I Still Know What You Did Last Summer (1998) - 1.5/5

Here at Blood Brothers we pride ourselves at being 'unapologetically cult' and keeping that in mind I'm going to say this to you, oh faithful readers..."I Still Know What You Did Last Summer" is more enjoyable than the first one. I know, crazy, right? The first one pretty obviously sucked as a watered down modern slasher with no kills and less thrills, but this sequel has three things going for it that make it more enjoyable (not better, but more enjoyable): its got a better setting, Jeffrey Combs, and an actual body count that's worthy of a slasher film. Generally speaking, "Still" lacks characters, acting, direction, logic, and an urgency to push the limits of creativity...but hey, its got a few things going for it.

Julie (Hewitt) and boyfriend Ray (Prinze Jr.) have been having a few relationship troubles lately. Julie keeps having dreams about the fisherman killer Ben Willis and a new friend Will (Watson) seems to want to be as close to her as possible. When her roommate and best friend Karla (Brandy) wins free tickets to the Bahamas for a brief vacation, Julie and company seem set on a killer weekend. With emphasis on killer. It seems like Ben Willis with hook in tow has shown up on the island and the wild storm that's bursting outside is going to keep them there...can Julie survive the ordeal again?

While the first "I Know What You Did Last Summer" film lacked in all areas as a slasher and horror film, "Still" does rack up a few points in knowing what it is and going with it. It's a slasher film folks, so give us some slashering! It does. The body count is way higher, the kills are far more brutal (although still tame enough to garner the larger mainstream audience it was gunning for), and the setting of an empty island hotel is solid enough to match the killer hook fisherman villain idea. For this, I enjoy "Still" much better than the original one.

Past that though, "Still" is about as generic as it gets. Our actresses and actors still wrack the nerves (a surprise heartwarming appearance by Jeffrey Combs is almost negated by an uncredited and awful performance by Jack Black), the characters are about as flat and unmotivated as ever, and the plot progression could have been mapped out by any self respecting horror fan in the first ten minutes. Lots of pseudo-scares plague the first act with silliness and by the time we get to the cool setting they have to kill off everyone at lightning speed (with some very unoriginal kills might I add) so the moments of terror are lost in the pacing. It barrels down into more watered down modern slasher drivel...making the better elements seem trivial in the end.

No "Still" doesn't warrant a better score than the original, but by being worse its almost better. At least I had a few good laughs at this one rather than scratching my head in disbelief at the original. It rarely makes sense, the acting does nothing to right the script flaws, and its by the numbers plot fails to ignite the slasher imagination. It does have Jeffrey Combs in it and a better body count. That stands for something in the slasher world, right?

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Mardi Gras Massacre (1978) - 1/5

I'm very forgiving towards ultra low budget drive-in type horror films of the 70s and 80s for the simple fact it was actually hard to make movies back in the day with limited funds and resources (unlike today where any talentless ass wipe can buy a cheap digital video camera, edit their own filth on their personal laptop and somehow convince Lionsgate to release it on DVD). However, even with a promising title like "Mardi Gras Massacre", this film comes off completely incompetent with no entrainment value what-so-ever, even on an unintentional level.

The simple plot has an rich, high class asshole who goes around flashing cash and asking bartenders and pimps where he can find the most "evil" women. He then proceeds to take these hookers to his secrete chamber where he brutally sacrifices them to his Aztec God while wearing a gold mask. He disposes their bodies on railroad tracks (why I don't know as this seems like a terrible place to "hide" a body) and two bumbling cops somehow can't crack the case despite oodles of evidence pointing them in the right direction.

Die-hard horror fanatics will notice the similarities between this and the plot to Herschell Gordon Lewis's splatter classic "Blood Feast" where a psychopath also sacrifices women to an ancient God. Unlike that film, "Mardi Gras Massacre" lacks any of the campy charm that made "Blood Feast" such a hoot.

Lewis also knew he didn't have enough plot to pad it to a full hour and a half and made it last comfortable hour. Not director Jack Weis as he loads up "Mardi Gras Massacre" with so much filler that I nearly fell asleep on numerous occasions. Each killing is shown in its entirety and by the third time it grows very weary and boring. We also get plenty of filler with him stocking up on footage of disco dancing and cops beating the streets asking pedestrians questions. Mix all that with a low speed chase with a station wagon, shoddy editing, non-acting and boring point-and-shoot directing and your guaranteed a film to cure your insomnia.

There's tons of female flesh present for people that judge a films quality on that aspect alone but "Mardi Gras Massacre" is just a BAD movie, and NOT so BAD it's GOOD. There isn't one aspect of this film that I can recommend, it just plain and simple sucks. I knew I was in trouble when the title card on the film literally had the title painted on a piece of plastic held up in front of the camera complete with shadows of people moving behind it. A sure sign of quality!

What kills me more is that Code Red DVD, one my favorite companies, put so much effort into releasing this hunk of crap. They did a tremendous job transferring the film from its last remaining 1" tape master source (all prints and negatives have been lost). Well I believe all films, including awful one's like "Mardi Gras Massacre", deserve to be preserved in the digital format even for historical context and for that I thank Code Red. I do appreciate them also including a beautiful horror host on the DVD release that bookends the movie which eases the pain of the film experience.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Amityville: Dollhouse (1996) - 1.5/5

Even as a kid seeing "Amityville: Dollhouse" on the rental shelves I knew it was a desperate attempt at continuing the overlong, dying haunted house franchise. I mean really, a fucking dollhouse? After all these years and finally seeing this eighth and final Amityville film into the original franchise run, my original inclination was correct... it sucks.

Like Amityville 4,6 and 7, the plot here is concerned with yet ANOTHER cursed item from the Amityville house. Seriously there are more entries in the series about cursed objects as there are plots that actually take place in the notorious haunted house itself! Like the original film, the story follows a blended family as they move into their newly built dream home. All goes well until they discover a dusty dollhouse in a dilapidated shed. The dollhouse is of course a scaled down model the world's most famous ghost house and it predictably it causes all sorts of ghostly shenanigans.

Out of all the Amityville films this is by far the most hokey and convoluted. Seriously there is so much shit going on here one will have trouble following what the hell is happening. Our father has clairvoyant bad dreams, our mother has sexual thoughts of her step son, our aunt and uncle are occultists who are desperately attempting to save the family and to top it off our youngest son is seeing images of his dead father as a corpse. Mix that with giant rats under the bed, dead wasps crawling into ears and fireplaces that are doorways to alternate dimensions with demons and you have diarrhea that is as explosive as "House II: The Second Story."

All of our actors are equivalent to Lifetime Movie of the week material and all of the characters are downright dislikeable. The father and mother are wishy-washy, the eldest son is the stereotypical asshole jock and the youngest son is the stereotypical brainy ass wipe. I seriously wouldn't have shed a tear if the dollhouse would have buried them all 6 feet deep.

The plot is also full of plot holes big enough to drive a moving truck through. How did the this cursed Amityville dollhouse end up in this shed? The film explains that the father built this new house on the old foundation of a house that burned down. Does this mean he built it on the ruins of the old Amityville house? This still makes no sense as the setting is obviously the southern California desert and NOT East Coast New York. Absolutely nothing is explained and no mention of the previous murders or haunting at Amityville are mentioned.

Director Steve White obviously had a hard-on for the cursed Amityville object plot device as he also served as producer on Amityville 4, 6 and 7. The result of "Amityville 8" proves he should stay out of the director's chair as he seems to have no handle on the bumbled plot and gives the film a forgettable, flat look about it.

"Amityville: Dollhouse" lives up to its ridiculous title as it is a silly, hokey and downright lame horror film and easily the worst of the franchise next to "The Amityville Curse". The directing is flat and the story has far too many subplots for its own good. The simple idea of a haunted dollhouse is laughable and proves the series had nowhere to go and rightfully marked the end of the original franchise run as the original "Amityville Horror" would be remade in 2005.

