Chromeskull: Laid to Rest 2

Short and sweet, with no spoilers.

As noted in other reviews, the movie picks up where part one ended, but quickly goes another direction, as we find out Chromeskull has an entire team of people working for him. Again, as many reviews note, this is hard to believe, and a bit of a personal letdown, but I won't trash it like others. At the end of the day, I don't judge movies on whether they are realistic, as I take what I'm fed and go from there. Most serial killer/slasher flicks are unrealistic, so why wrestle with a plot over its "this could never happen" facets?

I put this movie in the "JUST O.K." boat. I came for the blood and gore, not superb storyline or acting, and in this respect it was fine. Due to working on intercharacter relationships, however, some of the intensity was lost, as well as the consistency of "kills," if that makes sense.

***NOTE: So I like blood and guts horror. Sue me.

But I digress.

Personally, I feel like the storyline tried to do too much for a formulaic slasher flick. I liked the original, as it wasn't about notable actors or personal relationships other than the people involved. With Brian Austin Green's inclusion, part 2 felt a bit contrived, as if attempting to find validation for the script. Besides the fact that he doesn't play a convincing maniacal killer, the beauty of part 1 is that the story doesn't rely on anything but sheer slashing. BAG was completely unnecessary and could have been played by any old chump and it wouldn't have mattered to me. Though, any time I see Danielle Harris, I'm happy.

Anyway...beyond this bit of beef, it was ok. The pace is different, since we already know what Chromeface does, and the story takes precedent over kills. At the end of the day, there just wasn't enough "meat" to take it from "just ok" to "good."

The production was on par with part 1. Shot on professional equipment, decent acting (but for BAG), editing, etc...all about the same as the original. Special fx remained decent as well.

All in all, if you watched the first one and enjoyed it, you'll be ok with the sequel (I hear there's another one in development...with BAG. Ugh), just don't expect quite as much. Not a total let down, but I think the writer just tried to do too much.

Notes on Parental Contact:

• There is a fair amount of profanity. At least as much as part 1, if not more.
• I would not call this a scary movie, but there are several scenes that could be described as "intense."
• Brief partial nudity but sex and sexual content is not a prevailing theme.
• Violence and gore is what most people would call "severe." As noted above, there are fewer killings in part 2 but the ones we do see are no less gory than the first. If you're a gorehound like me, it's fine. Lots of blood & violence with a smattering of gore for good measure.

For those who call this a terrible movie because the story is fake or the acting isn't Oscar worthy, why would you expect this to begin with? It's a straight-up slasher flick for the modern horror buff. Yes...they tried to add some "Saw"-like elements, but come on...what movie doesn't borrow from another these days.

So, if you watched the first, then you should see the second. Just know it's lost a bit of umph. Still worth the watch, just take what you're fed and go with it.

The specialized magazines loved this flick. I must say that I wasn't a fan of the first one. I liked the gore but it lacked on a story. This one was directed by the same director as part 1 (Robert Hall) and I must say, it was shot in the same way, a lot of gore but again it was written by the director himself and yes, a lack of story...

The flick starts were the other one ended at the grocery store. The heroin from part 1 (the wife of Robert Hall, Bobbi Sue Luther) has survived the atrocity at the store and she finally can go away from it all, wrong, after a shower someone is visiting her motel. From there on you can pick up the flick easily because before the shower scene she do has a flashback about what happened at the store.

The names from part 1 are back here in this part and some new names like Danielle Harris. She's only in it for a few minutes so don't expect to see her act like in Blood Night: The Legend Of Bloody Mary. Her name is in fact just a teaser. The acting is believable so on that part no complaints.

But as I said, the story is weak. Here we do have a fake Chromeskull and of course the real one. The fake one do plays the main part in the first part of Laid To Rest 2. The second part it's gore galore with the real Chromeskull. But it just doesn't fit the way the story is told. Why those two girls are chosen by Chromeskull isn't explained of example. And the coppers doesn't add anything special too.

But of course this feature is known for it's gore and that is done in a excellent way. The red stuff do flows a lot and the killings are done in a exaggerated style. The knifes are again impressive.

Overall, this movie is really one for the gorehounds and the lovers of torture porn. The Laid To Rest flicks aren't my cup of tea storywise but i do love the gore in it and the way the killings are done.

Gore 4/5 Nudity 2/5 Story 2/5 Effects 4/5 Comedy 0/5

When Laid To Rest came out, I thought I was in slasher heaven. The movie was no BS when it came to what it was about and solidly delivered the goods with gore. A few years later I revisited the film and realized a problem. I was too intoxicated with the gore when younger that I failed to see the horrendous acting. watching it again, I found myself cringing at almost every piece of dialogue. However I still liked the gore.

So here comes the sequel, which promised to be better and gorier, like all slasher sequels should. But I wanted to keep the expectations in check in case everyone stunk again.WRONG! Main girl Jess is very nice to look at and is a great scream queen, unlike the gratingly annoying girl from the first. Thomas Dekkar reprises his role and performs fine, but Jess is the main focus. Brian Austin Green steals the show when featured, I won't say his role but its massively entertaining.

With Chromeskull though, the main attraction is the gore. I write this review after viewing it on demand so I cannot tell if I saw the unrated, but WOAH, I'm more than sure I did. The body count reaches double digits, and every death is more elaborate than the next. not like Saw elaborate, but I've never seen blades used in so many shockingly graphic ways in one film. Director Robert Hall outdid himself here, it's just bloody beyond belief, really, and the energy keeps the film chugging along. There are also some legitimate scares and tension which Laid to Rest sorely lacked.

Did I have any problems with the film, sure, but they're too small to mention. See this if your a horror fan, and be prepared to see so much blood you'll be knocked back. Also, be sure to stay after the credits!

I know that I enjoyed the original Laid to Rest for its sheer enthusiasm and spectacularly OTT gore, but I can recall very little about the actual plot, despite having only seen it a year ago; perhaps that's because there wasn't much of a story to remember in the first place (the lack of strong narrative clearly didn't matter too much to me: I gave the first film a rating of 7.5/10).

Chromeskull: Laid to Rest 2 is just as eager to please in terms of bloody mayhem, and does so brilliantly with oodles of really mean-spirited and excellently executed gore, but this time around the film-makers also try to build on Chromeskull's character, and it is here that the film comes apart quicker than one of the killer's victims. While a bit of back-story mightn't have been so bad, what we are presented with here is so overblown, convoluted, and incomprehensible that it only serves to confuse and irritate in the extreme.

The film opens abruptly with no recap of previous events, immediately launching into the unnecessarily complex nonsense that passes for a plot, in which a secret organisation is revealed to be behind the work of our metal mask-wearing maniac. With a script even messier than one of Chromeskull's kills, the viewer is simply left with too many unanswered questions—Who are these characters? What is the nefarious organisation hoping to achieve? Why are the police so f•••ing inept? Who the hell thought it would be a good idea to hire Danielle Harris (she was in the extremely disappointing sequel to Hatchet too!)? It all adds up to a very frustrating and frankly rather tedious experience.

If director Robert Hall proceeds with his intended third and final Laid to Rest film, I really hope that he succeeds in explaining matters in a satisfying manner; simply drenching proceedings with buckets of really nasty knife action just won't cut it next time.

I rate Chromeskull: Laid to Rest 2 a 9/10 for the sterling work of the effects guys, but 1/10 for everything else (resulting in a disappointing average of 5/10).

ChromeSkull (Nick Principe), who barely escaped death, is hell-bent on continuing where he left off... and forging a new path of terror and destruction.

Robert Hall wrote and directed this picture, just like the first part. And Hall proves he knows what he is doing in the big chair -- while primarily known as a makeup artist, he skillfully controls this story and makes it a very powerful franchise for the 21st century. And he has not left the makeup behind, either -- CG is used very sparingly, with more than enough practical effects and gore to satisfy any horror fan.

The cast is also a bit stronger this time, with horror icon Danielle Harris making a sizable cameo and the well-known Brian Austin Green in a starring role. His character calls to mind certain aspects of "Saw", which I think is unfortunate, but also overcomes those comparisons. ChromeSkull is not Jigsaw -- he cares not for redemption or to test humanity.

There is an expanded mythology in this film centering around "the organization", which I found to be a bit complicated and hard to follow. Maybe I need to view the first film again, view this film again or listen to the commentary. I feel there is a lot of potential here for exploring the organization, and also potential for sequels (though hopefully they do not proceed without having a solid story to tell).

This sequel is more mature than the original, but relies on the same strengths -- fast-paced action, terror and gore. If that is the type of horror film you like, this is a must-see for you. I do not wish to say it is anti-cerebral, but this is not a thinking film... it is blood first, story second... and not in a bad way.