Add a Review

  • It is simply unwatchable with grade Z-rated acting and a flat dialogue. Don't waste your time watching this show unless you like a dull movie that offer no entertainment value.
  • This was a pure joke this is no way even close to the original i waited for 30 years and I couldn't even get through 30 minutes please don't do anything else like this
  • I am giving it a 4 rating for effort, it was not that bad, the post apocalyptic setting could have been better but i do understand the low budget.

    I always have an issue with people walking down pretty street when all is suppose to be squashed.

    I guess they say its a sequel to the 1977 movie The car, but a part from the car driving itself, there is more in common with John Carpenter Christine then that car.

    There is some good gore, death scenes and more.

    Its an ok way to pass an hour and a half if you have nothing to do.
  • From a filmmakers stand point it was a complete film but to call this a sequel to the original was a travesty!

    I'm sick and I despise what was created!

    They should have called this something totally different and never associated it with the original!

    I'm sick!

    Why did Ronnie sign on to this debacle! It had no heart .. especially no heart in the essence of THE CAR!
  • 'this is a true reprise of a good old car movie from the early 80's,that are still the best anyhow. also with inspiration from the first 3 madmax movies,and a few moreof the kind,then you have the car on the road to revenge.

    its all about a sinister car spirit that takes revenge on everyone that has been cruel somehow to the car or its owner or close friends of the carowner. its not a good film, but its not bad either. the storyline are lousy and simple, much of the acting are on c-level, but the slashing and cruelty made on man and machine are topnotch if it is what youre looking for....a bit much dressing on the salad if you ask me, but i guess this is the salesargument behind making films like this. the special effects are good at times.

    its worth a look if you can outstand extreme car violence because its some of the most graphical images and effects i have seen in a feature movie.

    so take a chance on me,its recommended
  • Took a great concept of a mysterious car terrifying a small desert town...weeding out its sins...and turns into something stupid.

    In the process, it rips off concepts and elements from; The Dark Knight Johnny Mnemonic Robocop Lethal Weapon 2 Christine Nemesis Ooh...tried to kill somebody with a pencil ala John Wick. And rehashes cool scenes from the original The Car.

    The Car in this movie is far from ominous and intimidating. Poor engine sound effects and it sounds like it has a bad rocker tick.

    Pretty low mileage movie that could use a huge bottle of octane boost. By the end, it rips off Austin Powers by making a Mini Me.
  • Should of had an old Luke warn people to stay away from that part of the canyon as he feels its cursed. Meanwhile mountain bikers/hikers stumble upon old twisted metal and the front grill of The Car as if its calling to them. They collect what they can find and one being into old cars decides to rebuild it using old newspaper articles he found in the town library PC showing what The Car looked like and what it supposedly did. To him rebuilding it would be a trophy of this Urban Legend for bragging rights. Luke gets word and he warns them but it's to late as The Car is back! Winds, Horn, Original Eerie Engine! SCORE! That would have been sick! Instead we get Christine meets Mad Max... Had its moments but....
  • Fans of the original cult classic 1970's 'The Car' , do not bother with this movie.
  • isaackiernan18 January 2019
    This isn't a very good movie, but it's not unwatchable. Almost completely unrelated to the original 1977 film (which I am a huge fan of), but the car does resemble the original car by the end. This movie takes the similar approach of what if, but different? The original film was "What if Jaws, but it was a car", this is "What if The Crow, but he's a car". The cyberpunk sci-fi future is a weird touch, and I must ask, why do so many bad sequels go sci fi with non sci fi source material? Seriously, Highlander 2, Jason X, Leprechaun 4, Hellraiser 4, it's a very strange trend. Anyway, I enjoyed this enough. For what it is, it's a decent time waster and has some nice gore effects. Recommended for lazy Sunday afternoons when nothing is on TV. Incidentally does anyone know what make and model the car used in this movie is? I swear it looks like a modified Chrysler 300, but I'm not sure.
  • Poor plot, felt like I was watching Christine in a different year ,w a different car. Not what I expected, and didn't finish watching it
  • From the tittle and lovely made poster, I thought (or they wanted to make us think it was) that was a sequel of the awesome original The Car movie from 1977.

    This was not at all a sequel, nor even a well done horror movie using a car. For me, this movie just look like they were hoping to "click & bait" people who watched and loved the original movie.

