NOTE IMDb
2,2/10
1,2 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueComing back from her bachelor party in Las Vegas, Christine and her friends are driving through the hot desert of Nevada. But they are not alone - serial killer Max Seed is back and he broug... Tout lireComing back from her bachelor party in Las Vegas, Christine and her friends are driving through the hot desert of Nevada. But they are not alone - serial killer Max Seed is back and he brought the whole family.Coming back from her bachelor party in Las Vegas, Christine and her friends are driving through the hot desert of Nevada. But they are not alone - serial killer Max Seed is back and he brought the whole family.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Avis à la une
Normally a sequel to an Uwe Boll movie that isn't directed by Uwe Boll can be counted on to be at least a slight improvement on the original film--but Seed 2: The New Breed is the exception. This movie is so dreadful it actually makes Boll look good, sort of.
Fans of the original Seed, if there are any, will likely be disappointed that this seems to have virtually nothing to do with the original film. Actually, it feels more like an unofficial Hills Have Eyes sequel than a follow up to Seed.
Seed 2: The New Breed appears to have been shot on digital video, really badly. Most of the film looks ugly and over-bright. The acting and dialog are beyond bad. The movie is clearly meant to be transgressive and disturbing (the opening scene involves a gun barrel being shoved between a squealing young woman's thighs) but the movie is simply too incompetent to make an impact beyond inspiring a strong desire to turn it off.
Fans of the original Seed, if there are any, will likely be disappointed that this seems to have virtually nothing to do with the original film. Actually, it feels more like an unofficial Hills Have Eyes sequel than a follow up to Seed.
Seed 2: The New Breed appears to have been shot on digital video, really badly. Most of the film looks ugly and over-bright. The acting and dialog are beyond bad. The movie is clearly meant to be transgressive and disturbing (the opening scene involves a gun barrel being shoved between a squealing young woman's thighs) but the movie is simply too incompetent to make an impact beyond inspiring a strong desire to turn it off.
Let's get one thing straight: I only watched this film out of curiosity. I knew it was going to be bad, but I had seen the first movie by Uwe Boll a while ago and was curious to see how the sequel would turn out. Despite watching this movie with my expectations at almost zero, I still was appalled at how bad a flick this turned out to be. One of the worst movies I've EVER seen, and definitely the worst horror movie I've seen.
The first film's director, Uwe Boll, is notorious for his poor films, which are said by numerous critics to suffer from serious flows in script, directing, acting, etc. This film, although directed by another director named Marcel Walz, does nothing but also fall into this category of Z-movies.
Let's get down to what is actually wrong with the movie: a poorly written script filled with lazy and silly dialogue, effortless directing, wooden acting, infuriatingly amateur cinematography, cheesy and laughable special effects, and, perhaps worst of all, a story that makes little to no sense.
The film attempts a Pulp Fiction-like story structure in which the events of the film are not in chronological order, and therefore leaving it up to the viewer to figure which scene happened when. While this works in Pulp Fiction, it just makes this film confusing and wondering what the heck is going on.
In addition to these flaws, the film is not scary whatsoever, despite a few gross-out gore scenes that attempt to scare, but fail. The only remotely entertaining part of this film is the unintentional laughs that occur occasionally, but these goofs aren't enough to compensate for 90 minutes of boredom and eagerness for an ending.
And let's not forget how little relevance this sequel has in relation to the first movie, showing almost no relation, and even lacking some of the very few decent qualities of the first one, too.
DO NOT WATCH THIS FILM. A sheer waste of time.
The first film's director, Uwe Boll, is notorious for his poor films, which are said by numerous critics to suffer from serious flows in script, directing, acting, etc. This film, although directed by another director named Marcel Walz, does nothing but also fall into this category of Z-movies.
Let's get down to what is actually wrong with the movie: a poorly written script filled with lazy and silly dialogue, effortless directing, wooden acting, infuriatingly amateur cinematography, cheesy and laughable special effects, and, perhaps worst of all, a story that makes little to no sense.
The film attempts a Pulp Fiction-like story structure in which the events of the film are not in chronological order, and therefore leaving it up to the viewer to figure which scene happened when. While this works in Pulp Fiction, it just makes this film confusing and wondering what the heck is going on.
In addition to these flaws, the film is not scary whatsoever, despite a few gross-out gore scenes that attempt to scare, but fail. The only remotely entertaining part of this film is the unintentional laughs that occur occasionally, but these goofs aren't enough to compensate for 90 minutes of boredom and eagerness for an ending.
And let's not forget how little relevance this sequel has in relation to the first movie, showing almost no relation, and even lacking some of the very few decent qualities of the first one, too.
DO NOT WATCH THIS FILM. A sheer waste of time.
