn action movie and it had Eva Mendes (hence, watchable). Spirit of Vengeance is just stupid. Everything about it is stupid. No part of this movie is fleshed out and none of it is interesting. It throws you right into the action with no exposition. It's just a bunch of things happening on screen oozing with CGI to make up for the complete lack of substance. You can tell this is the same guy that directed Crank: the difference is that movie didn't need any substance because the premise was so fun. This movie just pisses on Ghost Rider's origin (literally) and expects you to enjoy watching sh*t blow up for the sake of sh*t blowing up. The writing in this movie is especially horrendous; did they hire a 10 year old to do the screenplay? It sure as hell seems like it.

So you may be asking yourself, "why give it a 4/10 if it's so awful?" Well, I'm a sucker for laughably bad movies and this definitely qualifies. I mean, the dialogue alone tries to take itself seriously but ends up providing really good unintentional laughs. But I'll be fair, not all of this movie sucks.

Nicolas Cage is always enjoyable to watch. You can tell he's invested in the role, and his dedication really holds this movie together. Idris Elba is also in this movie for some reason and he's great in anything, even if his character is completely throwaway. The other acting is serviceable I guess. You can't really blame any actors here because it's obvious the filmmakers wanted it to be a massive CGI-fest with stupid dialogue to lead action sequence A to action sequence B. To their credit, the CGI in this movie is pretty cool. Ghost Rider looks badass, the visuals in the big set pieces are nice to look at, and if you have no interest in the story you can definitely shut your brain off and enjoy the insanity happening on screen.

So in a nutshell, you don't need to see this movie. You really don't. Not even the great Nicolas Cage is enough to hold this piece of trash together. But if you're really stoned or just want to see cool sh*t on screen for an hour and a half and there's literally nothing else to watch, go ahead and knock yourself out with Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance. You may find a new B-movie comedy classic.

Was the above review useful to you?

154 out of 243 people found the following review useful:

What a waste!

Author: dayspring-297-896587 from United States
19 February 2012

Having grown up with many of the comic book super heroes, I have been delighted to see so many of them becoming movies now, and look forward to each one. The whole Marvel series has been enjoyable for the most part. Ghost Rider (both of them) have been total disappointments.

The first Ghost Rider was poor, so I figured this one could only go up. Wow, was I wrong! The acting and plot in this one was SO poor, I was ready to walk out within 10 minutes. I decided to be fair...maybe things would improve. Well, I'll never get that hour and a half of my life back again.

I've seen some pretty cheesy B movies before. They can even be fun But I expect the quality of these to be so much more. It wasn't, and there was nothing fun about it. This one will never reach the acclaim it could will fittingly go down in flames as nothing more than a poorly done B movie.

I've seen better acting out of most middle school and high school productions! Even the special affects were substandard for a movie of this type.

Don't waste your time with this one. Don't even bother with buying a DVD when they come out. Your money is worth more than seeing this movie even once.

Was the above review useful to you?

131 out of 211 people found the following review useful:

A Marvel film far under the average

Author: Victor Yamaguchi from Brazil
18 February 2012

The first Ghost Rider was already a disappointment – compared to other Marvel adaptations to the cinema, it was far under the average. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, however, is even worse. It didn't even look like a big Hollywood production – the special effects and the action sequences were sometimes absurd going to the ridiculous. It looked like a low budget film – a poor visual with only one or two exciting scenes - if I can call them exciting.

Then, there is the plot issue. Those 'blockbusters' are not supposed to have a story with philosophical meanings as they are made aiming pure entertainment, but this one actually didn't even have a story. It was totally redundant, silly and cliché – actually kind of ambiguous because the characters were not well explained or explored - things seemed too much up in the air leading the audience to nowhere.

Nicolas Cage also didn't help at all as he was not convincing on what he was doing. But, we can't put all the blame on him – the character was already badly written by the screenwriters who didn't know how to make him interesting. The Ghost Rider is not the conventional superhero – he has an obscure personality. So, where is this aspect on the story? Where is the true nature of the Marvel superheroes? In this film, there isn't any.

What surprises me most is the fact that this film coasted $75 million and no one knew how to make a good use of this big budget. It was a total waste of money and time – not only for the audience, but for the actors too. A superhero movie that promises more than it really has to offer. If you didn't like the first film, you'll probably hate this one.

Was the above review useful to you?

