Change Your Image
allgood_2000
So far, no one who's ever said "By your logic..." in response to something I've said has correctly used my logic. Next time someone tries to say that my logic supports something, they need to say "By (my erroneous interpretation of) your logic".
Reviews
I Spit on Your Grave: Deja Vu (2019)
Awesomely bad
What the HELL did I just watch???
The only reason I gave this 7 stars is because I enjoy awesomely bad movies.
I will start off by saying that this movie fails MISERABLY as a true sequel to "I Spit on Your Grave". The tone is just completely wrong.The original was hard to watch in places because it was gritty and a little too real in the way it portrayed predatory behavior against women and attitudes (especially misogynistic men's attitudes) toward rape victims. This sequel, on the other hand, is just so campy and ridiculous that it borders on comedy-horror. It does not fit into the same universe as the original AT ALL. It actually comes off as more of a spoof than a sequel. The characters in the original seemed like real people you would meet in a small town, but the characters in this one were just satirical Jesus-freak hillbilly stereotypes. It's hard to believe that it was written and directed by the same person who did the original.
That said, the redeeming value of this movie for me was that it is one of the best "so bad it's good" movies I have seen in a long time. It's so absurd and over-the-top in places that I laughed out loud several times. The movie tries to take itself seriously at first but realizes how bad it is toward the end of the first act, so it just decides to milk the campiness for all its worth for the remainder of the movie. It's almost like the makers realized after filming a few scenes that they were never going to pull off a serious movie with the acting talent (or lack thereof) involved, so they brought in Adam Green and John Waters to ghost-direct the rest of the movie (the old woman in the pickup truck even reminded me of Edith Massey).
In summary, this movie is not "good" by any stretch of the imagination, but I did find it highly entertaining because of how bad it was (and possibly because of how tipsy I was). This was a long-awaited sequel to the original "I Spit on Your Grave", and it is a god-awful insult to the original, which almost makes it even funnier. It might appeal to a select few with a certain sense of humor, but those expecting a sequel that does justice to the original should probably down a few shots of hard liquor before attempting to watch this.
Brutal (2007)
Cheesy, but sort of boring
The box has a quote that says, "Hostel meets Silence of the Lambs in this horrific murder mystery." The movie throws in a couple of "Hostel" style kills during the first fifteen minutes, and the rest of the murders are just routine slasher movie killings. I don't really see the resemblance to Silence of the Lambs, other than that a female is working to catch a serial killer.
This movie seems like an unused episode of a generic network crime drama. That said, the script and acting would suffice for 45-minute TV show episode, but the plot ended up being too simplistic to carry a 90-minute movie. The movie isn't entirely bad; there's some pretty campy b-movie humor if you're into that sort of thing, but there's also a lot of boredom that fills the gaps between the cheesy goodness.
Grizzly Park (2008)
No masterpiece, but entertaining
It seemed like this movie was a PG-rated family comedy for most of the way through (save for language and a few sparse kills), and then they set a hungry grizzly bear loose on the characters in the last ten minutes of the movie. I would not have had a problem with this if there had been more character development, but the first half of the movie was wasted with the group walking around picking up trash, without much suspense or dialogue. Although Glenn Morshower was the star of the movie, I thought his time on screen prevented the development of the other characters. It also seemed like they killed some of the more interesting characters too early in the movie. All in all, I felt that there was more that could of have been done to make the story and the characters more interesting.
Grizzly Park is by no means a masterpiece of cinema, but it did keep me entertained. It's a good movie to watch with friends and laugh at or make sarcastic commentary. The movie was not terrible, but there was definitely room for improvement.
Saw IV (2007)
Formula movie
This was my least favorite Saw movie so far. The previous entries were clever and complex. This one was just complex. It seemed like the main purpose of this installment was to provide supplemental information about Jigsaw's origin and how he became acquainted with his victims from the previous installments (mainly Saw II). This alternates with a plot line in the present which happens simultaneously with the events of Saw III.