    I figured that right after like the first 30mn, and stopped watching by then. But hey, if you like the genre, go and watch it, and I will let you be your own judge.
  • This movie if it were called something else, would probably get better reviews!! This was not how the original CAR was. Christine 2 maybe but as a supposed sequel HORRID
  • I'm so mad at myself for not liking this movie, because it had all the elements that would make you like a movie, such as good actors, good acting, nice cinematography, nice music-score, good action, gore, brutality, violence, interesting villains, a ruthless and nice-looking killer car, and a story that made sense.

    So, why didn't I find it thrilling, exciting or interesting? Why was I just waiting for it to come to an end? Is it because it could have been much better if it had higher budget? But I've seen B-movies with far lower budget, terrible acting and much worse special effects that I have actually enjoyed. Maybe it's because the gore was not as explicit as it could have been if they had the budget to create it (all you get to see is blood splashing) or because it was devoid of jump scares, which for me is the defining feature of a horror movie.

    I should have enjoyed it, but for some reason it didn't work for me at all. One reason I can think of is that the movie did not try to engage the audience. I didn't feel part of the movie experience. I didn't care for any of the characters and what might happen to them. They were just random characters shooting, shouting, stabbing, getting tortured, killed, etc, so I just watched brutal action scenes unfold before my eyes with no impact.

    Final score: 4 (or perhaps less, because the last movie to which I gave a score of 4 entertained me a lot more than this)
  • First off this is not in anyway a sequel or remake to Stephen King's/ John Carpenter's Christine (1983). Evidently you that have said so did not see or year of the much superior The Car (1977). Get your facts straight. The original The Car had style, atmosphere, and good action. This wanna be sequel sacrificed much of that for poor CGI graphics and weak story line. It amps up the gore but it is so fake looking with tge overuse of CGI. I gave this a few extra stars for some decent action scenes and the Car itself. It adds nothing to the original.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    In a post-apocalyptic cyberpunk city of the future that's been destroyed by crime and corruption, a District Attorney finds the information he needs to finally arrest a gang of cyborg criminals. Too bad he's killed before he can do anything about it. But then again, his car has come back, looking for revenge. And that's how the kinda, sorta sequel to The Car begins. If you were expecting another Anton LaVey quote to kick this off, you picked the wrong movie.

    Where the original film hinted that the titular vehicle may or may not be powered by Satan - seriously, this was a never-ending debate in the HBO fueled 1980's in our immediate family - this movie has a very simple motivation. Well, two of them. Revenge and misguided love, as the DA pretty much has been stalking his ex. And it turns out she likes it, no matter how much her friend tries to explain how crazy their relationship was.

    Soon, though, the police, both good and corrupt, as well as an army of cyborg ruffians, including a cowboy, several punks and some guy who wandered in from A Clockwork Orange are after her. And yep, The Car is both there to protect and pretty much continue stalking her. It gets blown up real good, but a mechanic (played by Ronny Cox, who was in the original) uses old parts to make it look a lot more like the 1971 Lincoln Continental Mark III that it should be.

    This felt way closer to Upgrade that to The Car. That said, I'm still wondering how any movie that has cybernetic gangs and killer women can leave so little of an impression.

