Category: 2010’s

Directed by Rene Perez [Other horror films: The Dead and the Damned (2011), Demon Hunter (2012), Alien Showdown: The Day the Old West Stood Still (2013), The Snow Queen (2013), The Dead the Damned and the Darkness (2014), The Burning Dead (2015), Playing with Dolls: Bloodlust (2016), Little Red Riding Hood (2016), The Obsidian Curse (2016), Playing with Dolls: Havoc (2017), From Hell to the Wild West (2017), The Dead and the Damned 3: Ravaged (2018), Cabal (2020), Cry Havoc (2020), Legend of Hawes (2022), The Vampire and the Vigilante (2024)]

I’ve known about Playing with Dolls for a long time, and because of the little I knew about it, I avoided it. Well, after seeing it, I wish I had kept avoiding it, as it really is quite awful.

To be sure, the movie is not without it’s strong points. The killer, for instance, uses a sledgehammer to kill two people, and that was sort of fun. Uh, perhaps Natasha Blasick had a few moments in which she was quite attractive. Um, the trees were nice?

Okay, there’s not many strong points, and on the flip-side, a whole lotta negative ones. For instance, it seems that little really happens for the first hour of the film. Sure, we get the set-up, but once Blasick’s character is at the cabin, we get nothing for forty minutes save “creepy” scenes of her being followed and watched while not knowing it. It was just tedious and often boring, in my view.

I don’t want to harp on the performances. It’s true that I found pretty much everyone’s acting stilted, including Natasha Blasick (Death of Evil), but I don’t really blame them for it. The story was pretty damn bare-bones, so it’s not like any of these people had much to work with. Blasick looked cute now and again, which was something. David A. Lockhart (The Dead and the Damned) seemed rather weak, but again, I’m hesitant to blame him. Richard Tyson (The Fear Chamber, Flight of the Living Dead, Big Bad Wolf) literally had no character, but boy, was he great at staring at a computer screen menacingly.

There’s also not a real ending here. Sure, where things leave off with Blasick’s character, we’ve seen before, and that’s all well and good, but what happens to Lockhart’s character? What happens to the killer? We literally have no idea. I would hope that this is picked up immediately in the following film, being Playing with Dolls: Bloodlust, but given the quality of the story, I wouldn’t be surprised if it wasn’t.

All-in-all, Playing with Dolls (or, as an alternative title, Metalface, which is the God-awful title I saw this under on Tubi) was pretty bad. When it wasn’t dull af, it was beyond mediocre, and the lack of story doesn’t do this one any wonders. It’s not like the kills make up for that either, which is all the more disappointing.

I wasn’t surprised that this movie didn’t do much for me. Perhaps some out there would enjoy something about it, but it was just terribly bare-bones, in my view, and not at all my type of thing.

3/10

Directed by Lin Oeding [Other horror films: N/A]

I need to preface this review with something personal – I’m writing this on January 20th, 2023. God knows when it’ll be posted, but that’s when this is being written. My mother died December 30th, 2022, and this is the first horror film I’ve seen since her death. I wanted to say that as to frame this review in proper context.

With that depressing sentiment out of the way, I can say that Office Uprising is a movie I had mild hope for – it has a decent score on IMDb (5.7/10 with 17,700 votes), and I thought that was optimistic. Unfortunately, more than anything, I found this a rather generic experience, and I’d be flat-out flabbergasted if I ever get the urge to sit through this again.

Not that Office Uprising is a particularly bad movie. It’s just generic. Think Zombieland, or perhaps even Cooties, with less soul. Zombie comedies aren’t easy to master, and I’m not the biggest zombie fan anyway, so this really isn’t my cup of tea. I can say that I was able to watch this alongside a friend on Discord, so at least that helped a bit.

The movie does look nice. There’s a definite sign of high production value behind this. There was even a scene transition that I found somewhat cool. Sadly, though, if a movie doesn’t feel as though it has soul, these positive aspects don’t lend a whole lot to the overall product. And I’m not saying that those involved didn’t put their hearts into this, of course – I can’t know that. I can just say that the story here felt generic and lifeless, with dashes of ridiculousness (that robot suit groan), and it wasn’t my vibe.

