Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2011) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
340 Reviews
Sort by:
A mindless CGI-fest that's so bad it's kind of funny.
Andrew Gold29 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.
84 out of 90 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Visually Entertaining!
g-bodyl4 August 2013
I don't know what to make of Ghost Rider: The Spirit of Vengeance. I know it's laughably bad, but I couldn't help being entertained. The first film was actually a decent, enjoyable film, but the sequel is more campy and has a different tone. The story is very dumb, compared to the first film. But the visuals are excellent. I loved the look of the Ghost Rider and his charred skull.

Neveldine and Taylor's film brings about the return of the Ghost Rider. Johnny Blaze has been hiding out in the remote parts of Europe, but he returns when the Church recruits his help to help protect a boy, whom has the Devil after him so he can use the boy's body.

Nic Cage delivers another over-the-top performance as Johnny Blaze and despite some amusing moments, it did get old and stale after awhile. Idris Elba does a good job as the Church guy and Ciarin Hinds is decent as the Devil.

Overall, this is a over-the-top superhero film that doesn't deserve widespread hate, but still is pretty bad. But what I mean by bad is the film is "good" bad. I found it somewhat entertaining and a nice way to spend an hour and a half. The story/script is just plain silly, but the visuals are very good. I rate this film 7/10.
13 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Comic book film - not an action film
A May14 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I think there is an awful lot of hate for this film and it is not really warranted . I think the film struggled to explain its story and the story telling could have been better ... as an action film it is a little slow and disjointed ...but as a comic book film as a comic book fan i really liked it .

So many comic book films fail because they try and reinvent the character and have them do things for the sake of the film the original comic book character would never do .... take for example the terrible Toby McQuire spider-man films - no humour no internal monologue - just teenage angst ....

But this film for me gets the essence of the comic book which is what you really want it to ... Sure the effects are limited . I actually like the ghost Rider look in this over the original film but the darkness effect of Roarke in his demon form is weak and I think filmmakers went overboard with the 3D effects But as for the feel of the film i think they got it about right - Ghost rider was an odd, dark and twisted comic book . It was unlike the other Marvel series where light and dark was easy to distinguish and the good guys always prosper - in Ghost Rider it was about vengeance not justice and as long as the evil got punished there was no care for anyone else... and that was what they were trying to get at in Ghost Riders depiction ....

As a stand alone film - even as a sequel it does a poor job of story telling, but if you go into this knowing something about the characters as a comic book fan then you are not going to be disappointed ...
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A tale of fantasy and wild stupid debauchery
jonhamms20 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
185 out of 277 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Harmless fun!
Andrew Pelechaty18 March 2012
At first glance, 'Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance' seems like an unnecessary sequel, another example of Hollywood mining old ideas and slapping the 3D label on it for a higher ticket price.

When viewed in right 'spirit', GR:SOV is a bit of harmless fun, a mindless superhero/action film where you can turn your brain off and relax. It's a nice antidote to the slew of overly serious superhero films.

Set in Eastern Europe, the plot is an unoriginal demon-possession story (done far better in the Omen franchise), with young Danny (Fergus Riordan) being chosen by Roarke (Cirian Hinds) to carry his evil legacy. On the proviso that he's rid of his curse, Ghost Rider/Johnny Blaze (Nic Cage) agrees to help Danny's mother Nadya (the absolutely stunning Violante Placido) save her boy.

Probably the highlight of the film is Nic Cage, who unashamedly hams it up. Sometimes it's fun to watch someone play a bad role with gusto and no shame. That's exactly what Cage does, and you know he's having a ball. More power to him.

This is complemented by some cool special effects, again they're cheesy, but a film about a demoniacally possessed daredevil with a flaming body and skull doesn't have to worry too much about realism.

