I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE 2 holds nothing back

RATED- UNRATED
RUN TIME- 105 MINS
WRITER(S)- NEIL ELMAN AND THOMAS FENTON
STARRING- JEMMA DALLENDER, JOE ABSOLOM, AND YAVOR BAHAROV
DIRECTOR- STEVEN R. MONROE



Synopsis taken from IMDb
Katie is trying to make it in the cutthroat world of modeling. When she innocently accepts an offer to have new photos taken for her portfolio, the experience quickly turns into an unthinkable nightmare of rape, torture, and kidnapping. When a twist of fate finally frees her from her captors- beaten, battered, bruised, and broken, she will have to tap into the darkest places of the human psyche to not only survive her ordeal, but to ultimately find the strength to exact her brutal revenge.

  

Being a big fan of the 2010 remake, I was definitely excited about this sequel, especially since it's by the same director. However, I also remained a bit skeptical. There's concerns that rose to my mind, like little red lights flashing. Sadly, I must say that I was right in being apprehensive about this one. The alarm going off in my conscience, those flashing red lights ended up being dead on the money, and I'll tell you why.

I've said this before, and I'll repeat it again for the sake of this films topic. There is no such thing as a good rape scene. I understand that sometimes in order to make a revenge flick, or a drama even, rape needs to be depicted. However, there is tactful ways of doing it. The film that I praise for having a tactful rape scene is Alex Aja's 2006 "The Hills Have Eyes" remake. It didn't show you much but, you were fully aware of what was going on.

The 2010 remake of "I Spit On Your Grave" also surprised me in the sense that although it was extreme, it wasn't overdone. The amount of maltreatment was done quite well. There wasn't too much thrusting or humping shown. It was more implied that she was molested by the gang of guys due to her passing out. I think that's the greatest thing about the retelling of the 1978 motion picture. The brutality was shown on such a tense level, that it wasn't necessary to exploit every little thing. It was immensely intense as well. And, the payoff was as much deserved as it was worth the wait.

This sequel does the exact opposite of what I praise the remake for. Before I go further, let me go on record as saying that I did like this movie. I just found it to be less tasteful than the prior installment, and not as thrilling. Unfortunately, the thing that I think lessened this one compared to the other, is the revenge. And that's a big problem.

This film centers around Katie (Jemma Dallender) and the gang of foreign creeps she encounters, from Bulgaria. When she refuses to go nude for the photo shoot, she soon realizes that she got mixed up with the wrong people. Things go from bad to worse, and then a little more worse. And right when you think the film has gone a bit too far, it goes a bit further. This to me, is like a half-sister to the remake. It's got similar traits, and is definitely part of the same family but, it's not as complete and whole.

After being beaten and raped repeatedly by multiple men, and being deceived by someone Katie thought she could trust, as well as the police, the payback just isn't what it needed to be for such a violent and gritty piece of cinema. The rape and torture goes a bit too far, to the point where it's almost un-watchable. They show a lot more than they should, unlike the remake. It's really not a necessity to show all that is shown, it's a bit much, and crosses a few lines, especially for a lackluster conclusion. Katie is beaten horribly, raped multiple times by different men, shocked, and pissed on. Oh, and buried alive! 

The revenge scenes were nasty and twisted, and deserving. They're not anything but shock factor though. It seems so fabricated and commercial, it doesn't feel as real or dreadful like it should. The final death is really hard to watch for men, at least I found it painful to view. Brings a new image to mind when hearing the term balls in a vice.

And, there's one other big thing that I did not like, and that is that they made Katie too much of a female icon almost, for lack of a better word. Once she decides to go over to the dark side, and get vengeance  for herself, she gets this black leather jacket, and she wears it through the remainder of the movie. I don't like that she has a cool, dark image about her. She should have a dirty tank top with sweat stains and grease and soot on it. She just doesn't look the part, and the wardrobe throws me off. It just lost the genuine revenge feel that the other film had, and you can see that this one has the brain of the remake but, not the heart or soul.

