151 reviews
On July 4th, in the small Broken Ridge, Colorado, the teenagers Colby (David Paetkau), his girlfriend Amber (Brooke Nevin) and their friends Zoe (Torrey DeVitto), Roger (Seth Packard) and PJ (Clay Taylor) play a prank with the legend of the Fisherman that kills teenagers with dirty little secrets with his hook in an entertaining park. However, when PJ jumps with his skateboard, there is an unexpected accident and PJ dies. The group stays together and makes a covenant to keep their secret. One year later, Amber receives messages in her cell-phone telling that "I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer" and she gathers her friends to find who might have told about their prank. They find that PJ's cousin Lance (Ben Easter) also knows what they did. Sooner they find that a dark man wearing slicker is chasing them with a hook to kill each one of them.
"I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer" is an unoriginal collection of clichés. The forgettable story is very weak and a rip-off of the two other movies, only worse. The deaths are not original; the acting is average; the situations are predictable in accordance with the worse clichés of the genre and the conclusion is awful. My vote is four.
Title (Brazil): "Eu Sempre Vou Saber o Que Vocês Fizeram no Verão Passado" ("I Will Always Know What You Did Last Summer")
"I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer" is an unoriginal collection of clichés. The forgettable story is very weak and a rip-off of the two other movies, only worse. The deaths are not original; the acting is average; the situations are predictable in accordance with the worse clichés of the genre and the conclusion is awful. My vote is four.
Title (Brazil): "Eu Sempre Vou Saber o Que Vocês Fizeram no Verão Passado" ("I Will Always Know What You Did Last Summer")
- claudio_carvalho
- Nov 17, 2007
- Permalink
I don't write reviews often, but I feel particularly strongly about this movie.
I watched all three of the movies in this semi-trilogy back to back today. The first one was okay, as was the second (which I actually preferred to the first). But I'll Always Know is quite obviously the worst of the three, and I'm basing this purely on the merits of this film. I don't really care that the cast isn't the same, and I wasn't even particularly concerned about the obvious plot difficulties surrounding the catalyst death.
This is a direct-to-video movie, but even keeping that in mind, I can't give this movie better than a 3. The first half to 3/4 of the movie isn't terrible--it's about the level of quality you'd expect (low, but watchable). However, the last part of the movie just disintegrates and really makes it obvious that you made a mistake in ever wasting your time with it. I won't give anything away, but a lot of the movie is spent trying to figure out who this film's Fisherman is. Based on what you know about the three films, try to imagine the absolute WORST idea for the identity of the Fisherman. If you decide to watch this movie, that's the ending you're going to get. I guarantee it. If your idea even halfway seems like it would be decent, you haven't come up with the worst idea yet.
I strongly recommend turning off the film right before the big reveal.
You've been warned.
I watched all three of the movies in this semi-trilogy back to back today. The first one was okay, as was the second (which I actually preferred to the first). But I'll Always Know is quite obviously the worst of the three, and I'm basing this purely on the merits of this film. I don't really care that the cast isn't the same, and I wasn't even particularly concerned about the obvious plot difficulties surrounding the catalyst death.
This is a direct-to-video movie, but even keeping that in mind, I can't give this movie better than a 3. The first half to 3/4 of the movie isn't terrible--it's about the level of quality you'd expect (low, but watchable). However, the last part of the movie just disintegrates and really makes it obvious that you made a mistake in ever wasting your time with it. I won't give anything away, but a lot of the movie is spent trying to figure out who this film's Fisherman is. Based on what you know about the three films, try to imagine the absolute WORST idea for the identity of the Fisherman. If you decide to watch this movie, that's the ending you're going to get. I guarantee it. If your idea even halfway seems like it would be decent, you haven't come up with the worst idea yet.
I strongly recommend turning off the film right before the big reveal.
You've been warned.
I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer it's not clear who it was filmed for and raises only questions. Why was it filmed? Why did the film somehow become part of the original series? How didn't you hesitate to release it? I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer is formally a response to I Still Know What You Did Last Summer. But it's only on paper. In fact, I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer is bad in everything. There is a bad direction, terrible editing and camera work, not expressive acting of the main characters, just the most boring plot. The film's budget was clearly a couple of tens of hundred dollars, and most people took part in it either because of pity or somehow forced. I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer is one of the worst movies I've ever seen in general.
