Urban Legends: Final Cut

A typical 2nd installment in the series. I actually like the 2nd one a little better and I like all the new faces in this movie. It was not scary but a better screenplay then the first. It a slasher movie and a good script to play wih but it was so predicdible. I like Joey Lawrene but not enough screen time and the rest of the cast is going to do other and better films but just take it as it is as horror movie and nothing else. Out of 4 stars I give it 2 1/2 stars.

Urban Legends: Final Cut is a great sequel to Urban Legend. It is not like other horror movies because in the first one, the mask was different, other horror movies have the same masks for all the sequels that they have.

I think that the return of Reese was good because she is able to understand Amy, in what is happening to her, when she realises that something is wrong, because of what happened the last time.

Also, Rebecca Gayheart's return at the end was excellent. I think that was a great surprise. I didn't expect to see Rebecca in the sequel before I knew, she had a cameo appearance. Not all horrors do that either. Even though the killer is different. The killer from the first one is in the second.

Well this movie is great and I hope all of you enjoy it too!

"Urban Legends: Final Cut" is a sequel to the 1998 slasher movie "Urban Legend". The sequel concerns a group of college coeds, primarily lead by aspiring film director Amy Mayfield. Amy is trying to direct a horror film for her latest project, and is striving to be awarded the Hitchock Award from her school. She introduces the idea of a horror film based on urban legends, but after the crew of filmmakers begin to shoot their project, cast and crew members begin to disappear one by one. The more of the film that is shot, the more students begin to die. Who is responsible for the killing? Could it be Travis' twin brother Trevor? Or could it be someone else? Who knows? Who cares?

The original "Urban Legend" wasn't Oscar worthy but it had a semi-original story, some horror clichés tossed in. But for the most part, it was a decent slasher film. This follow-up is nowhere near the first film. The story was somewhat weak, and it was as clichéd as could be - bumps in the dark, eerie shadows, a misrepresenting interlude, and a killer who can appear out of thin air. The ending wasn't as shocking as the filmmakers were expecting it to be, and the little sequence before the credits roll tied this film to the original, but for what purpose? Reese, the female campus security cop from the original, returns in this film as the a new security guard on this campus, and does give a few laughs with her "Foxy Brown" imitations. The Amy character, our leading woman, does make some smart moves in the film, but all of the others make dumb decisions that cost them their lives. The scene that stood out the most of the whole film was the infamous "kidney" scene, which was actually pretty well constructed and was disgusting enough.

Overall, "Urban Legends: Final Cut" isn't anything great. The story wasn't anything we haven't seen before, it's your basic "find out who the killer is" horror movie. It serves well as a gory slasher flick, but there is nothing new that it has to offer and very little surprises at all. Put all that aside, fans of the first movie may want to check this out. But, while the original wasn't great, I can confidently say it was better than the sequel. 5/10.

A student filmmaker's thesis project encounters production problems when the actors and crew of her film start getting killed by a monstrous force.

Jennifer Morrison stars as Amy Mayfield, a student at a prestigious film school, unsure about what her thesis film is going to be. But after a conversation with security guard Reese Wilson about her experience with a series of murders that had happened on the campus she had previously worked in, she is inspired to make a film about a serial killer murdering in the fashion of urban legends.

I rewatched this on Blu-ray in the new collector's edition trilogy, although I have seen the film in the past. The film is carried by Morrison's gratifying performance, alongside Loretta Davis bringing comic relief to the film. Where the film succeeds is in its classiness as a horror picture, and director John Ottman has proven that he can successfully cross over from being, not only a gifted composer but also a respectable filmmaker. The film embraces the horror genre wholeheartedly and giving us a nail-biting, heart-jolting experience. Where I found the film fell short is the fact it's very keen on keeping the film (mostly) bloodless and a lot of the deaths happen off-screen or cut away just as it happens, although I think the film would've benefitted from more gore and brutality. Which is not something I would normally say. The end of the film wraps up reminiscent of an episode of "Scooby-Doo" with a nice nod to the original courtesy of Rebecca Gayheart. It's a fun watch.

As a former film student the setting for the film had some appeal. Film students after the coveted Hitchcock Award strive to make the film that will secure them a spot in Hollywood, just like the honored alumni before them. Unfortunately the power of greed has someone taking out the competition.

It begins with an obvious film-within-a-film cliché to introduce us to all the principal characters/victims of the film. The cast, a slew of nobodies, lacks any true depth and continually stumbles through forced 21st dialogue. The only recognizable face, Joey Lawrence of Blossom fame, has matured in looks but not so much in talent. In fact, the most entertaining parts of the film are when the killer `urbanizes' his victims making the viewer happy to see them go.

The entire story is weak and too many standard horror movie conventions are tossed into the mix. Bumps in the dark, shadows in the background and masked characters that appear out of nowhere are tired repeats of films in our past. As expected, every character is given a reason to be the killer until the very next scene when they are exonerated because another character seems more deserving.

With many veiled references to Alfred Hitchcock's films, the filmmakers may have thought they were honoring the great director but in reality the idea is so poorly done that they only come across as cheap rip-offs. Stair climbing in a tower ala Vertigo and a weak wheelchair scene ala Rear Window are two that come to mind.

The whole scary movie genre was given life by Scream and now it ought to be put out of its misery with one swift swing of the ax.

2 1/2 out of 5