The Fear Footage 2: Curse of the Tape

Not an academy award winning movie, but not understanding the overly harsh negative reviews. Also it them read as being personal or written by people who don't enjoy found footage. If you wanted the first movie, and don't like found footage as so many others here have stated, then I would not reccomend this for you. Otherwise, it was entertaining, and very low budget. I don't consider low budget to be an insult though. Most of the interesting movies I've seen lately are low budget and this one is no different. Better than the first one. Only didn't give more stars because it really isn't that phenomenal. Just a good movie to pass the time.

Is this a good movie? Not really. Is it as bad as the reviews suggest? Absolutely not. So what is it? It's about as average as average gets in found footage horror. The premise is great if you are one of the few who enjoyed the 1st, like myself. It has some pretty good moments, just too many BLAH moments. Will you revisit it or even remember it a month from now? Probably not. But 1 star? No.

A couple of years ago I watched a movie called the Fear Footage and it became a bit of a running joke between me and my friends. We'd say that the movie scale was Fear Footage to Shawshank Redemption, that it was the movie all bad movies should be measured by and made the Sharknado films look like the Godfather series.

Well because it became such a big deal for us we all tracked their being a sequel and laughed in awe at the trailer, when my man pal Jason bought it for me as a joke present we excitedly sat together to watch this inevitable masterpiece and laughed from start to finish.

Like the first one it looks awful, the whole thing is so amateurish it makes Birdemic look like it had Hollywood level special effects teams. The sound guy must have fallen asleep because there was no consistency there and the story? Well I'm being nice saying there is one, this is an unintentional comedy almost like a two Ronnies sketch show but with bad lighting.

Is it worse than the first? I'd say they're on the same level and arguably the same film really. I'd like to thank Ricky Umberger and the whole team behind these movies, I haven't laughed this hard in years.

Keep your awful student looking films coming!

Dumbest (and most annoying) lead character imaginable, terrible acting, infuriating plot contrivances. BUT...this film has a lot of jump scares, and it does them quite well. Yes, I know the jump scare is the lowest common horror denominator, but I still have to give some credit for timing and creepy visuals. Even as I sat rolling my eyes at the stupidity of everything, the next jump scare would still jolt me right out of my seat. I'd watch it again just for that. And while the cheap thrill is not my end game, you have to kiss a lot of horror movie frogs to find one you *might* go out with once just for coffee. So I'm semi-satisfied when an otherwise crappy movie pulls off one or two decent scenes, and this one definitely does that.

I waited for something to happen, I assumed the film was a slow burn to some incredible payoff then after little over an hour the credits rolled. Where was the film? Where abouts was the content, the horror, the storyline? It has none of these things, it's a series of laughable attempts at horror imagery with little to no connection. There is absolutely no story here, it's just mess.