RETURN OF THE BLIND DEAD is a sequel to the first film but not to the original film's storyline, which was its weakest aspect. So the fact that this sequel doesn't follow the first film's storyline didn't bother me at all. In contrast, there's more of a story here but the atmosphere is not as compelling as the one in TOMBS OF THE BLIND DEAD and the acting seems to be even cheesier than the original film.
I somewhat enjoyed both BLIND DEAD films but I wouldn't consider them to be classics. The sub-par acting and repetitive nature of both films keep them from the same league as "THE Texas CHAINSAW MASSACRE" or "THE EXORCIST".
The truly odd thing about the BLIND DEAD films is that they've created these amazing looking zombies based on the Knights Templar's history, which is vast and complex and by creating horror films about the evil ways of this sect seem to be filled with potential and yet both films are so devoid of any truly fascinating aspects of the Templar's history, and the flimsy way the spectacular zombies are used in both films, I can't help but wonder what went wrong. They simply did not know what to do with them.
I somewhat enjoyed both BLIND DEAD films but I wouldn't consider them to be classics. The sub-par acting and repetitive nature of both films keep them from the same league as "THE Texas CHAINSAW MASSACRE" or "THE EXORCIST".
The truly odd thing about the BLIND DEAD films is that they've created these amazing looking zombies based on the Knights Templar's history, which is vast and complex and by creating horror films about the evil ways of this sect seem to be filled with potential and yet both films are so devoid of any truly fascinating aspects of the Templar's history, and the flimsy way the spectacular zombies are used in both films, I can't help but wonder what went wrong. They simply did not know what to do with them.