There's a scene where she exacts revenge on a big bull of a man. She knocks him out, and drags him through the train station tunnels where she's living, picks him up and puts him on a bed, all while wearing her little black jacket and without breaking a sweat. I'm not one for nitpicking, but damn. As I said above, this was just far too fabricated and insincere. 

Do I hate this film? No. Do I love it? No. Do I like it? Yes. 

I just can't fully back it because it's hard to watch something so gut-wrenching and have the pigs responsible for these despicable acts get punished in a watered down way. This film had no problem screwing with male genitalia but, what it needed to grow a bigger set of nuts for the sickness depicted and turn it up a notch. You can't have the antagonists do worse than the protagonist or the point is missed, and that's the case with this sequel.

Would I watch it again? Yeah. Would I buy it? Yeah. Will I watch it often? No. 

The remake is already hard enough to watch, and I like it a lot more than this one. "I Spit on your Grave 2" is Jack Ketchum's "The Girl Next Door", meets Eli Roth's "Hostel". I'm more disappointed than anything with this one. I wish they'd gone more original than predictable. Oh well. 

On a final note, the acting is good. But like the gore and torture aspect of this movie, it takes you out of the experience because it seems so expected and refurbished.

The Collection (2012)

"Every great collector has a vision"

RATED- R
RUN TIME- 82 MINS
WRITERS- MARCUS DUNSTAN AND PATRICK MELTON
STARRING- JOSH STEWART, EMMA FITZPATRICK AND CHRISTOPHER McDONALD
DIRECTOR- MARCUS DUNSTAN




Synopsis taken from IMDb
A man who escapes from the vicious grips of the serial killer known as "The Collector" is blackmailed to rescue an innocent girl from the killer's booby-trapped warehouse. 

Regardless of the bad reviews I heard and read about 2009's The Collector, I really liked it. I found it fun, exciting, somewhat original and suspenseful. So yeah, I was pretty pumped for the sequel to come out. I wasn't disappointed.

The movie starts off with a television broadcasts that speak of the Collector and his recent crimes, there's a manhunt out for him. Arkin (Josh Stewart) is the Collector's most recent victim from the ending of the previous film.

Elena Peters (Emma Fitzpatrick) goes to a secluded party that her friends drag her to. The party takes place in a dingy  alley that looks suspicious. There they're greeted by a man with piercings all over his face and dreadlocks, they have to give him the password "nevermore" to enter the party. Upon entering, all of their fears and suspicions  disappear when they see the party is all they had been hoping it would be.

The fun doesn't last too long as the Collector has made this party his latest death maze, full of sick, sadistic torture and slaughtering devices that turn the entire club into a crimson mass. The traps, the deaths and the gore are really upped in this film and I was pleased, bring it on.

Arkin makes a lucky escape during the party after seeing Elena being taken by the Collector. Arkin gets treatment at a hospital. Where even there he isn't safe, he gets a card from the Collector threatening his family. Soon after, Arking is approached by Lucello and his team of hired mercenaries. Lucello is Elena's father's right hand man, and he' watched after Elena since she was a child. He's leading his team to find and kill the Collector, and find Elena.

Arkin gets strong-armed into leading Lucello and his hired team to the Collector, but he warns them of what they're getting into. Once they enter the Collector's lair, a run down hotel, it becomes a bloodbath. People being picked off one by one in pure brutality. I like how calm the Collector is, he has the odds stacked against him but he's always two steps ahead of everyone, he's meticulous.

As Arkin and Lucello dig further into the Collector's residence we see some of what makes the Collector tick, seeing how sick he is and learning what he does with his victims. I especially like this because there was no development with his character in the first film. This was definitely the right way to go for a sequel.

The film is incredibly violent, it pulls no punches. It comes packing a big punch. If you're not one for gore or torture you should probably turn this movie down, unless you want to lose your lunch. The acting wasn't anything fancy, but it worked. There's a lot of chaos going on in this film and it's a bloody good time.