Written By Eric Reifschneider

Maximum Risk (1996) - 2.5/5

Just the combination of Jean-Claude Van Damme, Natasha Henstridge, and director Ringo Lam should perk any self proclaimed action fan's ears. Throw on top of those elements a story about lost twins and the Russian mafia and this should be B-action movie heaven...too bad it takes itself far too seriously to be the cheesy riot it should have been. Of course it does have some redeeming moments in its play time, but overall it is a rather disappointing action films that sports a talented director playing it very safe.

Alain Moreau (Van Damme) is surprised to find a dead body in Nice, France that looks exactly like him. As it would turn out, its his long lost twin brother who seems to have some serious connections to the Russian mob in America. Determined to find out why his brother was killed and what he was doing in his town, Alain heads to the US only to find an upheaval in the mafia ranks that leave him and his brother's girlfriend (Henstridge) in immense danger...

The let down I felt with "Maximum Risk" is pretty immense. The talent of director Ringo Lam (he even made "Twin Dragons" an entertaining and silly flick despite its horrid script) is put on ice as he seemingly goes through the motions with the film - very much crafting a film for American mainstream audiences. This only adds to the rather mundane quality of how serious the film plays out its ridiculous plot. The bleak look of the film mixed with some rather hit or miss performances (when Van Damme gives one of the stronger performances for the flick you know you are not in good territory - at least not in 1996) doesn't lift the film from its mediocrity either.

Luckily, "Maximum Risk" doesn't lose all of its charm in the watered down style of the film. A reoccurring battle between Van Damme and a massive Russian blond villain is always a blast to watch (with a rather awkwardly awesome fight in a sauna with both only in towels about three-quarters into the film) and many of the action sequences are brutal enough to add to the lacking emotional relevance. How many hands and arms does Van Damme break? Who cares! It's awesome every time! The more the merrier!

In the end my expectations for "Maximum Risk" lead to some hefty disappointment. Ringo Lam seems on cruise control, Van Damme ably kicks some ass but plays it a bit too seriously in his subtlety, and the lacking embrace of the ridiculous plot twists only drag the film down (sans the very outrageous finale in France). Although it has its moments, this is far from being either Lam or Van Damme's best film.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Straw Dogs (2011) - 2.5/5

Here's the deal with "Straw Dogs". It's been decades since I've seen the original one, so I'm going to keep my detail comparisons short and let's be honest...my hopes were rather high up for this one. Unfortunately, the story just didn't translate to a modern setting as well and thusly lost some of the impact it had. Not unlike films like "Let Me In", this just happens to feel like a completely unnecessary remake - and one where the added elements (or lacking elements) didn't really give us the needed jolt to kick it. Leaving us a film that desperately tries to balance being a mainstream thriller and the gray area extremities that made the original one so memorable.

David (Marsden) and Amy (Bosworth) are heading back to her home country of Mississippi so that he can continue writing his newest screenplay. She isn't very happy about the idea considering her ex-boyfriend Charlie (Skarsgard) is going to be rebuilding the roof on the barn and it had taken her a very long time to get out. When tensions rise between the couple and the locals (along with one another) though, its David and Amy who might be the first to crack under the pressure from the local 'straw dogs'...with violent consequences.

The biggest flaw with this modernization of "Straw Dogs" is just how flat it can fall. Despite the blatant use of symbolism in the film (he's writing a screenplay about the siege of Stalingrad, the hunting exercise/rape sequence), some of it seemingly just falls under the spell of being...dare I say it...mundane. For a film that graphically displays the transformation of civilized people into bestial survival, its hard to say it went far enough. It felt like it was trying too hard not to offend people, when that's the extremes they should have gone to...its a modern day so you have to go pretty far to offend folk. So "Straw Dogs" simply doesn't make the cut at the biggest key element to sell the film.

As for execution beyond its plot progressions, I felt like "Straw Dogs" did its job well enough. The casting (which some critics panned it for) didn't really effect me all that much with Marsden earning the froofy man quality nicely and Skarsgard hulks his way across the film with subtle effectiveness. Even the hit or miss Bosworth earned some merit in a few scenes. My biggest issue is that director Lurie just doesn't push it far enough. Marsden doesn't give us the despicable anti-hero at the end we needed (in fact, we sort of root for the extreme violence instead of be shocked by it) and its attempts at being too artsy hindered some of the story telling aspects.