The present plot line seemed like it was forged to fill the time between the flashbacks of Jigsaw's origin. The twist wasn't exactly a twist, it was more or less a resolution to a mystery that was hinted at from the beginning of the movie. It was also somewhat recycled. The contraptions were less absurd than the ones in Saw III, but the story never really went in an interesting direction. Instead of having a solid original plot, it seemed like they just tried to milk the complex mystery and torture aspects for all they were worth.
All in all, this just seemed like formula movie that cared more about catering to the fans than having its own unique plot. Of course it is left open for a sequel, but I fear Saw V will be enter the gray area between sequel and rip-off.
If you see this, make sure you have Saw II and Saw III fresh on your mind, because there are numerous references to characters and events from these movies that you are expected to understand.
Final Destination 3 (2006)
Basically an excuse to splatter copious amounts of gore all over the place
Final Destination was great suspense/thriller movie with an interesting concept. Final Destination 2 was a good sequel because it expanded on the concepts of the original and was not just a repeat of the first. When I heard the writers of the first Final Destination were returning for Final Destination 3, I was expecting it to be a good movie that would delve deeper into the concepts of the first two and tie up all the loose ends. I was sorely disappointed. Final Destination 3 seemed like more of a remake than a sequel. It brought nothing new to the table, it had no returning characters, and it had virtually no connection to the first two. The only acknowledgement the first two movies receive is about ten seconds of characters discussing news articles they had found.
The writers apparently expect viewers to be familiar with the concept, as there is little explanation of death having a design and how that design can be cheated. There is little character development, so you don't really care whether or not the characters live or die. This movie is full of plot holes and discrepancies. I had a hard time believing that this installment was written by the writers of the first one. The first one was in-depth and well thought out, while the script for this one seemed like it was thrown together in an hour by a drunken fifteen-year-old. Final Destination 3 is basically just a 90-minute excuse to splatter copious amounts of blood and guts all over the place.
The first two Final Destination movies are far superior in terms of plot, originality, character development, and plausibility (and that's saying something). The death sequences in the first movie are plausible for the most part. Some of the deaths in the second movie are over-the-top and somewhat cheesy, but still entertaining. The death sequences in the third one are completely off-the-wall scenarios. If you haven't seen the first two Final Destination movies and you are thinking about seeing Final Destination 3, I would strongly suggest watching the first two instead.
Urban Legends: Bloody Mary (2005)
Okay, but predictable
After seeing just about every kind of horror movie imaginable, it is hard to find one offers something new. Just about every element from this movie can be found in other movies (such as Candyman, FearDotCom, and The Grudge). As a result, it is pretty easy to predict the would-be plot twists. Another gripe I have is that there are certain parts of the movie that go on for too long without an appearance by Bloody Mary. As a fan of the horror genre, I found this movie decent, but not great. I thought the first two Urban Legend movies were better because they kept you guessing. However, this installment did a better job at basing the deaths on urban legends than Urban Legends: Final Cut. I would recommend Urban Legends: Bloody Mary to fans of the genre, but not to people who only like Oscar quality films.
Friday the 13th Part III (1982)
My favorite Friday the 13th installment
Although this installment was not too original, I thought it stood out from the others. If you watch the series in order, this is the first time the victims are just vacationing teenagers and not camp counselors. I also thought the character developement was better than the first two (yes, I know "character developement" and "slasher movies" aren't birds of a feather, but I though it worked in this particular slasher). I actually became attached to some of the characters and didn't want them them to die. Most people, however, think the time spent developing characters slowed the pace and made the movie boring. This was also the first Friday the 13th movie to have it's climax in a barn. I thought the fact that it took place on a ranch was kind of neat, I was getting kind of tired of camp.
Most of the death scenes were original, the gore level was average, not a whole lot of suspense (but what do you expect? This is Friday the 13th, not The Sixth Sense), but the characters were really cool. It had some continuity errors with the previous movies, so I'm deducting one point. 9 out of 10.