I never write reviews but I had to on this one because I am actually a fan of uwe boll's work he has gotten better over the years and can make a half decent movie thesedays, but why did he let his production company or him himself let them make this incoherent garbage it was thrown up all over the place going back and forth for no reason whatsoever the special effects were just lame and the story made no sense whatsoever. At least the first one had a story and was a brutal movie which made you squeamish in the stomach. Avoid this at all costs. Also whoever wrote the positive review of this movie has to of had some part of this movie as no one in their right mind would find anything positive in this movie.
Went to a horror convention and bought t'his flick while the main villain was sitting there, Nick Principe. A really nice guy who was afraid to be caught taking a selfie with me, because you had to pay for pictures with the stars. Have seen a few flicks with him this was one that I really can't say that it was any good.
Strange to see Uwe Boll being used to promote this flick due the fact that many geeks find his flicks utter trash. And this wasn't any good at all. I give you one example. When victims are stabbed by a machete there's really no blood coming out of the wounds. And don't let me go deep into the acting if you could talk of any. Campbell is the one who tear this flick down to ground level. I just don't get it why people are still casting her.
Seed 2 is slow and doesn't have a good story. Nick does his best by not saying anything at all maybe he did know what was going on. Uwe Boll addicts will love this but many will be left with a huh feeling...
Gore 1/5 Nudity 1/5 Effects 1,5/5 Story 1/5 Comedy 0/5
Strange to see Uwe Boll being used to promote this flick due the fact that many geeks find his flicks utter trash. And this wasn't any good at all. I give you one example. When victims are stabbed by a machete there's really no blood coming out of the wounds. And don't let me go deep into the acting if you could talk of any. Campbell is the one who tear this flick down to ground level. I just don't get it why people are still casting her.
Seed 2 is slow and doesn't have a good story. Nick does his best by not saying anything at all maybe he did know what was going on. Uwe Boll addicts will love this but many will be left with a huh feeling...
Gore 1/5 Nudity 1/5 Effects 1,5/5 Story 1/5 Comedy 0/5
Granted, I haven't seen the first "Seed" movie, so I have no clue whether or not this sequel lives up to the first movie. But given the low ratings both part 1 and 2 have scored on IMDb, then I guess the first movie was just as bad as this sequel was.
The storyline was completely pointless, if not utter rubbish. A group of girls are on a roadtrip, when they have to pass through the desert. Coming across a police woman on foot in the middle of the desert, the girls stop and decide to give her a helping hand. But something is very wrong this far out in the desert.
Right... Well, the storyline was fairly straight forward, but towards the end it took a rather unforeseen turn for the worse and it just went downhill so fast. Prior to that, then the movie did bear some resemblance to movies such as "The Hill Have Eyes".
"Seed 2: The New Breed" doesn't really bring anything innovative to the genre. In fact, this is the type of movie that you just shut down your brain while watching, because it requires nothing from the audience.
The acting in the movie was good and the camera work was good, and that the the high points of the movie, the rest was just a waste of time.
The sound effects were so off the chart that is was just annoying. Someone got shot in the head, and there was a long series of slurp-like sounds. It just didn't make any sense whatsoever.
"Seed 2: The New Breed" tries to be brutal, but it fails in doing so. There is nothing original or innovating about the entire movie. And it becomes a struggle to sit through the entire movie to the very end.
I can't really recommend "Seed 2: The New Breed" to anyone, because it was a waste of time. And now having suffered through it, I can honestly say that I am not even going to bother with part one.
The storyline was completely pointless, if not utter rubbish. A group of girls are on a roadtrip, when they have to pass through the desert. Coming across a police woman on foot in the middle of the desert, the girls stop and decide to give her a helping hand. But something is very wrong this far out in the desert.
Right... Well, the storyline was fairly straight forward, but towards the end it took a rather unforeseen turn for the worse and it just went downhill so fast. Prior to that, then the movie did bear some resemblance to movies such as "The Hill Have Eyes".
"Seed 2: The New Breed" doesn't really bring anything innovative to the genre. In fact, this is the type of movie that you just shut down your brain while watching, because it requires nothing from the audience.
The acting in the movie was good and the camera work was good, and that the the high points of the movie, the rest was just a waste of time.
The sound effects were so off the chart that is was just annoying. Someone got shot in the head, and there was a long series of slurp-like sounds. It just didn't make any sense whatsoever.
"Seed 2: The New Breed" tries to be brutal, but it fails in doing so. There is nothing original or innovating about the entire movie. And it becomes a struggle to sit through the entire movie to the very end.
I can't really recommend "Seed 2: The New Breed" to anyone, because it was a waste of time. And now having suffered through it, I can honestly say that I am not even going to bother with part one.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesAlternatively titled "Blood Valley: Seed's Revenge"
- GaffesThe film takes place in Nevada, however, the officers uniform is an Iowa sheriffs uniform.
- ConnexionsEdited from Seed (2006)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Seed 2?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 200 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée
- 1h 18min(78 min)
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
- 16:9 HD
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant