Review: Wrong Turn 2: Dead End

Sometimes Hollywood gets sequels right.

This isn’t one of those times.

Those (few) people who liked the original Wrong Turn pretty much did so because of the bloody cannibal gore. Well, this story has that, only less and not as good. What nixed the deal for me was where they replaced the high-suspense storyline with a thirty-pound bag of horse shit.

For those interested in such things as… you know… actual PLOT… here it is: A bunch of nitwits participate in a Survivor-style reality show where the producers picked the WRONG stretch of woods to set up production.

And that’s it.

If somebody gave me that plot, I could work with it. It would be a challenge since the premise is so stunningly contrived and cliche from from the get-go… but I could pull it off.

But I wasn’t writing this movie. Pity.

Oh yeah, characters. Here, they pulled the standard set of cliches from the Hollywood buffet, then didn’t even bother to fill them in enough for the viewer to actually CARE when they get eaten. There is exactly one character that was remotely interesting, the others were just annoying, some on purpose, some not. I realize that you don’t rent movies like this one so you can be dazzled with characterization, but there comes a point when the laziness of the screenwriters becomes a fatal flaw even for a monsters-n-gore movie. Here’s a tip for those guys: What makes excessive violence and gore work in a movie is when its happening to somebody the viewer CARES about or at least identifies with. Without that element of empathy, you essentially have… well… Wrong Turn 2.

Do we CARE what happens to the spoiled actress or the slutty actress or the movie producer guy or the random guy taking a piss in the woods? No. They didn’t even try to build any empathy for them. Do we care what happens to the vegan girl or the football guy or the asshole dude or the lesbian chick? Not really. They try to make us care, but fail miserably. Do we care what happens to that other producer chick? A little, maybe. But that’s too bad, considering how long she lasted.

Basically, any time two or more people are talking on the screen, I’m hoping some random mutant cannibal runs out of the woods and face-stabs one of them with a chainsaw because THAT would be more entertaining than watching these cardboard cutouts dance clumsily around a non-existent plot.

So here we go:

+5: Mutant cannibals are always good.
+3: Teen Cannibal Chick. She was actually pretty entertaining. No, really…
+1: Indestructible mutant cannibal? I swear to God they must have killed that one guy three times…


-15: Buy some scriptwriters next time. (Or just hire ME.)
-10: The marine guy. This isn’t a comedy, after all. He would have been a plus, but you took it waaaaay too far, and then let us down at the very end.
-5: Bad CGI. WTF, people… gore effects are all this movie has going for it, but some of those kills were clearly amateur work.

Bottom Line: Skip it.


  1. udgang99, November 18, 2007:

    Sounds cool – I’m gonna pick this up right away! :-) (no, really … I AM – have a soft spot in my heart for cannibals)

  2. DarkIcon, November 18, 2007:

    You’d probably like the first one better. It was an all around better movie (even though most people hated it).

  3. udgang99, November 20, 2007:

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA … OMFG ! I just saw it … it was soo funny! Henry Rollins as a Rambo wannabe – priceless! But actually, it wasn’t all that bad. Sure, the characters were cliches, but when there were only four left, I actually hoped they would get out – even the annoying skaterdude. I do disagree with you thinking the producers girlfriend being the only one remotely interesting … I thought she was just as cliche as the others, and I was sure that she would be the survivor – so it was kind of a “nice” surprise that she got whacked so quickly. I liked the vagan girl – but that was properbly because I thought she was goddamn hot (I’m gonna find out if she in anything else! ;) ). The firste scene with the spoiled actress getting split in two – oh man, that was so funny.

    So, bottom line, I actually enjoyed this one. Was it a good movie – hell no, but it was funny. (and Erica Leerhsen was hot – ’nuff said)

  4. DarkIcon, November 20, 2007:

    But that’s just it: the FIRST movie was not a comedy… so why should someone expect the sequel to be? Had I gone into this film knowing that it was basically a satire of the first film, then I would have appreciated it more… as you, apparently did. But I’m glad you liked it. As a comedy, it is pretty decent. As a horror movie, it blows.

  5. udgang99, November 20, 2007:

    Guess I’ll have to go find the first one now! ;-)

  6. nate, November 18, 2008:

    I saw the first one on the recommendation of a coworker and loved it. I saw the second one because of how I felt about the first one, and after the first kill scene it went down the crapper the rest of the way.

    They were both better than the hills have eyes series though.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.