Three horror stories, including a woman's fate when she and her lover attempt to rob her husband's grave, a woman who brings her son back from the dead and a Zuni fetish doll who comes to li... Read allThree horror stories, including a woman's fate when she and her lover attempt to rob her husband's grave, a woman who brings her son back from the dead and a Zuni fetish doll who comes to life again and goes on another murderous rampage.Three horror stories, including a woman's fate when she and her lover attempt to rob her husband's grave, a woman who brings her son back from the dead and a Zuni fetish doll who comes to life again and goes on another murderous rampage.
- Nominated for 1 Primetime Emmy
- 1 nomination total
Featured reviews
Made-for-TV sequel to 1975's Trilogy of Terror, which was also made-for-TV. In the original movie, Karen Black starred in three separate stories. Here it's Lysette Anthony. The first story is "The Graveyard Rats." It's about a millionaire's young wife and her lover/cousin (Geraint Wyn Davies), who murder the old guy but find out all the money he had left was in Swiss bank accounts. The passcode for these accounts is on microfilm the old man had buried with him. So they have to go dig him up. But, oh no, what's this? There are giant fake rubber rats that are stealing corpses out of coffins. Good for some laughs, I guess. Anthony isn't a particularly strong actress and Davies is TERRIBLE. But it's got Geoffrey Lewis using an Irish accent so it's not all bad.
The second story is "Bobby," about a mother who uses witchcraft to bring her son (Blake Heron) back from the dead. But he comes back not quite right and soon is trying to murder his mom. This is a forgettable story that starts out one way but quickly devolves into a repetitive slasher story with the kid terrorizing the mom. A very annoying musical score accompanies the kid on his rampage. I screamed for those stupid horns to stop. Weakest story in the movie.
The final story is "He Who Kills." This is a sequel to the most popular segment from the original film, the Zuni fetish doll story. The police drop the doll from the first film off at a museum. It was badly burned so they want Dr. Simpson (Anthony) to examine it right away and tell them what it is. From here, in typical sequel fashion, we get a retread of the first film where the doll comes alive and tries to kill Anthony. Nowhere near as exciting or scary as the original but still the best of this movie. More annoying music.
Made-for-TV movies had decreased in quality quite a bit by the 1990s. This is in large part because in the '70s and '80s, the weekly TV movie was a staple of network television. By the '90s the TV movie became something reduced to crappy cable channels and the occasional network effort like the Amy Fisher crap. They were a higher quality in the old days, for the most part. I'm not saying they were equal to theatrical films but they were a lot better than most of the stuff that's been produced for cable the last 25 years or so. Anyway, this is watchable enough. It helps that Dan Curtis, the director of the original, returned to direct this. It's nothing that will leave an impression but you won't hate yourself for having watched it either.
The second story is "Bobby," about a mother who uses witchcraft to bring her son (Blake Heron) back from the dead. But he comes back not quite right and soon is trying to murder his mom. This is a forgettable story that starts out one way but quickly devolves into a repetitive slasher story with the kid terrorizing the mom. A very annoying musical score accompanies the kid on his rampage. I screamed for those stupid horns to stop. Weakest story in the movie.
The final story is "He Who Kills." This is a sequel to the most popular segment from the original film, the Zuni fetish doll story. The police drop the doll from the first film off at a museum. It was badly burned so they want Dr. Simpson (Anthony) to examine it right away and tell them what it is. From here, in typical sequel fashion, we get a retread of the first film where the doll comes alive and tries to kill Anthony. Nowhere near as exciting or scary as the original but still the best of this movie. More annoying music.
Made-for-TV movies had decreased in quality quite a bit by the 1990s. This is in large part because in the '70s and '80s, the weekly TV movie was a staple of network television. By the '90s the TV movie became something reduced to crappy cable channels and the occasional network effort like the Amy Fisher crap. They were a higher quality in the old days, for the most part. I'm not saying they were equal to theatrical films but they were a lot better than most of the stuff that's been produced for cable the last 25 years or so. Anyway, this is watchable enough. It helps that Dan Curtis, the director of the original, returned to direct this. It's nothing that will leave an impression but you won't hate yourself for having watched it either.
Lysette Anthony takes over for Karen Black in this trilogy of scary stories in which she is the star in each tale. The first one is about adultery, murder, and grave robbers. The second tale is about a mother who uses black magic to bring her dead son back to life. The final and best tale is about the demonic African doll from the first film stalking Anthony. While the effects may be a bit on the cheap side, this is a fun and scary outing. Lysette Anthony is a good choice for taking over the Karen Black.
Rated R; Violence and Profanity.
Rated R; Violence and Profanity.
