For those of you who have read my review of the original, you know how much I despised it. It just was not good at all. Any horror film that wastes Robert Englund cannot be good. well, I was surprised to find that I enjoyed this one more than the original...but that still doesn't mean that this one was good by any means.
Acting/characters: Third-age slasher film stereotypes. however there were definitely a few moments that were actually well done. They were few and far between but they were there for sure. It shows that even with a cheap slasher sequel that good acting can happen...it just doesn't. I would love to have seen that kind of acting throughout the film. But on the whole the characters were unbelievable, cardboard cut-outs. I have never met anyone like these characters and thus, I see no reason to care if they live or die at all. I can't imagine anyone else caring either. They could be robots for all we know...wait...I may have figured it out!!! 1.5/10
Plot: it is the same plot as the original film...or at least, it says that it is. A killer kills using urban legends as his M.O. I gotta do a bit of a spoiler here and say that that doesn't really happen in this film more than once. it has the feel of a generic slasher film and you kinda get bored after not too long. It doesn't even try to make its kills creative. I mean, it just does not try at all. That's the one thing that is often a saving grace of films like this and it doesn't even have that. Or an interesting killer. But i do have to give it credit because it did have some good laughs that were ACTUALLY INTENTIONAL. I'm not talking huge laughs here but it did have moments (brief moments mind you) where I thought "okay, that was funny." But it was overall an uninteresting, underdeveloped, and boring plot. 1.5/10
Screenplay: There is a dialogue scene between two characters in the film. They are driving around just talking to each other. Man, my ears almost fused themselves shut just so I wouldn't have to hear the 'fingernails on chalkboard' quality dialogue anymore. It had absolutely not quality to it in the least. I just sat there thinking "who wrote this and have they ever had a conversation with a normal human being before?" The rest of the dialogue was just as bad as the car scene. it was just horrible. But once again, a few intentional laughs gave this film a few good moments. 1/10
Likableness: Not much really. It didn't have creative kills, it didn't have a good killer, it didn't have a good motive, it was thrown together and had no value to it whatsoever. Its like they didn't even try. Plus, look at the poster, do you notice that that poster layout (main cast looking blankly forward while the killer is somewhere on the poster as well) is the same layout as a ton of other slashers from this era? And guess who did it first? SCREAM! Just like everything else in this age. This is a film that I would suggest to nobody. You've probably seen this film already. it has a dozen other films just like it. 1.5/10
Final score: 4/40 10% (S)
Tomatometer rating: 9%
Tomatometer rating if my review was added: 9%
TRIVIA TIME: 1. The snow storm seen in the film was completely unexpected.
2. A picture of Professor Solomon's parents is seen on his desk. The picture is actually of John Ottman's parents.