Most Helpful Customer Reviews
9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Stick to the original, April 14, 2007
I agree with the sentiment of most reviewers on here. The plot to this movie was simply absurd and while the director did not set out to make a slasher movie, this is simply all he made. For one, you never really care about the sorority members and what happens to them in this movie. Rather than getting backstory on the sorority members to actually care about them, you have a lot of Billy backstory and simply a bunch of foulmouthed sorority sisters that you don't care about.
Further, the movie is filled with Billy backstory that simply takes away from what made the original so great. Who was Billy...why did he do what he did? But you can figure out what's going on here from early on, so there's really no great surprise. There are also a bunch of plot holes and killers doing things that are physically impossible. And how many times are two people both erroneously pronounced dead?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
9 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Awful. Awful. Awful., April 13, 2007
I don't usually waste my time reviewing bad movies, but I felt it was my duty to warn others about this turd. As the other review stated this is definitely the worst horror remake ever (and that's counting the horrendous Wicker Man rehash). The girls in this movie are absolutetly the most brainless bimbos in horrordom, even for sorority girls. For some lame reason, no one wants to leave the house where everone is being murdered because "oh no! it's snowing outside!" what? This basically drags the story out to over an hour where one dumb brunette after another gets killed, and the lighting is so dark in the film, you can't tell one from the other. My biggest gripe was killing Lacey Chabert off so quickly, as she was the hottest of the sorority sisters, and the only one I had seen before. The ending was completely pointless, like why would they cart two psychos off to the hospital without checking if they're dead first? duh... The four alternate endings were actually worse. This movie is horror kryptonite.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
29 of 40 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Worst. Remake. Ever., January 5, 2007
Surely no one sets out to make a bad movie. But in the case of the Black Christmas remake, it's hard to imagine writer/director Glen Morgan honestly thinking that this was the best he could do. The orginal Black Christmas is a classic, a forerunner to the modern slasher movie - stylish and eery and unsettling. But most importantly, simple and straight foward. A slasher and a murder mystery, deftly directed by Bob Clark. The remake (WHY!?) is, to be blunt, absolutely dreadful. From the first frame to the pitiful end, Black Christmas (2006) puts its viewer through the ringer, from the absurd and outlandish to the just plain dull and stupid. Giving the killer an elaborate (and ridiculous) backstory is beside the point, meaningless, mere filler. We get lame attempts at humor and gross out moments that are bad camp. The inclusion of Billy's sister, Agnes, is so out-of-left-field that it feels like Morgan was simply trying to throw in a few extra kills and pad out the movie's already spare running time. The movie isn't even 90 minutes, but you feel every second, particularly with the completely unnecessary hospital finale dragging things out to an asinine, but blessed close. Fans of the original Black Christmas should feel insulted. Horror fans should feel taken advantage of. The human race as a whole should shudder knowing this slag of trash came from one of its own. We can only hope this movie will end the careers of all involved.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