107 out of 167 people found the following review useful:

Worst movie I've seen in a LONG time

Author: Deny Watanabe from Brazil
19 February 2012

Seems anyone can be a movie producer / director / screen writer these days. One of the worst stories I've ever seen in a movie, crippled by awful directing and poor acting even from Nicolas Cage, of whom I happen to be a fan. The movie is a complete disaster from beginning to end, failing to capture the spectator because of a weak storyline, bad timing and management of tension and viewer expectations, and action sequences that besides not having the impact the film maker wishes they had, look pretentious and anti-climatic.

About the lines written for the characters, all I can say is: if *I* was invited to work in this movie as an actor (and I'm not an actor by any stretch of the imagination), I'd still be embarrassed to say them and ashamed that other people would watch me doing it.

The fight scenes are not believable at all, seems like people are waiting to be punched in the face, shot or whatever it is that's going on at any given moment. The reasons given for the outcome of any conflict in the movie seem like the ones a child would come up with while playing with his little friends.

I went to see the movie in a 3D "XD" (Extreme Digital) movie theater and even that didn't compensate enough how bad the movie is that I wouldn't be anxious to get out by 3/4ths into watching it.

Now here's something I definitely don't get, how can Stan Lee let such a horrible, horrible, horrible abomination like this thing be released under the Marvel name?

Was the above review useful to you?

97 out of 154 people found the following review useful:

Such a promising subject such a disappointment

Author: parrisjim from United States
19 February 2012

The ghost rider has the potential to be one of the coolest and most successful franchises today,Ghost rider is so iconic and so much can be done with him,the problem is morons are making the films.

The film has several styles that never really gell,It tries humor but fails,Halfway though the movie it literally starts making fun of itself..and its not funny.I felt like they were saying haha we got your money.

The over used Prophecy child theme,The fish eye 1970's lens used to death and poor effect..the home computer cgi..

If you rent this one day in redbox you'll want your dollar back,If i ever see the director I'll ask for my money back and shame him for taking something that could be so cool and just dropping the ball,he should be banned from making films for 2 years for this one.

I hope one day someone with imagination and talent takes on a ghost rider film and finally does it justice.

Was the above review useful to you?

90 out of 153 people found the following review useful:

Stay Away from this movie

Author: wgeddings from Manning, SC
17 February 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I liked the first Ghost Rider and collected comic books for years. I say that to let the reader know that I am also a fan of comic book movies normally and am not a stickler about a movie sticking to comic book canon. My problems with this movie have nothing to do with it being a comic book movie.

The special effects in the movie are very bad. I saw it in 2D since I do not like 3D but I do not believe that makes a difference. The new version of the burning skull is much worse than the original. Now, there is tons of smoke most of the time and it is hard to see anything. Like watching polar bears have a milk fight in a blizzard but in black instead of white. The excess smoke and a skull that sometimes blazes but often is just impossible to see in the smoke combine to remove some of the "cool" factor of Ghost Rider. In addition, the motorcycle and costume that were cool in the first one are gone. Replaced with a motorcycle that is hard to see (hello smoke) most of the time and when you can see it, it is basically an old motorcycle on fire. Not the awesome chrome and blazes chopper you would expect. The outfit is old leather that appears to be melting when you can see it through the smoke. I suppose that would be fine if you are going for more of a rotted zombie look but that is not Ghost Rider.

One of the main bad guys appears to be one of the ghost twins from the Matrix films and is about as interesting although he does have a cool power that the actor does a good job of appearing to enjoy. Sadly, he is on the screen far too seldom and is far too often in GR's smoke.

Which brings me to the acting. Normally, I like Nicholas Cage but here he is different. His face is chunkier and he has replaced acting with turning his head sideways. Apparently, someone told him that instead of snappy patter or doing cool things, he would appear so much more menacing if he started just turning his head sideways. So he does it A LOT! As GR, he barely talks except for a few very poor one liners that are akin to Arnold's "I let him go" in Commando.

In case the poor acting, distracting special effects and poor story are not enough, they also added annoying camera work. At times it has the hand-held shaky method so wonderfully annoying and at other times the director falls in love with closeups that add to confusion when you want to see what is going on.

In the first Ghost Rider, he could throw fire, he could use a Pennance (or Soul stare) Gaze. He could defy gravity with his awesome chopper. He made quips and was a hero. They did away with all of that and replaced it with....Nic Cage turning his head sideways. I know that he does gaze at a bad guy but although some might claim that is the Pennance Gaze, nothing seems to happen.

Finally, just in case all of the aforementioned was not enough, they made sure to have lots of people talking with odd accents to help make sure the mumbled dialog was harder to understand. An awful movie that I have 2 stars only because of my respect for comic book movies in general and I am glad someone tried to make a sequel. If only they would give the rights back to Marvel and let us get a decent Ghost Rider movie again.

Was the above review useful to you?

60 out of 103 people found the following review useful:

Nicolas Rage

Author: Mek Torres from Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines
18 February 2012

The biggest problem of the first Ghost Rider movie is it doesn't have enough riding, no action, and it focuses more to the romance between Johnny Blaze and Roxanne. Which isn't really the main appeal. In this film, it gets focused to the plot. Unfortunately, the story is weak and the script has its awkwardness scattered. Thankfully, there's Nicolas Cage who's spicing things up with his crazy insane performance. This is probably one of his craziest performance since Bad Lieutenant. Also, there's the Crank directors, Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor, using their shaky camera and directing style. It fits to the film. Some people may be disappointed but if you're in for some crazy Nicolas Cage and some crazy action then you're going to enjoy this.

It doesn't look like a sequel though. The flashback of Johnny Blaze's deal is different from the first movie. The only thing that stays here is Nicolas Cage. Everything else is new. Well, the story is pretty weak. The plot is little. The whole film is just chasing and protecting a boy. But chasing is what's best in a Ghost Rider film. More riding and less brooding. Though, there are some brooding but mostly is riding. But stories are still important in films and that is the main flaw of this. The script is awkward. With awkward dialogue and awkward moments.

The best parts goes to Nicolas Cage. This may not be the same performance from the first film but this new Blaze is more entertaining and ridiculously hilarious. With more ridiculous is the directing. Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor uses a lot of their trademarks and gives plenty of insanity in some scenes. There's a perfect chemistry between their directing and Nicolas Cage's rage. Feels like it's one of the trippiest films I have ever seen. The action is quite ridiculous. With its well shot shaky camera and its non-stop booming. These things feels right for this film. Yes, flaming awesome and disintegrating bad guys. Do the most ridiculous things with the power.

Aside from Cage, Idris Elba and John Whitworth are both fun and awesome. Ciarán Hinds is like Danny Houston. Even in the single glance, you know he could be a dangerous bad guy. And here, he is a threatening one. The CGI is obvious. The new skull design of Ghost Rider looks more awesome than the first one. The camera is shaky but it's well shot and made the action more exciting even in 2D.

Some people might get disappointed if they expect something bigger. But the action is bigger but the plot is just little. The people who likes Nicolas Cage and Neveldine/Taylor will enjoy this a lot. Or someone who wants to see something ridiculously insane. It's hard to take this film so seriously. It's just hilarious and fun. Let me say that it's a crazy version of last year's Priest but with better action scenes and there's a nut main hero than a bland one. It's short, it's dumb, but has its enjoyment. There's an easy advice to watch this film: Watch it for Nicolas Cage.

Was the above review useful to you?

48 out of 82 people found the following review useful:

Could've been waaaay better

Author: tjjavier from Philippines
17 February 2012

Judging from the mood of the theater I was in, the consensus of this film was "...."

Yep, the pacing and storytelling of the film was so bad that it's actually hard to appreciate the plot, and even the action scenes. The otherwise simple plot becomes a task and even a bore to follow due to the bad editing and pace of the story. Things that are supposed to hit home through a joke, or a "Wow!" action scene, fail to do so either because you've gotten lost in all the distractions the film throws at you, or you just merely lost interest due to the lackluster story telling.

It's quite a shame in my opinion that there were many scenes that were supposed to evoke emotion, that just did not. It's hard to comprehend how these scenes fail, when in the back of your head, you actually know that in another occasion, that scene should've been really bad-ass, or really funny. Better editing and better character development would've made the movie easier to follow, and would've given meaning to all the great visuals and occasional funniness the film has.

Now how does it compare to the first? Dare I say Apples and Oranges? The first was coherent and easy to understand but way too cheesy and campy (lacked action too), while this one was heavy and slow with a lot of zany visuals and camera work. Both seem to want to achieve completely different results from an audience that it's actually difficult to say which one's better.

If you're looking for great eye-candy, and whack visuals, then Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance delivers. As a complete entertainment experience though, it falls flat.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 34:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history