Brenton Thwaites (Ghosts of War, Oculus, along with playing Dick Grayson in Titans) didn’t do much for me. I mean, his character wasn’t bad, but it just felt, again, generic. His love interest, played by Jane Levy (Don’t Breathe, Evil Dead) didn’t really have that much of interest to do, and the pacifist character played by Karan Soni (Creep 2, Corporate Animals) just felt like an overlong gag.

A few others did make an impression, though, such as Zachary Levi (Blood Fest), who had some amusing lines (such as his dialogue about the correct usages of both “i.e.” and “e.g.”), and generally had a decent presence, along with Ian Harding, who appeared only a few times, but was okay. Gregg Henry (Bates Motel, Just Before Dawn) felt somewhat lifeless, Kurt Fuller (The Wolves of Savin Hill) felt pointless, and Sam Daly, despite being the son of a personal favorite (Tim Daly), didn’t add much either.

As far as the special effects go, they were fine, in an overly-stylized and Hollywood way. Honestly, while I didn’t find The Belko Experiment great, if you want a horror film of quality that takes place in an office building, I’d likely point people that way. Still, the effects here were okay, but it’s a zombie comedy – someone crushes a soda can and turns it into a ninja-star type thing, and decapitates someone with it. It’s just too silly for me, and even when it wasn’t, too stylized.

Oh, and another thing I didn’t dig at all – these zombies. Because when I say ‘zombies,’ I don’t mean the walking dead people might expect from 28 Days Later…, Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, or The Plague of the Zombies. Those infected here have increased rage (and strength, of course), but are capable of holding conversations, harboring grudges, and retaining other personality traits that you’d associate with, well, people with personality. These zombies are far too human-like and coordinated for me, which I couldn’t get into whatsoever.

For plenty of reasons, Office Uprising didn’t hold up it’s end of the bargain. A few scenes entertained me, a few pieces of dialogue were amusing, but in general, I was woefully unimpressed with a lot of this, and while Office Uprising might work for some people, as far as a zombie comedy goes, I can think of plenty of other films I’d prefer to spend time with, and while I don’t have a strong view on the Stegosaurus, I have a feeling examining their bones would be of more interest than watching this one again.

5/10

Directed by Joey Stewart [Other horror films: N/A]

It’s been some time since I’ve last seen this one – if I had to guess, likely around 10 years. I remember enjoying The Final when I did see it, though, so I was definitely interested in revisiting it with fresh eyes.

I do think it’s a decent movie, though I also think it’s fair to say that it’s not particularly special in many ways. While I remembered the movie as violent, the gore here strikes me as somewhat tepid, and while the general plot is okay, a few elements aren’t touched on enough (such as the identity of some others involved in the revenge plot of the main characters).

And on that note, let’s get into the plot – a group of bullied kids decide to fight back against those who have bullied them for years. They get them together, drug them, and begin to torture them, both mentally and physically. Before that, we see snippets of their encounters with these bullies, along with a little bit of their home life.

Now, before I make any judgments, I should say that I was never really bullied in high school. I could have been – I was the quiet, wallflower type, with a speech impediment to boot – but I wasn’t, which I am grateful for. That said, I do feel a deep sympathy with the main characters here, and while their vengeance is questionable, I can’t pretend that the stereotypical jocks and pretty girls got much in the way of pity from me.

Even so, though, the movie is pretty tame. Sure, there are a few violent sequences, such as someone getting paralyzed and then stabbed with acupuncture needles, someone getting a couple of fingers cut off, a girl getting her face eaten off by acid. Violent, sure, but the focus isn’t the gore at all, so though there are some disturbing scenes in concept, it’s really not that hard to watch at all.

I also wish we got a bit more characterization for all involved, bullies and bullied alike. I do like the little bit we get from both Vincent Silochan and Eric Isenhowers’ home lives, and what little we get from Lindsay Seidel’s background was decent too. Even so, almost all of the bullies here felt stereotypical, and while I understand the point, it was sometimes hard to take them seriously.