"Straw Dogs" is a fine film, but even as a thriller/home siege film it tends to try to play it too artsy. As for an art film that displays the transformation of man into a surviving mechanism...it plays it too safe. This remake just tries to ride the line too finely and it ends up making both of its sides mediocre. Mostly a film for the curious in the end.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Born To Fight (2004) - 1.5/5

After crafting some very cool stunts in the internationally successful "Ong Bak", stunt coordinator Panna Rittikrai helmed a couple of films in 2004 - one of them being "Born To Fight". Although the sheer amount of stunt work in the film will certainly impress action fans, its hard to say that quantity overcomes quality in this silly action film. Nothing else in the film seems to be well crafted and even the stunt work seems illogically set up for the sake of the stunt and it leaves "Born To Fight" registering nil in the intelligence area.

Deaw (Chupong) just lost his mentor and friend as the two undercover cops busted a massive drug and black market trafficking kingpin. To sooth his sorrows he joins his Tae Kwon Do champion sister on a trip to donate materials and gear to a local village. A local village that just so happens to be the target of a militant group who needs hostages to get their boss out of prison. Deaw and a hodge podge group of skilled athletes must now fight off their captors before they decide to nuke Bangkok (?).

Rittikrai must have a hard on for Cannon Films because "Born To Fight" feels like one of their sub-classic 80s action films. The logic for the plot is missing along with any sort of acting or good writing, but the action is essentially non-stop and high octane. Although most of the stunts are obviously staged and flow through these action sequences is choppy at best, the sheer amount of stunts (with more than enough people flying and bouncing off of vehicles/shacks) is rather impressive. Did I want to see a nonsensical martial arts fight with flaming logs? Not initially, but the idea is pretty legit!

Past the insane amount of writhing bodies and medical costs that this film racks up, "Born To Fight" is about as bad as you can get. Our lead hero is as flat as the boards he uses to beat down baddies with (and about as charming too) and the lacking character work really makes the forced emotional moments, like the crying child over her father's execution in the village, too awkward to work. Not only that, but the progression of the plot is as illogical as its ridiculous stunt work. Why does the nuclear missile miss Bangkok? Why do we have a one legged soccer player doing stunts with his crutch? "Born To Fight" leaves the audience scratching their head in confusion more often than not which only adds to the frustration of its poor storytelling.

Rittikrai shows some knack for cool sequences (even using a fairly cool and long uncut stunt-athon camera shot in the finale - a move he would perfect in choreography with "The Protector"), but the script and piss poor acting of the film undermines anything good that goes for it. The style is used sparingly and the substance is non existent. There are much better Thai action films out there to enjoy. Check out his slightly better work on "Ong Back 2" and "3" instead.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Unjust, The - 3.5/5

There are two reasons that "The Unjust" made my viewing queue. First reason: its a South Korean thriller and its a well known fact that South Korea has been putting out only the best in thrillers at this time. Second reason: its from the director of the stylish and brutal "The City Of Violence". Granted "The Unjust" is a solid thriller, but it is very slow paced one that focuses on subtlety of detail and the gray morality of its characters. One that more often than not succeeds in getting the point across, but can pull teeth in doing so.

Choi Cheol-gi (Jeong-min Hwang) is a police detective who has been desperately trying to work his way to a promotion, but finding his connections in the force hindered by politics. When the government comes down on the force for its lacking results concerning a child serial killer, he is given the chance to find the killer or it all comes down. Now Choi must head off with a well connected prosecutor Joo-yang (Seung-beom Ryu) about this case. And a few pieces of dirt in their past may come up in the process...

Perhaps its because I know very little about the Korean justice system or how it works (seems pretty similar to the US in all honesty), but it was hard for me to delve into "The Unjust". The story can be insanely complicated with a slew of secondary characters and enough plot twists to meld your mind into a knot. On top of that, it requires a very distinct memory for detail to watch how it all comes together. This detail orientation and "anti-hero" characters are enough to turn off much of the main going thriller audience.

