IMDb RATING
5.3/10
4.2K
YOUR RATING
When his home of New Eden is destroyed by a revitalized Brotherhood and its new Vamp leader, Martin finds himself alone in the badlands of America with only the distant memory of his mentor ... Read allWhen his home of New Eden is destroyed by a revitalized Brotherhood and its new Vamp leader, Martin finds himself alone in the badlands of America with only the distant memory of his mentor and legendary vampire hunter, Mister, to guide him.When his home of New Eden is destroyed by a revitalized Brotherhood and its new Vamp leader, Martin finds himself alone in the badlands of America with only the distant memory of his mentor and legendary vampire hunter, Mister, to guide him.
- Directors
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I had fun with this one, mostly of course because it reminded me of the first, a vampire movie with a slightly different approach. It is quite obvious that the horror viewers are begging for anything unusual.
As vamp movies go, there are a few with "cojones", like Daybreakers, presenting a complete society or Priest, with a new monster look, a better dystopian background.
Now for Stake Land: a nice add-on to the genre, a small movie that was nicely welcomed by anyone. The second part succeeded throughout the movie but failed with the opposite side, where they should have worked just a little more. If that part would have been explored properly, I do believe Stakelander could have been easily just as enjoyable as the first. Nevertheless it is a good movie on its own and I do recommend it.
All in all, I do hope for a third part, and with a little more effort, maybe we can have a nicely almost indie trilogy. One to remember!
Cheers!
As vamp movies go, there are a few with "cojones", like Daybreakers, presenting a complete society or Priest, with a new monster look, a better dystopian background.
Now for Stake Land: a nice add-on to the genre, a small movie that was nicely welcomed by anyone. The second part succeeded throughout the movie but failed with the opposite side, where they should have worked just a little more. If that part would have been explored properly, I do believe Stakelander could have been easily just as enjoyable as the first. Nevertheless it is a good movie on its own and I do recommend it.
All in all, I do hope for a third part, and with a little more effort, maybe we can have a nicely almost indie trilogy. One to remember!
Cheers!
I hope my review will help you guys, if you are the fan of the prequel Stake Land and then think twice before watching this! It was the couple of days before "Tet"- a traditional holiday in my country, i came to the DVD store looking for some good stuffs and then i found it. Wow they made the sequel! Amazing, i was really excited cause Stake Land was one of my favorites vampire movies (along with the Blade series and Daybreakers) I watched it on the morning of "Mung 5", the fifth day of Tet.First of all, the beginning was acceptable and then after 20 minutes everything gone wrong. The slots broke down, the conversation between the characters is boring and unnecessary. The runaway from the Brotherhood take too much time, the film turn into slow process with the flashback from our 2 main characters. The ending is the most disappointed in 80 minutes of this film, Martin seeking for revenge but when The Mother and vampire attack he has to wait for Mister to lure The Mother in to fight. The fight end-up quickly but seriously the fighting scene look so fake and the equipment, the backstage, also the CGI graphic throughout the film keep me questioning about the budget of this film. I actually has a very good impression and enjoyable time watching the first film by Nick Damici but this one is not. Last but not least, the Stakelander ruined my feeling about one of the best vampire horror in the recent years, i hope they could make a stop after this or else they could make the next mistake just like 20th Century Fox with Wrong Turn sequel.
I didn't even know that they had made a sequel to the 2010 "Stake Land" movie. I just happened to come across the movie by sheer random luck. And I did enjoy the first movie, so I picked up "The Stakelander" - or "Stake Land II" as it was marketed as here - and gave it a go.
And true enough to sequels as sequels usually go, then "The Stakelander" is just one of those movies that didn't turn out to be anywhere near the original first movie. And one such movie that you wonder why they actually took the time to make it, especially with 6 years in between the two movies.
That being said, then I will move right on to stating that "The Stakelander" was a massively boring movie, and it was a test of wills to actually see it through to the very end. I managed to do so, because I wanted to see if it picked up pace and became better. I didn't!
The characters in the movie were one-dimensional and could have easily been replaced with cardboard cut-outs. There were just no depth or motivation to the characters that trodded in and about in this movie. And it seemed more like a ragtag ensemble of odd characters coming together for making something resembling a movie.
The effects in "The Stakelander" were adequate, albeit not outstanding or memorable, mind you. So not even here does the movie have a chance to elevate itself.
Compared to the first movie, then "The Stakelander" was surprisingly devoid of action. Which was a shame, because that could at least have been something to keep the audience in their seats.