I'm looking forward to where they go with the future of this series, if they're is one. I'd be interested to see where they go with a sequel, which will hopefully happen. The ending of The Collection is spot on and a good, refreshing change in cliche endings.

THIS FILM GETS 3 1/2 REAPER SKULLS OUT OF 5

Dread (2009)

RATED- R
RUN TIME- 108 MINS
WRITERS- CLIVE BARKER AND ANTHONY DIBLASI
STARRING- JACKSON RATHBONE, HANNE STEEN AND LAURA DONELLY 
DIRECTOR- ANTHONY DIBLASI



Synopsis taken from IMDb
The outcast cinema student, Stephen Grace, does not drive cars due to the trauma of losing his brother in a car accident. He befriends, Quaid, who since the age of 6 has experienced dreadful nightmares and daydreams about the death of his parents. Quaid purposes they research about each one's innermost fear. Stephen sees the chance of developing an original thesis for college, and invites his friend, Cheryl, to work with them. Among the interviewees, Stephen talks to his colleague, Abby who works with him in the library. Abby has a complex about the way she looks. When the work is almost complete, Quaid has an outburst at one of the interviewee's and ends up destroying the camera and editing equipment. Stephen begins to re-evaluate the situation.



When I first heard they were doing this movie I was instantly skeptical. Because what we have here is the potential to make a landmark horror film. Totally original concept and it's from the mind of Clive Barker.

Dread is my favorite short story off all-time. I got Clive Barker's Books Of Blood Volume 2 at a Farmer's Market for only about fifty cents. I read it and Dread stood out to me the most out of the overall engenius  book. Dread had balls. It took you places that you weren't sure you wanted to go but you go anyway. Dread instantly became my favorite short story I've ever read.

So I was instantly prepared for failure when I heard the movie was being made, because I knew it was damn near impossible for the movie to be better. Unless they followed the book to a T. But let's face it, who does that anymore?

The ending to the book was so brilliant! I actually passed the book along to about 3 or 4 friends and they all loved it as well.

I liked the cast right away, I thought they were young, attractive kids who fit the parts. Shaun Evans did a good job playing Quaid, especially when Quaid starts to lose it. They were sympathetic characters who get caught in a mess.

The story is different. They changed several key things about the book and I noticed the differences right as I started watching. Noting them in my mind to see how this changes the outcome. And what you got was a watered down version of the book. I don't know why they would feel they needed to change the ending, but regardless, it wasn't for the better. I don't blame the cast for this, I blame the writing. The cast did their jobs well, the story just wasn't what it was supposed to be.

The film still has some "turn your head" moments, and it goes pretty deep on the torture factor. But like in the book, it isn't about the physical torture, it's about the mental torture of confronting your worst fear. This part of the movie was good. The best part in the book as well as the movie is the part where Cheryl has to eat the steak. For those of you who haven't seen this, I won't spoil it, but I don't recommend eating while watching this scene.

It all gets worse once Stephen discovers that Quaid is a twisted man in need of help. Quaid won't stop though. He won't stop until he gets his answer. What can you do to stop your own Dread. He plans on finding out by making his victims confront theirs.

The things the people go through in this movie are horrendous and vile. They don't deserve what's being done to them. But Quaid the coward, wants to make his companions face their dread so he won't have to face his. He claims this is helping his victims, sort of like Jigsaw from Saw, but he's only torturing them for his own research.

There's a scene involving a guy who used to be deaf and isn't anymore, and his biggest fear is to be deaf again. To feel that desperate and hopeless again. And let me say it isn't pretty when Quaid decides he wants to use him as a test subject.

I love the relationship between Stephen and Quaid and how they start off becoming good friends. And seeing the character development between them as Stephen starts to realize Quaid is off his rocker. However, this was better done in the book. I didn't feel the chemistry there between them like they portrayed in the short story.

The basic elements of this story are in the movie but they updated some things that didn't really need it. For those who haven't read the book you might like this movie more. For those who have I believe you feel MY Dread.