Yes, GR:SOV is a bad film compared to 'Iron Man', 'Thor' and 'Captain America', but its good fun and a bit of escapism. If you go into it with the right attitude, you'll probably like it. Sometimes we need to stop taking films so seriously and enjoy them as they were intended.
26 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Loved the first Ghost Rider, this one was TERRIBLE
solutionpw20 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.
188 out of 288 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
What a waste!
dayspring-297-89658719 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.
160 out of 249 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Worst movie I've seen in a LONG time
Deny Watanabe19 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?
113 out of 175 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Spirit of Vengeance Rides Again
Sean Jump28 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I was pleasantly surprised by Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, which is to say that I didn't hate it. Well, I didn't actually hate the original Ghost Rider from 2007 (itself based on an occasionally popular Marvel comic book), but aside from some neat special effects that film was pretty mediocre and I figured the sequel would be even worse. Imagine my shock when I found myself actually enjoying Spirit of Vengeance. While hardly extraordinary, the new movie is surprisingly fun.

Nicolas Cage is back as Johnny Blaze, the one-time stunt-rider now possessed by an evil spirit that transforms the unfortunate Blaze into an unstoppable beast with a thing for fiery motorcycles and a flaming skull instead of a head. Blaze is now cruising the backstreets of Eastern Europe, doing everything he can to keep the Ghost Rider at bay and himself out of harm's way. But trouble has a way of finding Blaze, and when a mysterious man named Moreau (Idris Elba) brings Blaze the strange story of a special boy on the run from the Devil (played with wicked aplomb by the great Ciarán Hinds), the haunted maverick can't turn him down…especially since Moreau promises to cure Blaze of his little problem when the boy is safe and the crisis averted. So Blaze lets the Ghost Rider come alive once again, just in time to save the kid and his mom (the gorgeous Violante Placido) from a batch of thugs. But of course, the trouble—for Blaze, for Moreau, for the boy and his mother—is just beginning.

While the script is hardly anything deep or profound, it is well-paced and often surprisingly witty. The script has a pleasant, self-deprecating humor underlying it all, and the various performers all seem to enjoy going along with the outlandish plot. Cage, who is a fan of comics in real life, is well-cast as Blaze, and captures the character's conflicting emotions with expert ease. Not many modern actors play villains better than Hinds, and Placido is surely on track to become one of the most sought-after actresses in the business with her rare combination of melancholy beauty and on screen intensity. There's also an unexpected but welcome role for Christopher Lambert of Highlander fame…though he's nearly unrecognizable beneath a scrawl of tattoos.

Special effects are outstanding, and there are a number of out-of-this world action scenes that are major crowd-pleasing moments. The Ghost Rider himself is a fearsome spectacle, and his every appearance brings with it the gleeful anticipation that one of the movie's numerous baddies is going to get his much-deserved punishment in an especially painful—and spectacular—fashion. Best of all, the script touches on the idea that we all have our inner demons to wrestle with, which is all too true, and there is even the hint that the Spirit of Vengeance is perhaps redeemable, and that somewhere deep inside even the Rider might yet harbor Good.

In a way you can't enjoy Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance if you're looking for too much, but it's not bad and at times even becomes quite good. If you're a fan of the old comic book then this is a must-see, and even general action fans probably won't regret throwing down the cash for it if they get in the right spirit of things…the Spirit of Vengeance, that is!
13 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A movie to watch...
Mihai Banu29 April 2012
well it's not like the first one but it's interesting to be seen...and it'll be more interesting to see a 3rd movie from this series...yes the effects are weak and the casting could've been better as always Nicholas Cage knows what he's doing but come on let's be serious other actors from this movie are way out of line... and then there is the place of the movie. Yes, Romania well it's not as they described it...but who cares in this days... the scenario could have been way better, the movie it's not intriguing actors are not as they used to be in the first one Final words: A good movie that could have been way better
17 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A junky, fun, non-apologetic rumble
heyanerd9 October 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This movie wasn't supposed to be dramatic, epic, serious or whatever. I don't want to point out to people that it's a Neveldine/Taylor flick, but their style doesn't mesh with everyone. My friend thought "Crank 2" was a disaster, while for the people I went with it was the most fun we've had at the movies in forever. So if you're not big on the crazy, stunty, overly stylized antics, you ain't gonna like this one. They don't create a precious world, which is important for this type of Marvel title.

