Not that I expected it to be but this film was nowhere near as good as the original. In fact I enjoyed it even less than the other passable sequels it spawned. My main problem was that I just couldn't take Edward Furlong seriously as the titular character of this film. He was completely miscast and looked particularly stupid when dressed up in full goth gear.
And what the hell was the deal with Dennis Hopper? Using pimp-slang from the 90's for exactly what reason? It just confused me, made me laugh and then confused me some more. That's a big part of the films problem is that there was way too much light-heartiness going on when this should have been a darker tale.David Boreanaz just played his Angelus character from the Angel series which wasn't a bad thing. He was probably the only thing that made the film worth watching. Him, and the ever fit Tara Reid.
The story has some mumbo-jumbo about making David Boreanaz into the anti-Christ and to do this him and his group (all named after the Horsemen of the Apocalypse)had to go round and kill everyone they meet. There's a pretty high body count of innocent by-standers in this film which is always pleasant. I think they should have just stuck to a very basic level of spirituality or magic in the story, just had David Boreanaz and his group as "normal" cultist psychopaths and lost all the Anti-Christ nonsense. This worked well in the first film but they lay it on way too think here but I suppose they feel the need to up the stakes from other films.
I'd only advise watching this if you have a sequel fetish like myself. Otherwise avoid.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by {I}{K}{E}
Bookmarks