That being said now, its also these elements that make "The Unjust" as powerful as it is. If you are willing to look past the blurry lines of good and evil and you are able to keep the details straight then the finale for the film is a one-two punch to the gut. It makes all the difference that you pay as close attention as possible for it to work and when it does - "The Unjust" can be a beast of a film with some very intriguing aspects to it.

"The Unjust" is not for everyone. It's very slow, very detailed, and very character driven. Although director Seung-wan Ryoo's style is still present with some clever shots and energetic moments, this film is very different from "The City Of Violence". The film is very impactful, but only for those willing to put the effort into its complex storytelling.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Incredible Hulk, The (2008)

Director: Louis Leterrier
Notable Cast: Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, Tim Roth, William Hurt

Ironically, "The Incredible Hulk" is the weakest film of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Although still a rather fun romp of larger than life action set pieces and ridiculous visual effects, this reboot of the Hulk character to fit into the story leading up to 2012's "Avengers" feels unfinished more often than not and misses out on some of the needed flow to make it work.

Dr. Bruce Banner (Norton) had an accident when working some gamma radiation for a military contract. A super blast of gamma rays now turns him into an instinctual creature where anger makes physically changes his body into a green monster of super strength and speed. On the run and trying to figure out a cure for his "curse", Banner must confront the military chasing him and return to his lost love (Tyler) to find it.

There are a lot of elements to "The Incredible Hulk" that do work. The special effects are top notch, the casting is more than impressive with particular nods to Norton as our hero and Roth as Abomination - I can do without Liv Tyler in any movie, and Leterrier does some amiable things to keep the film visually arresting. The finale (with a massive Hulk vs. Abomination throw down in the streets and rooftops of New York) is particularly thrilling with its massive destruction and stylish camera play. In a sense, the action and effects of "Incredible Hulk" are easily the highlight of the film.

I also admire the attempts at really building a solid character back story and human experience for Banner and company. 'Attempts' is the key word of that last sentence. Despite some heart felt strategies of love, family, and anger management to give depth to our cast so much of their chemistry is forced and falls flat. Norton and Tyler are rather awkward together and Roth's limited screen time is rushed as it pushes his villainous ways into speedy hyper mode to get it done for the finale. Leterrier knows how to keep it visually stimulating and work style into the action, but seemingly seems inept at making the emotional relevance hit home.

Generally speaking, "The Incredible Hulk" puts so much stress on a rather weakly executed character development that the film just struggles to put its story to bed. It's blatantly obvious that it was meant to be the first of its own franchise (with suggestions that a sequel will unfold after "The Avengers" hits) and the film leaves far too many questions unanswered in the forefront. Of course the film does succeed at being fun and stylish, but its lacking heartstrings and "partial story" plot progression hurt it far more than action and big monsters fighting could heal.

On the plus side: it's plenty better than "Hulk", but that's not saying much.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Mummy Returns, The (2001)

When a blockbuster action/adventure film on the scale of The Mummy succeeds, the eventual sequel needs to top it. In many ways, The Mummy Returns does this. The action is more epic. The plot is more epic. The characters more epic. Yet, the one element it doesn't top the original one with is the most important one. Quality. Although its a fun film, The Mummy Returns simply forces it all to work together and the chemistry that made the original one work so well is abruptly missing.

The O'Connell's Rick (Fraser) and Evey (Weisz) with new young son Alex (Boath) are on their latest adventure searching for the Bracelet Of Anubis that holds the key to discovering a lost oasis and a hidden myth of The Scorpion King (The Rock). Unknown to them, a group of villainous characters including a resurrected Anck-su-namun are bound to bring back Imhotep (Vosloo) to take the bracelet and kill The Scorpion King gaining control of the Army Of Anubis. Now its a race to a lost oasis to see who will take control of the army and save the world.

Call it epic, because that's what the plot to The Mummy Returns is. So epic in fact that director/writer Sommers and company decide to completely leave logic buried with its head in the sand. Why is Anck-su-namun reincarnated? Why is there suddenly all of this talk about past lives and Evey's now a ninja when it comes to fighting? Why is there a fucking blimp and a gold toothed lackey with no screen time? Half of the stuff just seems jammed into the film for the sake of making it look and feel epic. Rather haphazardly might I add.