Apparently it can. I don't know why I decided to watch this movie, I think it was out of curiosity. I thought the first one was average, the second was terrible and I really did not expect much from the third (a STV sequel). Maybe I thought it would be one of those "so bad it's good" slashers. No, it was a "so bad I would rather be castrated and burnt alive" slashers. This movie honestly had no redeeming values apart from being unintentionally hilarious. The acting from everyone was just bad, the story was a rehash of the first and second, the kills were unoriginal and the editing was vomit-inducing.
Five teens decide to pull a prank. Said prank does not go down so well for one of them, he dies. A year later, the four have *gasp* gone their own ways. Our lead girl gets 52 text messages which say *shock* "I know what you did last summer." She decides to group up again and investigate and then one by one they are all killed off.
I'm not going to spoil the revelation of who the killer is, but let me tell you now, it is without a doubt the stupidest twist you will ever see. It is nonsensical and to me, quite funny. There isn't much to say that hasn't already been said, everything is crap. The worst being the editing, it is unbearable, like watching a music video.
Avoid like the black plague, I beg of you, do not watch this movie.
0/5
Five teens decide to pull a prank. Said prank does not go down so well for one of them, he dies. A year later, the four have *gasp* gone their own ways. Our lead girl gets 52 text messages which say *shock* "I know what you did last summer." She decides to group up again and investigate and then one by one they are all killed off.
I'm not going to spoil the revelation of who the killer is, but let me tell you now, it is without a doubt the stupidest twist you will ever see. It is nonsensical and to me, quite funny. There isn't much to say that hasn't already been said, everything is crap. The worst being the editing, it is unbearable, like watching a music video.
Avoid like the black plague, I beg of you, do not watch this movie.
0/5
- LoneWolfAndCub
- Nov 15, 2007
- Permalink
- yo-saff-brig
- Sep 6, 2006
- Permalink
The stage curtains open ...
If the movie, "The Room", didn't already exist, this catastrophe would get my vote for the worst film ever. The Fisherman is back with his ever deadly hook and slicker, terrorizing a whole new group of young secret-holders. The only problem is, we are no longer in a coastal town. In fact, we are in the midwest, nowhere NEAR water. A fisherman would stick out about as bad as the horned, red devil himself wielding a fiery trident.
The story is flawed and weak, it's execution even worse. The acting...well, let's just say there isn't any. The cinematography sucks. That's a good word for it ... sucks. The characters are nothing more than fresh bait for the killer, nobody you care for or are invested in. The plot, at best, is cookie cutter. All the usual horror fluff is shown here, but done infinitely better in just about any other horror film. And finally, the ending is SO out of left field that you are left scratching your head in bewilderment. I think you've got the picture.
If you are up late one night, with nothing to do and nothing else to watch and you have the opportunity to watch this movie, go outside and count the little stones on your front porch. That would be a lot more entertaining and fun.
This movie made it on to my List of Worst Sequels/Prequels Ever. And deservedly so.
If the movie, "The Room", didn't already exist, this catastrophe would get my vote for the worst film ever. The Fisherman is back with his ever deadly hook and slicker, terrorizing a whole new group of young secret-holders. The only problem is, we are no longer in a coastal town. In fact, we are in the midwest, nowhere NEAR water. A fisherman would stick out about as bad as the horned, red devil himself wielding a fiery trident.
The story is flawed and weak, it's execution even worse. The acting...well, let's just say there isn't any. The cinematography sucks. That's a good word for it ... sucks. The characters are nothing more than fresh bait for the killer, nobody you care for or are invested in. The plot, at best, is cookie cutter. All the usual horror fluff is shown here, but done infinitely better in just about any other horror film. And finally, the ending is SO out of left field that you are left scratching your head in bewilderment. I think you've got the picture.
If you are up late one night, with nothing to do and nothing else to watch and you have the opportunity to watch this movie, go outside and count the little stones on your front porch. That would be a lot more entertaining and fun.
