House of the Dead 2

Didn't hope for much when I sat down to watch this but, as said, it was a better than expected.

Expect low budget, but not too bad - i've seen much worse in special effects and overall production.

Some of the scenes have been lifted completely from Resident Evil so on the whole its not too original -

And with both of those things in mind its okay - I jumped a few times and the build up of tension when trapped by hordes of the undead was pretty good (although very Res Evil).

There's some good humour too, with more than one nod to films it owes something to (which is good as opposed to just outright plagiarism), again particularly Res Evil.

I wouldn't run out and buy a copy, but I would watch it again sometime, there's worse ways to spend an hour and a half.

In Guesta Verde University, the deranged Professor Curien (Sid Haig) is trying to bring back the dead, killing students for the experiment. There is an outbreak of zombies in the campus, and the government sends a NSA medical research team, formed by Dr. Alexandra Morgan a.k.a. Nightingale (Emmanuelle Vaugier) and lieutenant Ellis (Ed Quinn), with a special force leaded by lieutenant Dalton (Sticky Fingaz), trying to get the zero sample from the first generation zombie. The team has a very short time to accomplish their mission and leave the place before missiles are sent to destroy the area. However, the place is crowded of hyper sapiens and the group has to fight to survive.

"House of the Dead 2" is not so bad as indicated in many reviews in IMDb, actually it is an entertaining and gore zombie action movie. The silly beginning recalls "American Pie", with many partially naked women, and then the story shifts to a funny zombie movie. The choreography of the movements of the undead, the makeup and the special effects are good. I do not play the game, but I like zombie and trash movies, therefore I believe this film is underrated for fans of this genre. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "House of the Dead 2 - A Casa dos Mortos 2"

First of all,I didn't see the first film cuz I saw a review of it and it looks completely awful.I saw the sequel and man I was very surprised:I liked it.Tons of action with no BS like slow mo,shaky cam,or jump cuts(Yes I'm looking at u Taken 2).I liked the two leads Ed Quinn and the always gorgeous Emmanuelle Vaugier.They kicked a$$ and they were likable.It does have some problems:Some characters are disposable and there are some stupid moments(no spoilers here).Anyway,its not as bad as some people say and it should've been in theatres unlike the first one.A $6 million production?The money is on the screen.It looks a lot better than a lot of films with 10 times that budget.It was entertaining!

I'm reluctant to inform the reader that House of the Dead 2 is an improvement over the first film because that implies that HotD2 is a more enjoyable experience. This is not the case.

The original was a spectacular failure. It was like watching a horrible fireworks accident that set Uwe Boll on fire, and he ran around in circles with sparks and flames and pretty colors going everywhere. Tragic? Yes, but highly entertaining in a sick twisted way. House of the Dead 2 is just a dud that falls over. It's awful *and* boring.

Although, it does have a few moments that arise to the Boll standard of "what the hell?" Such as when our hero smears zombie guts all over his body so the zombies can't identify him as living, which leads to the only scene in the film (or any zombie film) where we see Zombies sniffing around.

I personally loved how proficient these zombies where at knocking guns from the main character's hands. These zombies were well, trained, ladies and gentlemen. They were very well trained. It felt like something out of that Playstation game, "Nightmare Creatures." The zombies would stagger, Romero style, and then on cue run in and rip the guns from the good guys hands. Although, bear in mind, I'm making it sound more interesting than it really is.

Beyond the moments described above, there's only a handful of other entertaining points (zombie football, anyone?). The majority of the film is irritatingly cliché and flat out uninteresting. From the camera setups, to the pacing, to the sets, to the lighting, to the locations, to the editing, to the music – every aspect of this film droned on with the intensity of a metronome. It's painfully apparent that this was a micro budget production.

I'll give the film the benefit of the doubt and inform the reader that House of the Dead 2 intends to be campy, but apparently it doesn't know how to get there. It has characters who are laughably unaware of their environment, making statements like "we can't get through the air vent on this side" nevermind the plethora of materials in the background that would make great make-shift tools. But yes, they find the chalk-board so they can outline (NFL game plan style) the single stupidest plan they could have possibly conceived. Like I said, everything is in place for House of the Dead 2 to be a great campy film . . . except it's slightly confused on exactly how to get to camp-land.

That and House of the Dead 2 is still boring. This is because at no point does the audience feel like the actions in the movie mean anything. While HotD2 is trying to be campy horror, it fails and in the process of failing it demolishes any sense that this zombie infestation poses any kind of threat to anyone. "Oh no! The zombies are going to eat the cannon fodder!" That just isn't intimidating. It could be funny, except: House of the Dead 2 is so friggin' boring.

In an effort to inject a sense of impending doom and intensity in the film, the plot revolves around the idea that the zombie infested campus will be blown up sometime the next morning. ("Oh no! The cannon fodder might get blown up!") So our hero and heroine have to accomplish their mission before the countdown reaches zero; however, the film and all the characters forget this almost immediately. Five minutes before detonation, they might as well be waiting in line for stamps at the post office. They don't seem to care about the countdown, so why should the audience? That and House of the Dead 2 is *still* boring.

What's worse? After our main characters accomplish their goal and acquire the zero-generation blood sample, they make their escape and lose that blood sample. It ain't over yet, folks. So now we get to watch the cannon fodder go back into the line of fire, and yes, it's just as boring this time around as it was before.

In closing, House of the Dead 2 is a superior film, but that, however, does not make it more watchable. If it weren't for the handful of priceless moments where the film reaches Uwe Boll levels of stupidity, it would have no entertainment value what-so-ever.

My friends and I were in the mood for a really, really bad movie today. We weren't sure whether to rent 'Sasquatch' or 'Vampires vs. Zombies', but somewhere along the line we decided on 'House of the Dead II'. Obviously, we weren't expecting anything more than B-movie schlock we could point and laugh at, and that's exactly what we got. Better than the first one (as if that counts for anything!), House of the Dead II is an ultra-cheesy gorefest that will satisfy hardened zombie fans, but will turn off most mainstream movie watchers. However, the fact that you're actually on the internet, reading reviews for the movie 'House of the Dead II' means that, most likely, you are already a hardened horror/zombie fan, so you'll probably like this. It has all the 'zombie movie' goods: gore, decapitation scenes, naked chicks, gunfire, etc. Don't expect anything more than that and you'll have a decent time.