This film isn't terrible, but I hold Dread in high regard and so I expect a certain standard that I did not feel they were able to execute for this movie. All they had to do was keep it as true to the book as possible and leave the ending alone. But I guess that's a hard question to ask of them. I'm disappointed in this movie. This story deserves a better adaptation.

THIS FILM GETS 1 1/2 REAPERS OUT OF 4

Hostel Part 3

I was a little behind in my horror game when I found out they were adding another installment in the "torture porn" series Hostel. I own the first 2 on dvd and have seen them several times each. I like the torture in them as well as the gore. And I find them entertaining. However, I will be the first to tell anyone that they are far from great.

I liked Hostel a tiny bit more than Hostel 2 but I liked them both. So I got excited when I heard they were doing a third. But the caution sign went up when I saw it wasn't an Eli Roth picture.

I felt that with this installment that they went with more of a thriller feel than a hardcore gore movie like the other two. Had the acting been better it could have maybe pulled it off.

There were a few things that I did like about this movie, I liked the few deaths that they did show (the lack of is one of my main flaws with this movie) and I liked how in this one they made it more like a game when there was an audience watching the deaths.

But it just didn't deliver and come off like a Hostel movie, it came off as a cheap copy. But I guess I truly couldn't expect more.

The best way I can put it (and I mean this as a compliment) is that it's a okay movie in decent movie series.

2 stars for me. Trailer below

Synopsis taken from IMDb
While attending a bachelor party in Las Vegas, four friends are enticed by two sexy escorts to join them at a private party way off the Strip. Once there, they are horrified to find themselves the subjects of a perverse game of torture, where members of the Elite Hunting Club are hosting the most sadistic show in town.

The SAW legacy (2004-2010)

I'm sure we can all agree that atleast a few of the sequels were bad and I, personally, thought everything after Saw 2 was garbage. I mean seriously they continued the series 4 more movies after Jigsaw's death and I think that was just pointless. I could go on and on but the more I thought about it the more I realized that Saw hasn't done anything that our favorite horror movies haven't. Think of Halloween, Friday The 13th, A Nightmare On Elm Street, Re-Animator, Child's Play.

Now think of how many sequels they had that were bad movies. Easily for me it's Halloween 6, A Nightmare On Elm Street part 5: The Dream Child and part 6 Freddy's Dead. As well as Friday the 13th part 5: A New Beginning and Jason X. These are terrible films in my opinion but I forgive them and live with it.

I don't know if it's it's because I grew up with these movies so I'm soft for them or if maybe, somehow, I still find them entertaining in some way. But I don't find myself being as forgiving to the Saw movies, I'd like to but I think they just went on past my point of caring and they went way off track after killing Jigsaw. I still love 1 and 2 and I think part 7 is the only sequel to do the first 2 justice, but it still falls short. I enjoyed The Final Chapter and that put a smile on my face.

Saw, to  me, doesn't compare to my favorite franchises of horror movies but it does stand on it's own and will forever be remembered. It left it's mark no matter what, even if you only wanted to acknowledge the first film you have to see the sequels it's spawned and the mark it left in the horror world. Am I a Saw fan? Yes. Disapointed a bit, but yes I am a fan. Are you?

The Collector

I can't believe that I'm just now getting around to seeing this but I'm glad I did! This movie was awesome, I loved the feel and the cleverness of it. The killer had no back-story which I loved and the gore was awesome as well as the kills. My personal favorite is the bear-trap scene, so, so brutal.

Arkin (Josh Stewart) is trying to pay off the debt that his wife owes to loan sharks and so he breaks into a house he's been working on for a family and plans to steal their precious stone to get the cash he needs. He does this thinking the family went on vacation, however, he comes to realize that they aren't gone. In fact, they are being held in the house by a killer who rigs the house up in booby traps to make it impossible to leave. And Arkin realizes he broke into a house that he can't escape from and the killer is catching on that there is a new guest in the house.

3 1/2 stars is my verdict. Check this movie out! Trailer below.