Now to the film's benefit, it is a riot to watch. It's over the top and ridiculous to the point of insanity with some of its nonsensical plot turns, but fun nonetheless if you check your intelligence at the door. The movie plays up the special effects to its fullest throwing in a massive army of dog headed soldiers of the underworld, a double decker bus chase sequence with decaying mummies, a massive water way run for survival, and a finale where the Rock has his CGI face planted on a giant scorpion monster. Unfortunately, these special effects are give or take with some of them rocking (our bus chase highlights the film) and some of them sucking (The Rock Monster is atrocious) even if the action sequences are solid enough.

This is all scattered with forced chemistry from the cast. Fraser and Weisz have their moments, but damn this movie lacks the charm that made the first one work like it did. Our villain is rarely frightening (in the case of The Rock-trocity at the end - they are hilarious!) and the one horror aspect of the film is a silly killer mummy monkey slaughter. Yeah. Killer mummy monkey slaughter. With blow guns included. It's ridiculous. The heroes aren't as heroic and the villains not as evil. Not good for a movie about 'good vs evil'. It tends to detract from the B-movie fun instead of add to it.

The cast seems off, the humor is forced, and the epic story requires a bit of a lowered IQ to really enjoy. There is an enjoyment to its low brow adventure stereotypes, but its something where one has to turn off the thinking cap to really grab onto it. Kill me, but I enjoy The Mummy Returns just a smidge for its ridiculousness even if its nothing compared to the first entry.

Written By Matt Reifschneider

Wrong Turn 4: Bloody Beginnings (2011) - 1/5

After a leap of ridiculousness (and awesomeness) that was "Wrong Turn 2", this franchise sank quickly. The third entry was pretty abysmal itself and the returning director for this fourth film (technically a prequel) certainly didn't have my hopes up. Turns out this franchise took a 'wrong turn' with this one leaving it stranded as the worst one yet with its cliche and uninspired story and low end execution.

A group of young college students in 2003 go to head to a cabin in the West Virginia woods for a winter break on their snow mobiles. When a massive storm derails their trip, they find themselves staying in an abandoned mental hospital that just so happens to be escape place of three inbred and very vicious cannibal men...

The snowy abandoned hospital setting is (pretty much) the only thing about "Wrong Turn 4" worth its weight in film. Yes, the idea is rather basic when boiled down to its bones - abandoned building with horny college students terrorized by sadistic killers - but I'll give "Wrong Turn 4" credit for using the snowy setting as we don't get to see that often enough.

Unfortunately, when snow is the most unique element of a film...it's looking as bleak as the winter weather. Beyond the setting, "Wrong Turn 4" lacks in every element. The characters are unmemorable, poorly acted, and cut-out thin, the directing is simply par and fails to utilize the potential of many elements, and the kills within the plot as by-the-numbers as possible. The plot simply is so basic that it invests no interest from the audience to the well being of characters.

Our now recognizable villains of the franchise are also poorly used. The distinct characteristics of each (which is so very stressed in the opening sequence where we see them as youth escaping from their imprisonment) are never revisited and their killing acts are borderline knee-slappingly funny in their oddity. Barb wire noose? I'll go with it I guess. Giant drill? Oh so much more could have been done with that. At this point, the franchise should be giving these inbred hillbillies more of a challenge with their prey and a bit more distinction to raise them to the level of classics like Freddy or Jason. "Wrong Turn 4" does not do that at all.

The point of "Wrong Turn 4" simply goes through the motions. Never deviates too far and never invests enough into the audience. It's a slasher by the numbers at its core and does nothing to give it anything memorable. Although I will continue to follow the franchise (...that's the franchise whore in me), its discouraging to see the dive-bomb in quality for this fourth entry. Oh well. Let bygones be inbred cannibals. Here's to a relapse of quality for "Wrong Turn 5"!

Written By Matt Reifschneider