This movie made it on to my List of Worst Sequels/Prequels Ever. And deservedly so.
- Bart-James
- Jan 17, 2019
- Permalink
Having just seen a press advance of this movie, I thought I'd post my first impressions.
I'll confess to being caught up in the teen slasher craze of the late nineties - movies like Scream and Urban Legend really floated my boat back then, and to a lesser extent, still do. I Know what You Did Last Summer and its over-criticised sequel certainly slotted into this category nicely.
A sequel more or less in name only, the plot sees a group of teenage friends deciding to keep the death of their friend in a backfired prank a secret... one year later, in the days leading up to the tragedy's anniversary, the four receive ominous 'I Know...' messages before being picked off one by one by a hooded character in the 'Fisherman' outfit from the first two movies. Who could possibly know what they did? Is it someone out for revenge? Or is the original fisherman back to wreak more havoc?
From the box art (and the seven year delay) it was clear that this was never going to have the same high production values or quality acting as those late nineties slashers, but I didn't quite expect as far a drop as this. White's direction, while lacking any genuine drawn-out suspense, is at least edgy and 'hip'; sadly, acting from all but the pretty lead Brooke is decidedly wooden. Four or five minutes into the movie, you can see why Sony decided to bypass a cinema release in favour of a straight-to-video one.
That said, if taken as a low budget teen slasher in the vein of 'The Pool' and 'Lover's Lane', it actually works quite well. The true identity of the fisherman is well hidden, with various red herrings keeping the audience guessing. The special effects appear to have consumed a large chunk of the budget, too - one gutting, akin to the 'hook in the throat' from the first 'I Know...' movie, is particularly gruesome.
Ultimately, I felt let down by the ending - but I would imagine everyone's opinion would really depend on their reaction to the killer's identity. As a sequel to what I consider two of the most enjoyable slashers of the late nineties, 'I'll Always Know...' fails miserably. Taken as a standalone low budget slasher, there's more of a hook. 2.5 / 5.
I'll confess to being caught up in the teen slasher craze of the late nineties - movies like Scream and Urban Legend really floated my boat back then, and to a lesser extent, still do. I Know what You Did Last Summer and its over-criticised sequel certainly slotted into this category nicely.
A sequel more or less in name only, the plot sees a group of teenage friends deciding to keep the death of their friend in a backfired prank a secret... one year later, in the days leading up to the tragedy's anniversary, the four receive ominous 'I Know...' messages before being picked off one by one by a hooded character in the 'Fisherman' outfit from the first two movies. Who could possibly know what they did? Is it someone out for revenge? Or is the original fisherman back to wreak more havoc?
From the box art (and the seven year delay) it was clear that this was never going to have the same high production values or quality acting as those late nineties slashers, but I didn't quite expect as far a drop as this. White's direction, while lacking any genuine drawn-out suspense, is at least edgy and 'hip'; sadly, acting from all but the pretty lead Brooke is decidedly wooden. Four or five minutes into the movie, you can see why Sony decided to bypass a cinema release in favour of a straight-to-video one.
That said, if taken as a low budget teen slasher in the vein of 'The Pool' and 'Lover's Lane', it actually works quite well. The true identity of the fisherman is well hidden, with various red herrings keeping the audience guessing. The special effects appear to have consumed a large chunk of the budget, too - one gutting, akin to the 'hook in the throat' from the first 'I Know...' movie, is particularly gruesome.
Ultimately, I felt let down by the ending - but I would imagine everyone's opinion would really depend on their reaction to the killer's identity. As a sequel to what I consider two of the most enjoyable slashers of the late nineties, 'I'll Always Know...' fails miserably. Taken as a standalone low budget slasher, there's more of a hook. 2.5 / 5.
I would have given it a zero if possible. The most pathetic suspense thriller I have ever seen. What made them do it? Isn't the money not dear to them or are they so full of it that they found out a way to waste it. I lost the interest from the very beginning of the movie. Basically there are two types of suspense thrillers. One that is very serious and the suspense is maintained till the end. You scream O my God at the end when the secret is out and you always go back and forth and analyse the events and know when to look for the clue. A fine example would be "Final destination" The second category is where its a total nonsense. There is no story but it has loads of humor. People watch such film without their brains so many enjoy them. I also like those. For eg "Scary movie". This movie falls in neither of the categories. It was full of craps but still tries to be serious. And when the secret is let out in this movie you are left frustrated and irritated and angry. You develop a strong urge to kill the makers of this movie. You feel cheated. The mystical figure would come out from no where and then vanish into no where. It was more surprising that the figure uses modern gadgets like Cellphone SMSs to scare his targets. Every thing in the movie was hard to swallow and total rubbish. The director and writer aren't aware of the term "Reality". This is a Humble request from me, Please don't watch this movie. If you can do anything (anything) else then thats always better than watching this movie.
- kundan-nitrkl
- Feb 18, 2008
- Permalink
- christian123
- Feb 6, 2007
- Permalink
- xThomasxHewittx
- Dec 22, 2006
- Permalink
After accidentally causing their friend to fall to his death, a group of teenagers is stalked one year later by a fisherman with a hook who knows what they did last summer. Will the gang find out who is behind the fisherman's mask in time to save themselves, or are they going to get what they deserve? As I say in my headline, this film was watchable for a video sequel. While not of the standard that "Final Destination 3" is, it comes close -- and didn't even push for a theatrical release. The story uses the same elements as the first movie without using any of the same characters (though it does reference the first two movies). That's not really different from what "FD3" did, so for those people who bash this one but give "FD3" a pass, you're not really being fair.
My only real complaint with the plot is that I don't see why the kids deserved to be stalked. In the original, the kids are drunk driving, hit a man on the road and then hide his body. So we have three crimes: driving while intoxicated, vehicular manslaughter and hiding a corpse. Serious stuff. This time, the friend who died was in on the prank and fell to his own death on accident. No drinking, no pushing him to death, no hiding a body. A perfectly reasonable accident.
Ignoring that, the characters are decent (although one -- Colby -- reminds me a bit too much of Jake Busey) and the story is told at a good pace. The inclusion of the Zoe character was a good move, as all horror films benefit from a punk or goth chick, especially one in a band. I draw your attention to Trash (Linnea Quigley) from "Return of the Living Dead" and rest my case.
The movie has its faults and I admit I found aspects of the climax to be unsatisfying, but over all this was a good film. I have no strong urge to push for a fourth film, and hopefully we will never see one. But for a movie with no big actors and a recycled plot, this one is entirely adequate.
My only real complaint with the plot is that I don't see why the kids deserved to be stalked. In the original, the kids are drunk driving, hit a man on the road and then hide his body. So we have three crimes: driving while intoxicated, vehicular manslaughter and hiding a corpse. Serious stuff. This time, the friend who died was in on the prank and fell to his own death on accident. No drinking, no pushing him to death, no hiding a body. A perfectly reasonable accident.
Ignoring that, the characters are decent (although one -- Colby -- reminds me a bit too much of Jake Busey) and the story is told at a good pace. The inclusion of the Zoe character was a good move, as all horror films benefit from a punk or goth chick, especially one in a band. I draw your attention to Trash (Linnea Quigley) from "Return of the Living Dead" and rest my case.
The movie has its faults and I admit I found aspects of the climax to be unsatisfying, but over all this was a good film. I have no strong urge to push for a fourth film, and hopefully we will never see one. But for a movie with no big actors and a recycled plot, this one is entirely adequate.
No pun intended and not in a good way either. Off its tracks? Well off in many regards. Also morally speaking - I never was a fan of pranks, but this really brings this to whole new heights (maybe pun intended). So from the start (or quite early on) you will not have the best feelings for our main characters. Yes the original movies had them do something not clever either - but it was not as .. crazy as this one.
I also don't think I had seen this one before. I remember having seen the other two movies. They even are connected - this is almost like a reboot. Which probably is also true of the tv show, that I will be watching next or rather in the next few days - since it only has one season anyway.
No offense to the actors and I don't even blame them. They do the best they can with what they are served. The premise obviously was not strong enough to make this succesful. Thankfully most will say - because it wasn't any good. Not even the deaths/murders saved it.