    The Car: Road to Revenge was directed by G.J. Echternkamp, who also directed last year's Death Race 2050. As long as genre titles have some life, it seems like we're going to see direct to Redbox and streaming sequels. This has the smallest of connection to the film that inspired it, so if you're hoping for more marching bands being chased through cemeteries, sadly you've come to the wrong place.
  • curse-of-egypt5 February 2019
    Man I just watched The Car: Road to Revenge and like the first movie, The Car, it scared the crap out of me. In the original movie The Car just randomly chose its victims but in the one it was after the people who had killed the car's owner. I love where at the end that woman pulls out the CPU from the car and that makes it stop and then she pushes over the edge. Not as great of an ending as in the first movie where they blew the car up. I really liked James Brolin in the original movie but I must say both movies gets 10 stars from me
  • saptesh78614 January 2019
    Why so low ratings for such entertainer movie ? I don't understand at all. I just saw 'Traffic'( 2000) after the Car ( this movie). It was a boring movie and getting high ratings. As me when such boring and wasted movie gets 7.6 then why not such thriller movie get 7 or 8 star? I really love this car and hate leading kick ass actress who suppose herself over smart and over estimated and can beat a haunted car ! It never possible only story writer and director makes such foolish idea to satisfy viewers. However movie is watchable especially for magic car, who takes revenge to gang of goons. Comparing to old ' The Car' is not fair, because both movies are different genre and story and both are best. Another comparison with Bollywood flick ' Tarzan, the Wonder Car. is not possible, because Tarzan was a family drama rather than Car adventure and looks foolish version of the Car. If your are thriller lovers then you can watch once. Moreover I am waiting for squeal, which signed at last moment of the movie.
  • danfurtado-1122114 January 2019
    As somebody who hasn't seen The Car, knew it was supposed to be a sequel, or knew anything about it but the title it was a goofy fun suprise.. Not a great movie but a good time killer and a pretty fun time for me.
  • zandurian10 March 2019
    After reading some negative reviews I had to write this. What I expected is what I got. Enjoyable squishy kill scenes, bad guys that were hateable. Reminded me of A Clockwork Orange in some areas, yes Mad Max and Christine Maybe some Deathrace without the tally. I dont know what you expected but maybe if you step back and take a look, it isnt Its a Wonderful Life...
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Some movies just can't decide what they are about. This is one of them, in a very disappointing way. When you cook up a story, you need to decide what your antagonists are. The human baddies were... well, B-movie grade baddies. Their first real mayhem scene screamed "The Crow: The Rip-Off" cranked to eleven. It gets worse when you realize that the Car is haunted, which makes it pretty much a kind of second-rate Flying Dutchman kind of ghostly thingie, and one can go with that. Then, it all gets thrown, like the car owner, through the window: the car still needs a CPU to run... so what is this? A crossbreeding of Christine, The Exorcist and Knight Rider? Although it doesn't talk as such... and then, the story falls from the cliff (like the car...) one more time as even after the CPU is dealt with, the carcass can still revive itself, when it was made clear a minute ago that this was its Achille's heel? Consistency, guys. A story can be slow, lame, badly acted even, and we all can still like a "so bad it's good" movie but that indecisiveness as to what the Car really is, makes it all very much pointless to watch. Super Hybrid was at least funny and earned brownie points for originality. The Car R2R is sloppy and can't even get its concept right.
  • It is a silly premis and spiritual sequel kind of. But its a killer car movie. Theres not a whole lot of those these days
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The action takes place in a cyber-punk sin city. "The Night" runs the illegal operations and also modifies human bodies. A chip that contains all his payments etc. falls into the hands of District Attorney James Caddock who cannot break the encryption. Caddock is hung up on Daria, his ex. He also drives a Lazarus One. Yes, he is killed, becomes the Google car and goes after the bad guys and even a few good guys.

    The film was okay. Daria was cute and clever. She made the film. Could have been better.

    Guide: F-word. Stripper nudity.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Note: I watched "The Car: Road to Revenge" from a DVD in the United States. At the time of this review's publication, the disc can be rented from Redbox.

    "The Car" is a movie from the 70's with an interesting movie poster and a ridiculous premise. A car that has a vendetta against someone that drives itself. That plot makes the film seem ahead of its time in the age of smart technology. If you bothered to watch the original film, you might also want to watch this unnecessary sequel from 40 years later.

    Unlike the first film, this sequel is is more of an action film with a cyberpunk setting. An arrogant county prosecutor has been putting away criminals who are instantly vaporized for their crimes. When he gets his hands on some data that could send a criminal boss to jail, the boss sends his goons to kill the prosecutor. They succeed and throw him out of the skyscraper where his body lands on his awesome new car which he somehow possesses, maybe? It's a wasted opportunity for the movie to totally fail to present any idea about how his spirit comes to possess the car and operate it. I choose to think he didn't possess the car. The car just drives around on its own killing the goons.

    The scenes are often filmed in the cramped urban environment of the cyberpunk world. The Car doesn't really have the room to do more than ram the people it kills. At least the first film in its cheesiness placed everyone in an open world with room to be chased. This film could just have easily involved a gunman rather than a car.

    There is a cameo from Ronny Cox who was in Robocop, which is the film this one most emulates. Ronny even throws in parts from the original Car when this Car is damaged by the surviving goons. I suppose that is a nice touch.

    The original film at least has some camp appeal for viewers today. There isn't any reason to ever see this one. By 2020 it will languish in pawn shops as a small cultural footnote. Pass.
  • I thought it would be a sequel to The Car from the 70s but it's a futuristic robot cop like movie. I think the concept was really good but you can tell they were on a shoestring budget.
  • jrockjr-6253017 January 2019
    Kathleen munroe's character was pathetic and too over the top. The whole movie was just nonsense.
An error has occured. Please try again.