And with a cast that includes Lysette (Any relation to Josette?) Anthony, who is and always shall be a major babe, and Geraint Wyn (Who seems to do his best work at Knight.) why shouldn't he? I saw much that was borrowed from the Dan Curtis hit Dark Shadows in this made for TV flick ... The photography, the music certainly, and the ocean shots from the second tale. And these all work right well in this movie. The plots, as a whole, and the acting in particular, work well enough to be enjoyable. True, certain themes like the killer doll have been done to death over the years, but Curtis still knows how to put a twist to the devil of a tail.
When you compare this movie to its predecessor, which got released 11 years before this one, you'll have to conclude that this movie is not a better than its predecessor because of the reason that it's stories all are slightly weaker ones.
Again, just like its predecessor, this movie tells 3 different, unrelated stories that somehow all involve the supernatural. What they have in common is that in all 3 stories the main characters is being played by the same actress. In "Trilogy of Terror" this was Karen Black, in "Trilogy of Terror II" its Lysette Anthony. She of course is not as great as Karen Black, though its fun to see her playing 3 totally different characters in each story.
This is more an horror movie than its predecessor was. All of the stories this time feature horror elements. Again, the last story of the movie features the Zuni doll, which also was the highlight of the first movie. Perhaps this is also the reason why it's named "Trilogy of Terror II"? Fore otherwise this movie of course has little to nothing to do with the first movie that got made 11 years(!) before this one.
None of the stories are extremely well written or anything and they all got based on different short stories. The movie is longer than "Trilogy of Terror" and every story this time is about 30 minutes long instead of 20-something minutes. That doesn't really mean though that the stories are well layered or anything like that. At times they are even a bit dragging, which causes them to be a bit uneven in parts. The build up to the eventual horror often takes too long, which makes the movie itself needlessly long as well.
Of course these type of movies are never dull for the lovers of the genre. Dan Curtis is obviously a director with a love for the genre and that passion really shows on the screen at certain points.
6/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Again, just like its predecessor, this movie tells 3 different, unrelated stories that somehow all involve the supernatural. What they have in common is that in all 3 stories the main characters is being played by the same actress. In "Trilogy of Terror" this was Karen Black, in "Trilogy of Terror II" its Lysette Anthony. She of course is not as great as Karen Black, though its fun to see her playing 3 totally different characters in each story.
This is more an horror movie than its predecessor was. All of the stories this time feature horror elements. Again, the last story of the movie features the Zuni doll, which also was the highlight of the first movie. Perhaps this is also the reason why it's named "Trilogy of Terror II"? Fore otherwise this movie of course has little to nothing to do with the first movie that got made 11 years(!) before this one.
None of the stories are extremely well written or anything and they all got based on different short stories. The movie is longer than "Trilogy of Terror" and every story this time is about 30 minutes long instead of 20-something minutes. That doesn't really mean though that the stories are well layered or anything like that. At times they are even a bit dragging, which causes them to be a bit uneven in parts. The build up to the eventual horror often takes too long, which makes the movie itself needlessly long as well.
Of course these type of movies are never dull for the lovers of the genre. Dan Curtis is obviously a director with a love for the genre and that passion really shows on the screen at certain points.
6/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Dan Curtis returns to Trilogy of Terror 20 years after he terrorized Karen Black with that creepy doll, but Black's absence this time is obvious and Lysette Anthony is competent but can't quite fill Black's shoes.
Once again, Curtis gives us three tales of terror - one features an adulterous wife who gets her just desserts after plotting to kill her husband, another has her playing a grieving mother who brings her child back to life via witchcraft with some deadly consequences, and the final story has her as a museum researcher who gets terrorized by the same scary doll from the original film.
None of the stories are as terrifying as the final story of the original film, but they're all well told and entertaining enough for 90 minutes.
Once again, Curtis gives us three tales of terror - one features an adulterous wife who gets her just desserts after plotting to kill her husband, another has her playing a grieving mother who brings her child back to life via witchcraft with some deadly consequences, and the final story has her as a museum researcher who gets terrorized by the same scary doll from the original film.
None of the stories are as terrifying as the final story of the original film, but they're all well told and entertaining enough for 90 minutes.
Did you know
- TriviaIn the film's third segment, "He Who Kills," one of the museum security guards is reading a "Dark Shadows" comic book and enthuses about how he used to rush home from school to watch it. Director Dan Curtis created the two TV series Dark Shadows (1966) and Dark Shadows (1991).
- GoofsIn the film's third segment, the bottom half of the dead body of Amelia is shown wearing a short blue robe. In the third segment of the first film, Trilogy of Terror (1975), Amelia wore a short white robe.
- ConnectionsFeatures Kiss of Death (1947)
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Dan Curtis' Trilogy of Terror II
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content