I also don't think I had seen this one before. I remember having seen the other two movies. They even are connected - this is almost like a reboot. Which probably is also true of the tv show, that I will be watching next or rather in the next few days - since it only has one season anyway.
No offense to the actors and I don't even blame them. They do the best they can with what they are served. The premise obviously was not strong enough to make this succesful. Thankfully most will say - because it wasn't any good. Not even the deaths/murders saved it.
- drowningman
- Aug 17, 2006
- Permalink
This movie was supposed to be made as a direct sequel to "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer," with a group of teenagers played by some obscure actors who in Colorado find themselves being menaced by the mysterious man with the hook, which is supposed to be the ghost of Ben Willis.
The events of the first two movies were never elaborated or explained in this supposed sequel, which made this just another typical teen horror flick, but with a low budget, boring story and pretty bad acting. There is really no suspense or tension built-up in this film, just lots of running around, screaming and teenagers being jerks to each other (maybe a hint of some nice horror action here and there). Even on a slow day, I would recommend watching else.
Grade D--
The events of the first two movies were never elaborated or explained in this supposed sequel, which made this just another typical teen horror flick, but with a low budget, boring story and pretty bad acting. There is really no suspense or tension built-up in this film, just lots of running around, screaming and teenagers being jerks to each other (maybe a hint of some nice horror action here and there). Even on a slow day, I would recommend watching else.
Grade D--
- OllieSuave-007
- Jan 17, 2014
- Permalink
OK, first off.. straight up, this was a bad movie, compared to the first two. .. Just from the opening where the guy dies.. i was able to tell that this movie was gonna be stupid to watch. I mean, if that was intended to be a prank.. that was a horrific prank. The story seemed bad too, and the girl was really annoying with me. She was always freaking out and was trying to hook up with people while a killer was after them.. um yeah, try to get laid before you do stupid things. Unfortunately, i ended up watching the whole movie and found it a waste of time. Please, if you going to make a sequel to the original... Make it good -_-. I really disliked this movie. p.s. lucky lowest i can give is one rating u_u Also.. don't make it so predictable. =/
This might be one of the worst (if not THE WORST) movies ever made and a huge dishonour to what was else a nostalgic franchise. Acting was atrocious, the camera shots were made by a kindergartner or something because it was simply that horrible, and nothing scary about this one. You didn't care much for any of the characters either, neither the iconic villain. Trash movie, 100% would not recommend. I felt like I wasted both my life and time on this movie.
- darapjohnson
- Mar 31, 2022
- Permalink
- Robinson2511
- Feb 16, 2015
- Permalink
This is really impressive for a straight-to-video, pretty better than 'Urban Legends: Bloody Mary' another straight-to-video that was also the third in its trilogy. There was real looking gore and death scenes that were nicely done. Its really decent and fans of the series will sure like this one.
A group of friends are on a ferris wheel ride and they are telling the legend of 'The Fisherman.' Its just legend they say. Or is it? When a prank causes a deadly accident, the group keeps it a secret. A year later, that's when they face the menace.
So look for this one in a video store near you. Its worth a rent.
A group of friends are on a ferris wheel ride and they are telling the legend of 'The Fisherman.' Its just legend they say. Or is it? When a prank causes a deadly accident, the group keeps it a secret. A year later, that's when they face the menace.
So look for this one in a video store near you. Its worth a rent.
- iBeg_to_differ
- Aug 8, 2006
- Permalink
So here it is. Finally. "I'll Always Know What You DiD Last Summer". A lot of people were eager to see this movie, BUT: It's not an "I Know..."-film.
Okay, it's got the fisherman. And that's it. it is in absolutely no context to the first two parts, except for the fisherman and the title. Well, actually, just the title.
I'm wondering if this is what was going on in the production-office: Producer 1: "Hey, how do we get people to watch our movie?" Producer 2: "I've got an idea. People liked the 'I Know What You Did Last Summer'-Movies. Let's make a third." Producer 1: "Hey, good idea. But we won't get Jennifer Love-Hewitt or Freddy Prince Jr. or anyone else from the first two parts." Producer 2: "Doesn't matter. We'll just take the title and let the fisherman kill some other kids, who are not from South Port and who didn't throw Ben Willis into the ocean." Producer 1: "But why would he do that?" Producer 2: "Doesn't matter, they'll have to watch the movie before they can realize that it's crap!" Producer 1: "Cool!"