When it comes to performances, I do think that the three I’ve mentioned, being Vincent Silochan, Eric Isenhowers, and Lindsay Seidel, do the best. It’s true that we don’t get a whole lot from Isenhowers’ character, insofar as personality is concerned, but he had a cool look to him, and his banjo picking was classy. Travis Tedford didn’t really make much of an impression, and while Marc Donato (Haunted High, Bad Kids Go to Hell) had some strong moments, he got a bit preachy for me. Otherwise, the only other performance really worth mentioning is Jascha Washington, and it’s not even that his character was that great, but it was nice to see a character who we can actually root for without feeling bad.

I think, though, that the movie’s decent even without the best characterization. True, the opening scene struck me as somewhat pointless (reminding me a bit of Terrifier’s opening), and I’d have liked a bit more focus on the others helping with the revenge scheme (which, according to IMDb trivia, was planned, but the scenes were later cut, leaving only a reference or two to their identities), but it’s still a pretty painless movie.

It’s not necessarily great at all, but it’s not a bad time to spend an hour and a half. It might be a smidge above average, but it’s close – either way, The Final’s not something I think would blow anyone away, but it can be an okay time.

7.5/10

Directed by Misty Talley [Other horror films: Zombie Shark (2015), Ozark Sharks (2016), Santa Jaws (2018)]

I’ve seen Mississippi River Sharks once before, and it’s a movie I doubt I’ll watch again. It’s not exactly terrible – while terrible Syfy shark movies do exist, most can usually be entertaining – it just lacks anything that really allows it to stand out. That, coupled with both atrocious CGI sharks and a bothersome character, makes it so this one just isn’t really worth that much.

The story is pretty much like every other atrocious shark movie, only there’s not much here that’s that memorable. Trailer Park Shark was worse than this one, but at least that had character (albeit awful character). Swamp Shark was more stable than this, and Jersey Shore Shark Attack, while still a worse movie, had personality of it’s own. I didn’t really get that sense from this one, and it’s not a Syfy original that I think will be all that memorable.

Naturally, the special effects are terrible. I mean, just terrible. The sharks look shit, the kills are shit, everything is just awful in this movie as far as the effects go. It’s nothing new – when it comes to awful CGI in movies, who do you trust more than Syfy? – but it’d be nice to see Syfy actually try when they make a shark film, as opposed ot make it look as terrible as possible for the lulz, which I imagine has been their business plan since 2-Headed Shark Attack came out.

Cassie Steele (The Dorm) made a fair lead, and reminded me of Jordan Hinson’s character in Ragin Cajun Redneck Gators (only better, as I liked where Steele’s story went). Tahj Vaughans (Backwoods) was largely inoffensive, but didn’t really add that much. On the other hand, Dean J. West, whose character was almost entirely there for ‘comedic effect,’ got real old with his hero worship act of Jason London really quick. London (Sutures, Greed, The Rage: Carrie 2) himself was a bit annoying, playing a generic actor from a string of bad shark movies (sound familiar?), and didn’t work with me.

Others who were at least decent include Miles Doleac (the guy who directed the pretentiously annoying The Dinner Party), Marco St. John, and Jeff Pearson (The Inherited). I wish that Doleac had more to do throughout the movie, but his character was one of the few straight ones. St. John was over-the-top ridiculous, but in a fun way, unlike both London and West. Admittedly, Jeff Pearson’s character never had a lot to do, but his straight-laced nature spoke to me.

Overall, though, Mississippi River Sharks doesn’t have that much to offer. Sure, it’s marginally better than some Syfy shark movies, but it’s still not great, and it doesn’t feel special, or noticeable, in any way whatsoever. Definitely a below average film, and not one that I think I’ll visit a third time.

5/10

Directed by Philip Adrian Booth [Other horror films: Death Tunnel (2005), ShadowBox (2005), DarkPlace (2007), Children of the Grave (2007), Ghouls Gone Wild (2008), The Possessed (2009), The Haunted Boy: The Secret Diary of the Exorcist (2010), Soul Catcher (2011), Children of the Grave 2 (2012), The Exorcist File (2014), The Attached (2023)]

Dead Still isn’t a movie I want to spend a lot of time on. I found it absolutely abysmal the first time I saw it, and time hasn’t been overly kind to it. It’s one of those movies in which it’s hard to put into words exactly why I despise it, but the dislike is indeed real, and based on how terrible this movie is, I imagine the feeling is mutual.

The basic plot – a camera used for death photography (taking pictures of dead bodies, apparently a thing back in the olden days) is discovered by a descendant, and things happen – could have been okay, but it wasn’t because the movie sucked.

To elaborate, I just didn’t get it – the souls of spirits are caught in the Negative World, and have been since they were originally photographed, but apparently mean no harm toward the person who trapped them there, one Wenton Davis (played by Ray Wise), but once a live kid (not the only live person, because a little girl who died is also alive apparently) gets there, things happen.

If someone is photographed by this old camera, they die a couple of days later. But that’s not all – even if someone has been nowhere near the camera, the ghost trapped in the camera can leave the camera to possess someone to self-mutilate themselves, and there’s a cult watching a house but the cult only has one member and that member has an ancestor who is dead but also alive and cameras and sacrifice and the worst ending I’ve seen in my life.

Dead Still is shit.

And even after I watched it the first time, I was curious as to why. I’ve not touched on the meta reasons it’s shit – I will, don’t worry – but this film was directed by Philip Adrian Booth. I didn’t know at the time I first watched Dead Still that Booth was the same director behind Death Tunnel, which was another amazingly bad film that I couldn’t believe was as atrocious as it was. After I found out that the same guy behind Death Tunnel was behind Dead Still, everything fell into place.

See, as terrible as the story is, the technique is worse. I’m not a behind-the-scenes guy. I can’t describe filming techniques or properly use filming terminology. What I can say is that many of the scenes here feel like they’re from a ‘scary’ music video – they quickly flash on the screen with no context, and the editing too is shit, also in a way I can’t describe. Actually, if you’re a director, or editor, or have some movie-making ambitions, watch this movie and tell me what went wrong – even if I never find it, it’s worth seeing how not to make a movie.

Ben Browder (Bad Kids Go to Hell, Hoax) isn’t a good lead. Ray Wise (Dead End, Jeepers Creepers 2, The Butterfly Room) was hammy, so at least he was having fun. Eric Ruff was terrible. Elle LaMont (Mercy Black, The Devil’s Gravestone) was sort of hot, but also not great. I felt quite bad for Gavin Casalegno, as he was only a kid, and he didn’t deserve this.

The performances don’t matter. No performance in the history of mankind could make a movie with this story and this editing worth watching. I’ll give Dead Still props for it’s gore, but I’ll take them all away for two reasons:

1. The finale was about 15 seconds long. It showed that, despite destroying the evil, that the evil wasn’t destroyed, and was still able to possess people.
2. Apparently, this was ‘based on a true story.’ Show me one piece of evidence that a ghost/spirit was trapped in a camera and was able to possess and kill people and I will give this movie a 10/10 and publically apologize for giving it the rating it deserves. Cameras do exist, but that’s as true as this movie gets.

I was going to give this points for a scene toward the end – not exactly a twist, or at least not a good twist, but an almost okay scene – but this movie just pisses me off. It gets nothing. It loses. GOOD DAY, SIR!

0/10

Directed by Griff Furst [Other horror films: I Am Omega (2007), Wolvesbayne (2009), 30 Days to Die (2009), Lake Placid 3 (2010), Maskerade (2011), Swamp Shark (2011), Arachnoquake (2012), Ragin Cajun Redneck Gators (2013), Starve (2014), Cold Moon (2016), Trailer Park Shark (2017), Nightmare Shark (2018)]

Well, I thought, as I set this movie to record on my DVR, that Ghost Shark would be a bad movie, but hopefully an entertaining one. And because I’m what people call a genius (or a conceited dick, depending on your point of view), I was pretty close to the mark.

In plenty of aspects, Ghost Shark is laughably bad. The special effects were awful across the board, few of the characters really felt like they had character, the kills were as atrocious as one could imagine, and the story? Well, ludicrous may be the fairest way to describe it.

However, in the depths of atrocity, I can’t deny that Ghost Shark had some charm. Look, I’ve seen a lot of Syfy movies, and a lot of Syfy killer animal movies (be it sharks, alligators, Bering Sea Beasts, what-have-you) and some of them can get mighty repetitive. The 2-Headed Shark Attack series was awful throughout. So when I see something that feels different, even if it’s not executed well, I’m at least minorly pleased.

A good example of this would be Nightmare Shark, which, while certainly flawed, held a potential that few Syfy shark movies held before, and that’s because it was at least different and new, no matter how poor aspects of the execution were. Ghost Shark is nowhere near that level, but it is a bit fresher than plenty of other Syfy films I could name. It’s not lost on me, on a side-note, that these two films have the same director.

The story is awful – a shark gets killed, but before it dies, it winds up in a cave that resurrects those who died there as spirits. Which means, you guessed it, a Ghost Shark. It’s splendid, sure, and the ghostly shark effects are as awful as you can imagine. Not only that, but when it bites people in half, or splits them open from the inside (more on that soon), or gnaws someone’s fingers off, the special effects are absolutely shit.

Wherein lies the entertainment, you might ask? Well, normal Syfy shark movies, even sharks of the multi-headed or Atomic variety, are restrained by their physical being. They’re a physical thing, and as such, can’t go where sharks can’t usually go, unless they use their multiple heads to walk along the sand (God, 5-Headed Shark Attack was such trash).

Naturally, when a shark is instead a spirit, that frees it up a bit. Now it can pop up anywhere water may be. Ah, but not just salt water, which wouldn’t make sense anyway, but fresh water too. Basically, if it’s a source of water, the shark spirit could appear and consume you.

It’s hard to say what the best scene is. Well, perhaps not – a character grabs a plastic cup and fills it with water from a water dispenser. But before he filled the cup, the shark appeared in the tank and got poured into the cup. When the character drinks it, it doesn’t take long until the shark spirit literally splits him in half, emerging the victorious shark spirit that it is.

That’s probably the best scene, and there’s not much competition. True, the shark does appear in at a pool party, it appears as children are playing at a broken fire hydrant, it appears from the puddles caused by fire extinguishers, it appeared as some kids played on a Slip ‘N Slide, it even appeared in a bathtub (shame the character in question didn’t have a lifeguard nearby amiright?). It’s ridiculous and stupid, especially when it can jump from any puddle, or materialise mid-air when it’s raining, but compared to the repetitive nature of so many other shark films, it’s almost a welcomed alteration.

As aforementioned, none of the characters have much character. It’s true that Richard Moll (House, Headless Horseman, Night Train to Terror, Ragewar) had some strong moments, but the script didn’t do him any favors. Thomas Francis Murphy (Ozark Sharks, Sisters of the Plague, Ragin Cajun Redneck Gators) and Lucky Johnson seemed like pure filler, and neither Brooke Hurring nor Shawn C. Phillips (Haunted High) sticks around long enough to leave an impression.

Dave Davis (Ozark Sharks, The Vigil, American Horror House) didn’t seem to have a personality, which I found interesting, and Jaren Mitchell (End Trip) was a mixed bag. I didn’t think that Mackenzie Rosman (Beneath, Nightcomer) did too bad, and though far from stellar, Sloane Coe (Zombie Shark, SnakeHead Swamp) was at least fun.

Which, as terrible as portions of this film were, is a fair description of the film. It can be fun. Awful, yes, but fun. I still think Ghost Shark is far below average, but I’d definitely recommend it over plenty of other Syfy shark attempts, for whatever that might be worth.

5/10

Directed by Scott Spiegel [Other horror films: Intruder (1989), From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money (1999)]

Hostel has never been a film I considered amazing, but it’s a pretty solid film. Hostel: Part II is even better. It’s just a damn shame that Hostel: Part III is such shit.

My primary issue – actually, scratch that. I have more than one main issue, which is obviously problematic. Among them being the location switch, organization set-up, deaths, and ending.

In this film, they switched locations from Slovakia to Las Vegas, Nevada. It’s not a super gritty, dilapidated factory anymore – it’s a clean-cut room of torture with implements laid out and spaced beautifully. It doesn’t have anywhere near the atmosphere of grittiness that the Slovakia setting held, and it’s hard to take seriously.

It’s also hard to take the organization seriously. It’s the Elite Hunting Club, sure, but now it’s not just people who pay huge sums to torture people, it’s VEGAS, BABY!!!!!!!!!!! which means gambling. See, the victims are in a room with a giant glass window so the wealthy can watch them get tortured and killed, all while placing bets on how long it takes and also hoping to spin a Wheel of Misfortune.

If at this point you think this movie is a parody, I couldn’t blame you, but it’s not, God help our souls.

As for the deaths, there’s only one I sort of liked, in which a guy’s face was cut off. It didn’t look great, but it was at least brutal. Otherwise, we had a woman suffocated by cockroaches, a man who got his arm cut off (you could barely see anything, though), a guy shot via shotgun, a guy getting tased to death, a woman shot in the spine, a guy who was stabbed. There’s very little in the way of torture in this film, and though the first Hostel didn’t feature a ton of gore, it was so much better than this amateur hour.

Oh, it also did that thing I really, really, really love, where there’s some bloodshed, but the blood gets on the camera, because that’s so cool it’s like i;m actually there OMG BLOOD>>>>W>E>FW

In all seriousness, fuck that shit, brah.

The ending was terrible. There was a twist. The twist was illogical. I hated it. It sucked as much as the rest of the movie, though, so consistency, AMIRIGHT?????

As for performances, I did like seeing Kip Pardue (Sunshine from Remember the Titans, also in films such as The Wizard of Gore and Stag Night), though the character was pretty bad. It’s the same for most performances, such as the lead Brian Hallisay, and others, such as Chris Coy (Rogue River, The Culling, Deliver Us from Evil), John Hensley (Teeth, Campfire Stories), Skyler Stone, Thomas Kretschmann (2004’s Frankenstein, Dracula 3D, Discarnate, Rohtenburg, Open Grave, The Stendhal Syndrome), and Sarah Habel.

Well, to be fair, Habel’s character is okay, but at the same time, her character amounts to virtually nothing, so it doesn’t come to much.

I’ve seen Hostel: Part III once before, and I didn’t care for it then either (which I can’t imagine comes as a big shock). I wasn’t that hopeful seeing it again would lend any more pleasure, which was a good perspective, as this movie is just as poor as I remember. Pretty much an insult to the first two movies, this just isn’t a sequel I’d ever recommend. I’m sure some out there would have a fine time with it, but that’s deff not me.

4/10

Directed by John Luessenhop [Other horror films: N/A]

It’s been some time since I’ve seen Texas Chainsaw 3D, and I have to admit, time has been kind to it.

Well, moderately speaking anyways. The first time I saw this one, I remember finding it rather unsatisfactory and generic. Perhaps in my old age, I’ve grown a warmer heart, because while this movie does have some big problems (which I will expound on before too long), it’s probably tied for my third-favorite movie in the series.

Following directly from the 1974 classic, and in fact, showing us some choice cuts of that gritty staple of horror, the film shows the aftermath of Sally’s escape, what with police and vigilante hick folk wanting revenge on the savagery of the crimes. The Sawyer family grew considerably from what appeared in the original movie – there’s something like twenty people crammed in that house. Some are played by old hands, such as Gunnar Hansen (who, of course, was the first person to play Leatherface) and Bill Moseley (who played Chop-Top in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2). I didn’t care for how those family members popped out of nowhere, but whateves, it’s dramatic.

Anyhow, one of the babies makes it out of the attack (and I say ‘attack’ because the family, while armed, was willing to give up Leatherface, or Jeb, but before they could, vigilante hick folk decided to redefine ‘justice’), and years later, in what looks like modern-day to this film, say 2012 or 2013, a young woman inherits a house from a previously unknown grandmother, and her and her twenty-something friends – 

Wait.