As for myself, I thought it was it was cool, like watching WWE cool. You know everyone's over- the-top, but at least it's not trying to be awe-inducing like the original Ghostrider flick and falling on it's face. Everyone's in on the joke. If you're not, again, you'll hate it, and I don't blame you, but really, have fun guys.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Hell on wheels: "Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance"
dee.reid19 June 2012
"Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance" is a film that I rate about equally, if not slightly - marginally - better, than 2007's "Ghost Rider." "Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance" is "Ghost Rider's" much-maligned 2012 sequel. I enjoyed watching the original "Ghost Rider," even though I felt that it needed something more. I feel like I got what was missing from the previous movie - more or less - in this steroid-pumped, mind-numbing follow-up.

"Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance" is a sequel that has no real ties to the film that preceded it, which to me is a good thing (because it's actually continuing the story and not repeating it), but it's not a remake (or that other fashionable Hollywood term, "reboot"). This sequel has a completely different style, and attitude, from its predecessor. This last part is no doubt due to the co-directing team of Neveldine/Taylor, those guys who brought us the incredibly insane "Crank" action movies with Jason Statham.

And it has Nicolas Cage; depending on how you view it, having Nicolas Cage as the chain-wielding specter Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider can really either be a good thing or a bad thing. Most seem to agree that it's a bad, bad thing, but not me.

I'm not complaining about Cage, like so many other people. But I'm also not saying he's good: he's simply making the best out of the poorly written material he was given. And of course, he does what he can and like the movie, he goes ballistic once things get going: Let the "Cage" out of Nicolas Cage!

Like I said earlier, the movie has no real connection to "Ghost Rider," other than Cage's Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider (although it really would have been nice to see Peter Fonda, or at the very least, Blaze's former sweetheart Roxanne Simpson played by the lovely Eva Mendes again, but neither one is even mentioned this time around).

This time, Johnny Blaze's on the run, hiding out somewhere in Eastern Europe. He's approached by the mysterious French monk Moreau (Idris Elba) to rescue a young boy named Danny (Fergus Riordan), who along with his beautiful mother Nadya (Violante Placido), is being relentlessly pursued by her former boyfriend Ray Carrigan (Johnny Whitworth), who is not-so-secretly an agent of Roarke/The Devil/Mephistopheles (Ciaran Hinds), and eventually becomes a revisionist version of the super-villain Blackout. Roarke needs Danny so he can transfer his soul into his body in a bid to become immortal, or something like that. Only the accursed Johnny Blaze can stop Roarke from bringing about hell on Earth.

"Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance" is a totally different beast from the earlier film. This is good, I feel. With the insane hand-held camera-work by Neveldine/Taylor, it feels even more like a comic book (the film is, after all, based on the Marvel Comics anti-hero of the same name, and the film itself is produced by Marvel Knights - who were behind 2008's "Punisher: War Zone" - which aims to provide mature-themed superhero films much like Marvel's MAX imprint of superhero comic books). Ghost Rider was always different from Marvel's staple of super-powered heroes because he was not a mutant (like the X-Men) or mutate (like Spider-Man). No. He was a demon (possessed by the fallen angel Zarathos), a soul-hungry bounty hunter on Earth snatching up souls for The Devil, or Mephistopheles, or whatever satanic name you want to give to him.

Cage is decidedly loony from the get-go (and only needs to hear the word "go" to be fully turned loose), but the film's real stand-out is the hard-drinking Frenchman Moreau, played by Idris Elba. Elba is quickly becoming an in-demand talent in and outside of Hollywood, and it was interesting watching his portrayal of the blue-eyed, slightly crazed alcoholic monk. Another thing I'll also give this film credit for is that it is much darker than the first movie, and Cage's more-than-slightly unhinged portrayal of Ghost Rider does not see the character uttering bad one-liners every time he takes somebody's soul to Hell. Instead, this Ghost Rider appears to be a real demon and a real force to be reckoned with, with the full powers of Hell at his immediate disposal.

I feel that is what elevated this picture slightly above its 2007 predecessor.

And further catapulting this vehicle into full-blown camp territory is a cameo from the original "Highlander" himself, Christopher Lambert, as a monk who may not be as benevolent as he appears and whose time on the screen is, unfortunately, extremely short (because I don't believe Lambert has appeared in a theatrically released mainstream Hollywood film in more than a decade).