You are perhaps even better off just watching the 2010 "Stake Land" movie and letting it be with just that one movie. Because the 2016 "The Stakelander" sequel offers nothing important or outstanding to the storyline of the first movie.
This movie came and went without leaving a lasting impression. And it is hardly the type of movie that you watch a second time around, providing that you actually manage to get through it the first time.
And true enough to sequels as sequels usually go, then "The Stakelander" is just one of those movies that didn't turn out to be anywhere near the original first movie. And one such movie that you wonder why they actually took the time to make it, especially with 6 years in between the two movies.
That being said, then I will move right on to stating that "The Stakelander" was a massively boring movie, and it was a test of wills to actually see it through to the very end. I managed to do so, because I wanted to see if it picked up pace and became better. I didn't!
The characters in the movie were one-dimensional and could have easily been replaced with cardboard cut-outs. There were just no depth or motivation to the characters that trodded in and about in this movie. And it seemed more like a ragtag ensemble of odd characters coming together for making something resembling a movie.
The effects in "The Stakelander" were adequate, albeit not outstanding or memorable, mind you. So not even here does the movie have a chance to elevate itself.
Compared to the first movie, then "The Stakelander" was surprisingly devoid of action. Which was a shame, because that could at least have been something to keep the audience in their seats.
You are perhaps even better off just watching the 2010 "Stake Land" movie and letting it be with just that one movie. Because the 2016 "The Stakelander" sequel offers nothing important or outstanding to the storyline of the first movie.
This movie came and went without leaving a lasting impression. And it is hardly the type of movie that you watch a second time around, providing that you actually manage to get through it the first time.
The Stakelander or simply Stake Land 2 is a follow up to the 2010 feature which had a fair bit going for it.
Set in a post apocalyptic world that's been ravaged by vampires and small pockets of humanity are doing their best to survive. All grown up we see Martin (Connor Paolo) return and on a quest to find his mentor known only as Mister (Nick Damici) to assist him in getting avenging his families murder by the new big bad vampire queen. To make matters worse Christian fanatics have teamed with the vampires, deeming their leader a "Holy mother".
Now though the first Stake Land was hardly groundbreaking it was an enjoyable enough fluff piece that kept my attention throughout. After six years I certainly didn't expect a sequel and honestly don't think we needed one, the movie itself just confirms my belief.
Don't get me wrong this sequel isn't bad, it just accomplishes nothing and just plods along with mediocrity. Sure it's nice to see the two leads of the previous movie return, but they don't bring anything to the table worth paying attention to.
The side cast are great including veteran Steven Williams, but the writing is all over the place and left an already unnecessary movie even flatter than it should have been.
If you really liked the first then this might be worth a watch, for anyone else not so much.
*Insert pun here about this vampire movie sucking here*
The Good:
Same cast
Steven Williams
The Bad:
Shoddy writing
The whole thing is just so "Meh"
Set in a post apocalyptic world that's been ravaged by vampires and small pockets of humanity are doing their best to survive. All grown up we see Martin (Connor Paolo) return and on a quest to find his mentor known only as Mister (Nick Damici) to assist him in getting avenging his families murder by the new big bad vampire queen. To make matters worse Christian fanatics have teamed with the vampires, deeming their leader a "Holy mother".
Now though the first Stake Land was hardly groundbreaking it was an enjoyable enough fluff piece that kept my attention throughout. After six years I certainly didn't expect a sequel and honestly don't think we needed one, the movie itself just confirms my belief.
Don't get me wrong this sequel isn't bad, it just accomplishes nothing and just plods along with mediocrity. Sure it's nice to see the two leads of the previous movie return, but they don't bring anything to the table worth paying attention to.
The side cast are great including veteran Steven Williams, but the writing is all over the place and left an already unnecessary movie even flatter than it should have been.
If you really liked the first then this might be worth a watch, for anyone else not so much.
*Insert pun here about this vampire movie sucking here*
The Good:
Same cast
Steven Williams
The Bad:
Shoddy writing
The whole thing is just so "Meh"
Some say it was rushed.
less crafted.
I sure was really disappointed with the script this time.
also didn't like the way it went.
if I remember the ending was very disappointing too.
even acting .... watch 1st movie and forget about this cash grab disapointement
Did you know
- ConnectionsFeatured in Stakelander: The Making of Stake Land II (2017)
- How long is The Stakelander?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $34,752
- Runtime
- 1h 21m(81 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content