Now, I was never particularly gifted in mathematics. Truth be told, I was always more a history and English guy. If this character, Heather, was a baby in 1973, in 2012, she would be at least 39. I know that plastic surgery has done a lot for people over the years, but there is absolutely no way that Heather’s character is anywhere close to that. The actress, Alexandra Daddario, would have been 25-26 around the time this was filmed, and if you look at her character and think that she’s almost 40, you’re #wacky.

Some of you out there might think I’m nit-picking, or perhaps suggest that, perhaps, the date of the events of the first movie was just moved up to the mid-1980’s, which wouldn’t be a bad way to get around this. However, we clearly see on police documents and reports that the event happened in September 1973.

That’s a problem. That’s a big problem. That’s a completely avoidable problem. And honestly, that’s just utterly ridiculous. How they didn’t notice this glaring issue when making the movie is beyond me, but it’s one of the biggest issues with the movie.

It’s not the only issue, naturally. This movie is in 3D. Why? Because it probably sells tickets, and more expensive ones, at that. Otherwise, I don’t have a good reason. I don’t believe any of the 3D shots were of any value, and they easily could have not been in 3D and been just as effective. Other movies were doing it at the time; the My Bloody Valentine remake was 3D, as was Saw 3D and The Final Destination. None of them had to be, but capitalism, amiright?????

Perhaps the last of my issues is how they decide to end the film. For most of the movie, Leatherface is the antagonistic force, understandably so. That’s not the case for the final 15 minutes, though. I can’t get into why without giving away spoilers, but I can give you the most cringe quote I’ve heard in years: “Do your thing, Cuz.”

Oh, and there’s a short post-credits scene that’s void of any value, so be warned. I guess some out there might find it funny, but I just found it awful.

Otherwise, the movie’s not that shabby.

Look, I’m a simple man. Give me a character to root for and plenty of dismemberment, and I might have an okay time. Admittedly, likable characters in this film are few and far between, but the gore, 3D or not, was pretty solid. A guy got cut in half with a chainsaw, which was perhaps my favorite scene of the film. Another got attacked and hacked with what looked to be a hatchet. There were scenes of legs and fingers being cut off corpses, a scene of someone going through some mechanical meat grinder thing, another got stabbed with a pitchfork, and naturally, someone was slammed onto a meathook, in classic TCM style.

The gore here was solid, and I definitely appreciated that. For the few likable characters we got (given to us by Alexandra Daddario, Thom Barry, and Richard Riehle), I thought they were of good value. It’s here that I did want to applaud the film for trying something a little different – though I don’t think the execution was that solid, I did like the idea of the power structure of the town becoming the biggest problem toward the end of the movie.

Alexandra Daddario (We Summon the Darkness, Bereavement, Burying the Ex) was decent throughout. Never amazing, and I didn’t care at all where the story took her, but a decent lead all the same. Her friends – played by Trey Songz (apparently some R&B artist I’ve never heard of), Keram Malicki-Sánchez (Cherry Falls), and Tania Raymonde (Deep Blue Sea 3) – were mostly non-entities. Shaun Sipos (The Sandman) also didn’t do that much, and, while nice to see, Marilyn Burns (Sally from The Texas Chain Saw Massacre) didn’t add a whole lot either.

Paul Rae (who I know from the two-part season 4 finale of Criminal Minds) did well with a horrible character. Scott Eastwood was whatever, but it was nice to see familiar faces in both Richard Riehle (Hatchet, Mischief Night) and Ritchie Montgomery (Ragin Cajun Redneck Gators, Trailer Park Shark). I had no issues with Dan Yeager’s Leatherface, and Thom Barry was of good value just because his character was actually pleasant.

It’s obvious that I have some problems with this movie, but I want to state again that, as bad as some of the problems are, I didn’t hate this. It was an okay time. It’s not as good as the original movie, nor do I enjoy it as much as Leatherface: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre Part III, but I definitely enjoyed it more than films like The Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2. It’s likely on par with the 2003 remake – neither that film nor this are stellar, but they can be a good way to spend some time, and get the job done.

6/10