Despite the strong critical backlash against it, I think that Neveldine/Taylor did one good thing with "Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance" by deciding to take it into an even darker, more insane direction than 2007's "Ghost Rider," making it seem even more like a live-action comic book. That's truly one of the better things that can be said about it, in my overall opinion of this picture. Or maybe, that's really the BEST thing that can be truly said about it.

8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Such a promising subject such a disappointment
parrisjim19 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.
102 out of 159 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Marvel film far under the average
Victor Yamaguchi18 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.
132 out of 212 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
It's all mindless entertainment but it's still entertainment!
Hellmant1 May 2012

Nicolas Cage returns to play Johnny Blaze, also known as 'Ghost Rider', the superhero antihero from Marvel Comics. It's a sequel to the 2007 hit film. This one is directed by Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor (the team that brought us two 'CRANK' films and 'GAMER'). It was written by Scott Gimple, Seth Hoffman and David S. Goyer (who's written several B superhero films). The movie isn't really much better or worse than the original, which I thought was passable entertainment, not great but not bad either.

In this film Johnny Blaze is hiding out in Eastern Europe when he's contacted by a Monk named Moreau (Idris Elba) who tells him a plot to take possession of a young boy's body. The devil is currently using the human form of a man named Roarke (Ciaran Hinds), who Blaze previously made a deal with and cursed himself with the 'Ghost Rider' monster inside him. Moreau tells him that if he saves the boy, Danny (Fergus Riordan), he could rid himself of the 'Rider' permanently. So Blaze makes it his mission to protect Danny and his mother Nadya (Violante Placido), who are on the run from Roarke's men.

The movie is so bad it's good. It's definitely more 'out there' than the original but it also has even less structure. Cage hams it up even worse than usual but is still, like always, likable. It's all mindless entertainment but it's still entertainment.

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at:
17 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
You either get it or you don't
Ghazi Yarak16 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Listen you either get it or you don't. If you like mindless action and want a movie to entertain you, this is for you. But if you are, a person looking for a good story line and some good acting, skip it. I liked it, and I will be definitely watching it again. Nicolas Cage is funny as Johnny Blaze, and gives a good performance. The rest of the cast is not so good. All in all. A very entertaining piece of cinema. 7/10. For good entertainment. Also for good effects. The effects on ghost rider look way more better than the effects they put on him in the first part. It gave a more realistic feeling into actually thinking that his skull is on fire. The skull of ghost rider looks burnt due to the cause of the fire. There is also a little bit of humor in it that will keep you laughing.

Enjoy it. It is worth the rent price.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Ghost Rider in 3D
Jwdjrs13 June 2012
This movie is so much different from the original 2007 Ghost Rider. I mean that in a good way, though. The first time that I watched this, I couldn't believe that this movie was made by Marvel. I was so astounded. I kept watching the movie again and again. I was beginning to love it.

When Ghost Rider (2007) came out, I loved it. And when I heard that there was a sequel coming out, I was so excited. The thing that most excited me was the amazing and awesome looking poster with the Rider on his motorcycle, swinging his flaming chain around, and the poster read "in 3D".

Keep in mind that this is not anything like Iron Man or Hulk, even though this movie is produced by Marvel Studios. I think the film is good because it is full of cool action-packed scenes and has a decent plot.

This action-fantasy stars Nicolas Cage and Idris Elba as they take you on a fiery ride you'll never forget. I would recommend this to any Marvel superhero fan or people that enjoyed the first Ghost Rider, and if possible, try to see the movie in 3D.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Darker, grittier, a step up from part one...
Paul Magne Haakonsen24 March 2012
First of all I have to say that I wasn't particularly much of a fan of the first "Ghost Rider" movie, and much less fan of Nicolas Cage. But still, I decided to sit down and watch "Ghost Rider 2: Spirit of Vengeance" of out sheer boredom.

Let it be said that "Ghost Rider 2: Spirit of Vengeance" is actually much better than the first movie. There is a much darker touch and feel to part 2. The movie is more brutal and visual, and you get to see a more violent side to the rider.