Okay, it's got the fisherman. And that's it. it is in absolutely no context to the first two parts, except for the fisherman and the title. Well, actually, just the title.
I'm wondering if this is what was going on in the production-office: Producer 1: "Hey, how do we get people to watch our movie?" Producer 2: "I've got an idea. People liked the 'I Know What You Did Last Summer'-Movies. Let's make a third." Producer 1: "Hey, good idea. But we won't get Jennifer Love-Hewitt or Freddy Prince Jr. or anyone else from the first two parts." Producer 2: "Doesn't matter. We'll just take the title and let the fisherman kill some other kids, who are not from South Port and who didn't throw Ben Willis into the ocean." Producer 1: "But why would he do that?" Producer 2: "Doesn't matter, they'll have to watch the movie before they can realize that it's crap!" Producer 1: "Cool!"
I'll always remember this film because its hot,and scary,just because its Direct -To Video doesn't mean it sucks. The movie opens at a carnival on the 4th of July, where the new group of teens discuss the legend of the fisherman with the hook who kills people on the 4th of July. Then without warning the fisherman appears and runs through the carnival, scaring the s**t out of everyone.A crowd watches in terror as the killer runs onto the roof and battles P.J., the sheriff's son. This scene is hilarious because P.J., like all teens, is a skateboarder. He uses his board to block the hook and then skates across the roof and does an awesome trick. Then the lead teens run off and giggle because this whole thing was a prank, their friend was dressed up as the fisherman. The hook he used allegedly belonged to the original fisherman, and he bought it on ebay. Somehow it's not until a little later that they notice that P.J. never landed his awesome skateboard trick, and was impaled on a tractor. The real killer comes for revenge, and stalks the kids one by one. The only thing i was very disappointed with, is the ending! Other than that, a great movie! very scary and entertaining, definitely worth a rent, especially if your a fan of the first two!
- Horror_Fan01
- Feb 24, 2007
- Permalink
This was a decent movie, nowhere near the quality or the caliber of the first two but it was okay. I don't like the direction they took with the fisherman (Ben Willis) character at all. I think it was pushed through and that's the main reason it went straight to video. They should have written a killer script and enticed the original remaining characters to return for one last go round. But they didn't and that's why they have a straight to DVD movie. Is it a good film? Sure it is, but remember one thing... When you're watching it, forget that it is part 3 of the "I know what you did last summer" series and just watch it as a horror flick. That's it, don't expect anything new, don't expect to be blown away, just watch it. Pop you some pop corn, turn out the lights, grab your honey and just watch it...
- sawilson-2
- Aug 17, 2006
- Permalink
same old formula as old ones... so if you kind of liked the old ones you may enjoy this one...
I particularly think that the producers did not need to make this movie at all, because it did not bring much to the table in terms of anything in specific .. bad actors, bad plot. ..same as the original one... with just one tiny difference in the end.. . to make it a little more interesting... just a little.... I just enjoyed a little because I like
this kind of movies....
that's all...cheers
hope you all like it at least a little bit
they should have considered bringing back the original cast so as to make this film more appealing to the audience .....
then they should have considered a better script rather than coming up with one similar to the original script....I would be at least more interesting....
I particularly think that the producers did not need to make this movie at all, because it did not bring much to the table in terms of anything in specific .. bad actors, bad plot. ..same as the original one... with just one tiny difference in the end.. . to make it a little more interesting... just a little.... I just enjoyed a little because I like
this kind of movies....
that's all...cheers
hope you all like it at least a little bit
they should have considered bringing back the original cast so as to make this film more appealing to the audience .....
then they should have considered a better script rather than coming up with one similar to the original script....I would be at least more interesting....
- tammytastic
- Aug 27, 2006
- Permalink
- wolfmano23
- Aug 26, 2006
- Permalink
- headfulofghosts126
- Aug 12, 2006
- Permalink