Deadliest Prey

It's all here. Wooden acting, terrible plot, cheesy special effects, lots of ridiculous and campy choreography.. And killing everyone. Just, killing everyone all over the dang place.

While I haven't watched the original yet (on my to-do list), the sequel is terrible. It's just hammy and hokey all throughout. I knew beforehand that I was about to watch a solid "B" class movie, but wow man. This one is just sub-par.

Mr. Prior (the writer) is apparently behind on the times, as his portrayals of nearly every facet of the world appear to be built entirely on clichés and stereotypes. The actions undertaken by the bad guys are far removed from typical military procedure. The evil villain was so cruel and vicious to his loyal soldiers that a few good facepalms were in order. Why would anyone sign up for that sort of abuse? Because they needed jobs? Ha ha! That's a good one.

The "hackers" seemed to have given Mr. Prior a particularly nasty writer's headache, as every bit of their dialogue was absolutely just hilariously bad and demonstrated a profound lack of technical computer skills. The audience members were also a great laugh, although I was a little confused about how they were watching a live internet feed on the TV at their favorite watering hole, and apparently doing so for nearly 12 hours.

The acting was either wooden and unbelievable or uproariously excessive. There was no middle ground.

There were some great moments though. As one reviewer mentioned, the villain at one point claims to have killed more people than cancer. Now THAT is a great line. I loved it.

Overall, the film was pretty boring. Even the action parts were handled slowly and cleanly to be point of being hard to watch.

I wanted to enjoy this, but there just really wasn't much to enjoy.

Whenever a belated sequel to a "so bad it's good"-classic gets released, I start fearing what I call the "Birdemic"-effect. Directors who have accidentally obtained a cult status by being really terrible often start being really terrible on purpose, completely ruining their magic. I'm glad to say David A. Prior isn't one of those directors. "Deadliest Prey" is 100% serious, 100% genuine and 100% laughable. In many ways it's actually even more entertaining than its original. It definitely looks better, the special effects are upped a notch (not a fan of CGI, but the first one was almost completely bloodless), the dialogues are...slightly better and the fights are...slightly more realistic. Apart from that, this is pretty much the same movie as "Deadly Prey". The plot (so to speak) develops exactly like in the first one, right down to the smallest details. Five minutes in you think oh, almost the same opening scene as the first. That's kinda lazy, bring on the new stuff! Then Danton gets kidnapped while taking out the garbage, and then they tell him to "RUN!", and then he leaves someone alive if he tells him what's going on and then just kills him anyway. Oh what's next, they're going to kidnap his wife and he'll find the female henchman (henchwoman?)in his house? Thornton is ready to kill him but Hogan wants him alive because otherwise the movie's over too soon? Oh, both these things also happen? Well, I'm sure they're not cutting someone's arm off ag...this is a remake, pure and simple. But a nice remake, with a heart and a better pace than the original. It adds nothing, but it's still worth seeing.

Very amateur-like acting. Solders are in a life threatening situation, someone shooting on them and they act like they are just walking in the park! Some actors might be good but the director calling the shots obviously he didn't know what he was doing. The whole movie is filmed in the same location (someone's back yard). The story-line is very of childish too. Funny thing is at the end of the movie, in the last screen, it says: "The beginning". They expect to make another movie like this? Give me a break! So, don't waste your time watching this, we have seen similar movies with about the same story-line but a lot better acting.

It's quite impressive that a movie got a sequel with several of the original cast/director over quarter of a century later. But was it really needed?

Deadly Prey (1987) was a hyper cheesy Rambo ripoff that for some reason many consider to be a bit of a cult classic. I thought it was awful, but it had a certain 80's cheese factor charm at least.

26 years later and the story continues, well that's not entirely true. You see it does follow on from the events of the previous movie, with erm..........the same events of the previous movie. What I mean by that is this may be a sequel but it may as well be a remake as this is alarmingly similar, not only in regards to the plot but multiple scenes throughout.

I have no idea why they would do that, it's senseless. And here we're missing the 80's charm, it tries to replicate it with the same soundtrack and action style but it comes across forced and fails miserably.

I cringed throughout, I'd be surprised if even the most hardcore fan of the original appreciates this.

The Good:

Follows on from the previous movie

The Bad:

Some awful camerawork

"Action" is just awful

Some moments are so dumb it defies belief

Tacky soundtrack

More like a remixed version of the first movie

Colonel Hogan(David Campbell)is back after 27 years of rotting in prison and he surely is very very angry.He gets released and immediately seeks out his revenge on Mike Danton(Ted Prior),extremely skilled soldier and total killing machine,the star of "Deadly Prey"(1987).But this time Hogan want to broadcast his revenge over the Internet.The cameras in the woods are filming every moment of carnage as Mike Danton kills dozens of armed soldiers via Rambo-like traps and his deadly weapons."Deadliest Prey" is very watchable and vastly entertaining action/survival flick with plenty of mindless violence.Prior still looks as menacing as ever and Campbell is delightfully over-the-top as the main villain.Three hackers are quite annoying,though.Overall,pretty cool homage to "Deadly Prey".8 severed arms out of 10.