Storywise, well then I think the movie was halting, because it was a sort of a weird hybrid mix of "Ghost Rider" and "Rosemary's Baby". It wasn't bad, don't get me wrong, however, it was just something of a cliché. Nothing surprisingly new or inventive here.

The effects and CGI though, were top notch. I liked what I saw and I was thoroughly entertained. I especially like the pyrotechnics and the smoke effects.

"Ghost Rider 2: Spirit of Vengeance" had a good enough group of actors together. However, in my opinion, the movie was carried by Idris Elba (playing Moreau) and Johnny Whitworth (playing Ray Carrigan). What happened to the Ray character was really awesome. I am not familiar with the "Ghost Rider" comic books, so I have no idea whether or not that character is from the pages, but he was still cool and had really interesting powers.

For a Marvel movie, then "Ghost Rider 2: Spirit of Vengeance" was actually a surprise for me. Especially because I am not too keen on men in spandex tights running around with super powers. "Ghost Rider 2: Spirit of Vengeance" was darker, grittier and for a more mature audience.

One thing that I just had to shake my head in disbelief at was the in-you-face-lame raised finger morals with the "an illegal download" and the "crime doesn't pay" comments in the movie. Wow, could it get any more of a cliché? The "illegal download" comment was funny though, but it was not really at place in the intro.
14 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Stay Away from this movie
wgeddings17 February 2012
Warning: 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.
91 out of 154 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Proper Ghost rider!
Mark Burton10 March 2012
Proper Ghost rider! Nicolas Cage, actually played the part well. Bit loopy when needed. pseudo daddy for the rest of the time, sort of worked! I really like the fact that this film has tried to be more like the Graphic Novel & less like the original film. Moral, immoral & fun. The CGI style is perfect for a boy/angel/demon with a flaming skull riding on a motorcycle & killing folk(in an admittedly, sometimes pointlessly staring at people for a really long time, sort of way). I have honestly never seen flames & the whole burning monsters & things done so well!

Please, just switch off Hollywood review mode, Ignore the first films existence & enjoy!
30 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
micahspayer19 February 2012
if you don't take the movie as seriously as nic cage did, you'll probably have a mind-less, enjoyable ride. not too campy, and strong supporting acting, unique cgi and dedication to honesty of the exterior of the rider's character are all factors that save this film.

in 3D, it's wonderful. nicolas cage has jumped from a-list movie star to internationally famous cult star. he chooses movies and characters that are so off-beat they seem put off and "too much," but he just entertains. in this movie, he has funny moments that breach into the cooky, icon mode - receiving light applause and laughter from the audience.

if you bring a date, you might want to end the night with heavy drinking in a pub, after this movie.

enjoy the entertainment.
15 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Nicolas Rage
Mek Torres18 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.
62 out of 105 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Criminally Underrated Hollywood Risk-Taker!
Ulrik Sander-Pedersen28 June 2012
Warning: My reviews are 100% guaranteed plot-summary-free - as you can find movie summaries anywhere online. I truly believe a real movie reviewer should dissect the soul of movies, as opposed to merely summarizing plots - which any 14-year old could do.

Embarrassingly low IMDb rating for a Hollywood superhero-movie this unique and risky! GR2 creates a twisted and dark universe with visually compelling night-scenes bathed in Absinthe-green color-tones contrasting the day-time's over-exposed sharp white daylight. Equally compelling are the cartoon-universe's morally ambiguous characters - including the Morphine-popping, self-loathing protagonist Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider (Nicolas Cage)! The line between good and evil is thin here. Cage injects drops of his former manic acting-style known from early-career surrealistic masterpieces, e.g. "Wild At Heart" (David Lynch, 1990) which will please his long-time followers.

GR2 does admittedly have faults. It suffers from the standard sub-par, dumbed-down dialog of big-budget blockbusters, and its audience are asked to accept some far-fetched events so fantastic they would be fatal to the credibility of any storyline... normally! However, GR2 is not normal. Do NOT expect sophisticated plot and realism! Watch it for the weird world and sensatory experience: the GR2 trip is instinctive - NOT intellectual! When you open your mind to such an experience, the aforementioned faults become irrelevant.

Consider the odds: it is a closely-controlled, big-budgeted blockbuster sequel targeted at the horrified-of-boredom, escapism-craving superhero- movie audience (which is how Hollywood studios wrongfully conceive us...), and despite all this, GR2 is clearly a work of its own, therefore considerably more interesting than its by-the-book predecessor "Ghost Rider" (Mark Steven Johnson, 2007).


And as a result, sadly also widely misunderstood, hence the criminally low IMDb rating. Risk-taking is not a quality in itself, but when it results in an different AND fascinating spin on the arch- American superhero-movie genre, it deserves to be rewarded. GR2 is not a masterpiece, merely a slightly left-field, good movie. 7/10
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
C'mon it was sort of entertaining...
KineticSeoul24 April 2012
This isn't really a direct sequel to the 2007 "Ghost Rider" movie but it does show similar background and past in a comic book like manner. In fact there are few comic book like scenes in the movie where it shows origins and past by drawings in a cartoon like direction. Which I thought was sort of cool. There is about three main scenes where Ghost Rider comes out and although generic it was still entertaining and cool to watch. This one for sure is more of a entertaining Ghost Rider movie compared to the 2007 version. Although 2007 version had a bit more of a plot it just wasn't as entertaining as this one. Maybe it's because this one has more of the craziness and more of the essence of a chaotic and even a bit scary Ghost Rider. I don't know what to say about the cinematography though, Neveldine/Taylor is known for doing crazy and chaotic cinematography but I am not really sure if it really helped in this movie. But it also didn't feel like it took away from this movie experience. Nicholas Cage has been getting some bashing from critics lately, but he is Nicholas Cage and he is awesome. Yeah sometimes his acting can be over the top but his performance I found to be always entertaining and fun to watch. And that applies to this one as well, especially the scenes when the Ghost Rider is about to come out from his body and he tries to resist it. Those were some funny and yet entertaining scenes. Sure this movie doesn't have a good story but other elements in this movie kinda makes up for it...Sorta. So overall when it comes to certain elements that make a good movie it fails but it's still kinda entertaining.

8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Not a very good film, but moderately entertaining
Argemaluco15 March 2012
The only time I read the comics of Ghost Rider with a certain frequency was during the mid-2000s, when it took part of the "Marvel Knights" line, which pretended to be a collection of titles destined to "mature readers", with more violent, raw and sordid stories than what we are used to find in Marvel's "normal" comics. However, I quickly abandoned them, because I comprehended that Ghost Rider didn't need more violence nor profanity, but writers which could find an appropriate angle in order to exploit the character's (doubtful) potential. Unfortunately, the same can be said about Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, because despite the intensity of the action and the main character's ferocity, the screenplay lacks of narrative cohesion, and it only brings us a parade of situations in order to display bizarre camera angles, slow-motion stunts and extraordinary special effects. Nevertheless, I have to say that the film managed to keep me moderately entertained.

The screenplay of Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance consists of a modular adventure with a "mcguffin" (a kid in this case) as the plot's detonator, and with an anti-hero searching for redemption in order to justify the presence of action scenes of an increasing complexity, but null suspense. I liked the films Crank and Crank: High Voltage, in which co-directors Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor forged their frantic visual style, but the formula they had employed in those films doesn't adapt itself very well in the world of super-heroes, because they couldn't generate any connection to the spectator in here. What is more, I wasn't interested in the main character's suffering, nor in any threaten from the villain.

On the other hand, the magnificent cinematography and brilliant special effects from Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance were the main reasons why this movie kept me moderately entertained, and why I consider it worthy of a slight recommendation, even though it's a bit painful for me to say that, because I'm generally against the "style over substance" mentality. But when the "style" is so overwhelming, I have to accept an ideological defeat. Pity that those impressive technical aspects were included in a film with a trite and not very interesting screenplay.

In the leading role, Nicolas Cage shows conviction and energy. As for the rest of the cast, Idris Elba seems to be there only for the paycheck; Ciarán Hinds is absolutely insipid as the villain; and Violante Placido is only employed as a pretty face. Nevertheless, the technical aspects are the main stars, and as I previously said, the reason this film isn't boring is mainly because of them.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews