Killers 2: The Beast

When I hear or read of an Asylum movie sequel, I immediately think considering The Asylum's notoriously bad reputation that this is not going to be good. Imagine my surprise when I found myself enjoying Killers 2. It is not perfect, a few of the fight scenes are poorly choreographed and shot, some of the humour felt out of place considering the scenario, Steven Glinn's character is unbearably obnoxious and the cat fight shower scene between the "hot girls" added nothing to the story other than to perhaps bring some conflict between a prominent Asylum movie cliché. However, generally Killers 2 is crisp and clean, with more subtle lighting tricks and less claustrophobic-feeling photography and more of a sense of confinement. The scene where the lead character literally loses it is wonderfully surreal. The direction is generally good, a big improvement over the execrable Scarecrow Slayer, the confinement is menacing, some of the film has a sense of intimacy and while there is atmosphere it was a good idea to have it as like a stark atmosphere rather than the in-your-face sort that you get a lot. Apart from some misplaced humour, the script is vibrantly sharp and brutally shocking, while the story never bored me, didn't feel too predictable or implausible and most of all it was suspenseful and had a frightening intensity to it. The characters on the most part are types of characters that we see a lot from time to time, but a big attempt is made to make them have more than one sides to their personality instead of being one-sided and annoying. Only Steven Glinn's character belongs in the latter category, so much so you actually long for his depth. The acting I was also surprised by, Kim Little is unbelievably good in the lead, entirely believable as delicate, desperate, dangerous and deceptive. DC Douglas is frighteningly confident in his arrogance, while Melissa Renee Martin's brief appearance is quite a scene stealer. All in all, enjoyable and for The Asylum I found it a decent movie. 6/10 Bethany Cox

Almost inconceivable that the atrocious 'Killers' would spawn a sequel, and yet here we are, saddled with this abomination that's actually worse than the original. Little returns as the surviving female character from the first film, now institutionalised following those events, and still being pursued by a gang of assassins for no apparent reason.

Along with other patients, she masterminds an escape before the shock treatment is administered and they all forget what they're running from - up and down florescent lit hallways with panda eye makeup, using any implement available to defend themselves against another gang of armed thugs.

Like the first film (which is heavily sampled to pad out this nonsense) there's a misguided attempt at creating some sort of deep allegory, no plot nor adjacent storyline, just a mindless killing spree without explanation nor substance. How this film got made is a bigger mystery though, it's barely an outline of hide & seek in a series of long corridors where Little encounters her pursuers, incurs a few scratches then routinely dispatches the assailants in a virtual repeat of the first flop, just a different setting.

Killers (1997) was infamous film company The Asylums very first movie and was met with absolute hatred. Presently it sits with an outstanding 1.9 on IMDB, that's really quite the accomplishment.

So it's quite shocking that such a movie got a sequel 5 years later, and it's about on the same level. Now I didn't hate the original like most, but alike this it was still pretty bad.

Killers 2 followers directly on from the events of the previous film. Our one single survivor is now in a mental institute and believes that killers are still out to get her. Is she right? Or is she entirely crazy and in the right place?

I'm impressed they followed on from the previous movie so well. Sadly I'm not impressed by the movie itself, it's flat and uninteresting.

If you liked the first you might get a kick out of this, otherwise treat it like everything else that The Asylum creates and give it a wide berth.

The Good:

Follows on nicely

The Bad:

More lifeless poorly made nonsense

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

The two cover artworks are more interesting than the two movies

Basically, we have a movie that didn't live up to its potential.

This film's crew clearly included a talented DP and makeup artist, yet the same cannot be said for the director or editor (who are incontrovertibly more important towards a film's success).

There were a few nuggets of good writing and good visuals scattered throughout the movie, but the bulk was simply lacking. There are a lot of failed attempted at humor, failed attempts at action, and failed attempts at characterization. Occasionally we're intrigued, occasionally we're excited, and occasionally we're even somewhat impressed, but usually we're bored or rolling our eyes. The end result is a thoroughly mediocre experience.