Urban Legends: Bloody Mary

Samantha Owens (Kate Mara) have her two girlfriends for a sleepover. They are interrupted by Sam's brother David. They are all outcasts after Sam published a school news story denouncing the football players. The girls recount a story about the murder of Mary Banner in 1969. She and two other girls were drugged by the football players. Sam also talk about the urban legend of Bloody Mary. Next day, the girls are gone and David accuses the football players of foul play. Sam and her friends reappear later that afternoon disheveled and suffering from the after-effects of a drugging. Soon, the jocks and the captain's girlfriend Heather Thompson are showing up dead in unusual circumstances. Sam and David track down one of the girls from the 1969 incident, Grace Taylor.

The biggest name here is Kate Mara. It's odd that Sam's two friends aren't actually main characters. It doesn't help that they are limited actors. David isn't much better but at least, he's functional. Quite frankly, his role is unnecessary and Kate Mara should have been the only protagonist. The story should follow Sam and her two friends from the drugging onwards. The only good kill is the spiders and the CGI is cheap anyways. It's still creepy good. The other kills are either boring or silly or both. There are other issues and this never had a chance to be better than a B-horror.

If you thought the second Urban Legend had little to do with the original ... wait til you see this here. The (Urban?) Legend of Bloody Mary is very well known in America. Through Horror movies I reckon it is very well known in the horror community around the world.

That being said, this direct to video "sequel" has a really commendable core story. A me too way before the me too movement. But is it enough to just rain praise on it? You'll be the ultimate judge for yourself. But really badly aged CGI and some odd story choices probably will not work in favor of the movie for most people.

Still it is nice to see some good acting in here, even if the choices and moral high ground it takes (excusing murder and death) are not always for the ... well best. Especially if you consider the very predictable (character) twist and the behavior that person displays ... completely ridiculous. Shame because some of the ideas for deaths are not really bad ... with make up effects even making up for the shoddy cgi (maybe)

(2005) Urban Legends: Bloody Mary HORROR

Straight-to-rental third movie of the series that has nothing to do with the other two, which looks like nothing but a poor carbon copy of "Ju-On" or "The Grudge". Story starts with the year of 1969 involving three teenage jocks using the date rape drug on three different girls upon going to a prom dance, except that one of the girls, who happens to be Mary didn't take her drink and upon running away with one of them chasing her to bring her back. He eventually catches up with her and accidentally kills her by punching her with his fist on the head onto a hard table before landing to the ground and decides to dispose her body to a trunk so no one wouldn't even know about it. Jump to many years later, showcasing three teenage girls who accidentally wake up the Nancy ghoulish spirit, with some of those same students turning 30 years older and right off the get-go viewers should be able to find out the culprit who tried to conceal what this film calls a urban legend whose trying to prevent her son-in-law and daughter from exposing! Stupid, lame, clice and for the narrow minded, like the "Mary" girl never had any parents or friends. Police are never involved and are absent nor were Mary's parents.

This film has the POTENTIAL to be as great as the other two. It has pretty good characters, a pretty intriguing mystery, with this whole "past coming back to haunt" thread. BUT the ending is devastatingly lame.

I watched the "making of", and the director seems a few bricks short of a wall. She explains the film, and why it is such a brilliant, clever film. But the gaping hole in her logic is that she is WRONG. It is NOT clever, it is utterly ludicrous.

And there are too many stereotypes, from the jocks to the girls having pillow fights in their underwear, to the "Foxy Brown" / "power to the people" character.

These days the game in horror is a horrible business. Pity the poor filmmaker: she has to have enough formula to give the viewer something to rely on. After all, in a horror film, most of the work is done by the audience. We willingly supply all the imaginative components that thrill us. All the movie does is provide cues based on, derived from milestones in the genre.

But at the same time, that beleaguered filmmaker has to be novel enough to engage so far as the story and the metaphysical logic behind it. Usually, that is a matter of just mixing existing elements in a slightly new way and that's what we have here.

It is part ghost story, after the manner of recent much better films. It is part traditional slasher where an unknown human seems to be always in the right place to exact revenge (usually revenge, here a cover-up). And it is part that twist on the ghost story that kicked off the series: the notion that urban legends have a power of their own to invade the world and become real — the spectre that just thinking of hearing a story will have it land on you.

That novel notion wasn't fully exploited, but it is an intelligent a device as the movie within the movie of "The Ring."

And we have it here, dimly.

These three elements are mixed together with a bit more success than you would guess. It is still weak. But then, it has an appealing redheaded heroine.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.