ads

Slider[Style1]

Style2






(Review originally written at 26 June 2009)

This is a rather late straight-to-video sequel to the Stan Winston movie "Pumpkinhead" from 1988, that wasn't even a big commercial success in the first place. The first movie already wasn't too great but this movie also adds very little and can hardly be called an improvement.

It's really not an exciting or interesting movie to watch. The movie doesn't know to build up well and it doesn't seem to be able to handle its horror. Of course it also isn't being helped much by its story that provides very little originality. It's a movie that got made without too much imagination and true creativity. Even the good looking monster comes across as often being ridicules, mainly because he too often gets featured too prominently.

The story fills the movie with some uninteresting characters and the movie is perhaps also missing a true, good main character. Also none of the actors really impress within their roles, which can be expected of course from a straight-to-video horror-flick. But its main-story remains really the main reason though that the movie never truly works out the way it's supposed to. It's formulaic, uninteresting and just dragging too much in parts because it doesn't seem to be able to make choices.

It's still a rather good looking movie. It at least doesn't have a cheap B-movie look over it and the movie does feature some gore, however not really enough to please the average genre fan.

It's easily a sequel and genre movie that you can do without.

4/10

Watch trailer

About Frank Veenstra

Watches movies...writes about them...and that's it for now.
«
Next
Newer Post
»
Previous
Older Post

No comments:

Post a Comment


Top