Both films directed by Victor Salva.
Both films written by Victor Salva.
Starring Jonathan Breck.
Release Year: 2001 and 2003
Review Date: 9/1/03
So, in anticipation of the new horror flick
“Jeepers Creepers 2”, I watched the first film in the series (which
I had not seen) on The Movie Channel the day before seeing the
sequel. Then, I ran out to see the sequel, which made more money
over the weekend ($18 million) than it cost ($17 million), which
means only one thing: part three sooner than later! Impressions of
the first two...
I had remembered my cousin Ronnie telling me
that for some reason, he was shocked that “Jeepers Creepers” was
actually a decent horror flick. Not believing him, I skipped the
film for the last two years. But, some of my horror film friends
seemed to agree with Ron’s assessment, so maybe, just maybe, he
might be right...but, I still waited. With the sequel on deck, I
finally bit the bullet, and damn—“Jeepers Creepers” is actually not
I think it is this surprise that fuels a
solid 85 minutes of good times. See, the deal is that “Jeepers
Creepers”--where a brother and a sister discover a crazy guy that is
dumping bodies near a house off the highway--doesn’t really deserve
to be any good, but the pacing, the scares, the long silences and
the engaging leads dig it out of oblivion and make it a strong ride
for a while. I will be the first to admit that the initial decision
by teens Darry (Justin Long) and Trish (Gina Phillips) is just
fucking clichéd stupidity: check out just what the crazy guy is
doing dumping the dead bodies down a pipe in broad daylight instead
of running to call the cops. But, if you can get by that, good
times are had. It’s short, it has a good ending, and it has a
couple of decent kills in there for good measure. Just don’t go in
there expecting “Scream” or “Halloween” or anything of that caliber.
"Jeepers Creepers 2"
I imagined seeing “Jeepers Creepers 2” with
either my brother, “Dave” Bell, or my old roommate Keith “Dawg”
Karem, and walking out of the theater with them...one or both of
them would have immediately screamed out
“That was DOGSHIT”
and I would have laughed my ass off. As it
was, I had to curse to myself for thinking there was even a chance
that this sequel--fueled by even fewer name actors than the first
film--would be any good. Shit through and through, “Jeepers
Creepers 2” takes place in 2001, just days after the events of the
first film and near the end of that crazy guy’s ability to eat human
flesh for 23 days before going underground for 23 more years. In
fact, it’s day 21, and the Creeper (Jonathan Breck) snatches the son
of a farmer (Ray Wise) for a little snack before feeding on a
hapless bus of basketball players on their way back from a state
championship game. The farmer, naturally pissed off at that nasty
Creeper, sets off after it, and in the process tries to save the
remaining kids stuck on that bus.
But, the plot is worse than that, because
the Creeper spends almost a third of this film not killing anyone,
and I don’t come to see horror films for cat-and-mouse suspense, I
come to see folks get their heads lopped off. So, you would think
that writer/director Victor Salva would give me something else to
chew on between kills, right? Wrong. The kids on the bus are
boring macho types that have almost nothing interesting to say. In
a large horror film no-no (the first film was guilty as well), there
is no sex or nudity, and the laughs are few and far between. We
learn nothing more about the history of the Creeper, so there isn’t
even more backstory to give us...and, we have a ridiculous sideplot
with a psychic on the bus that just seems to know what’s going on
all too easily.
Bad. Just bad!
Rating: Hard Vice
Comments? Drop me a line at
Bellview Rating System:
"Opening Weekend": This is
the highest rating a movie can receive. Reserved for movies that
exhibit the highest level of acting, plot, character development,
setting...or Salma Hayek. Not necessarily in that order.
"$X.XX Show": This price
changes each year due to the inflation of movie prices; currently,
it is the $9.50 Show. While not technically perfect, this is a
movie that will still entertain you at a very high level.
"Undercover Brother" falls into this category; it's no "Casablanca",
but you'll have a great time watching. The $9.50 Show won't win any
Oscars, but you'll be quoting lines from the thing for ages (see
"Matinee": An average movie
that merits no more than a $6.50 viewing at your local theater.
Seeing it for less than $9.50 will make you feel a lot better about
yourself. A movie like "Blue Crush" fits this category; you leave
the theater saying "That wasn't too bad...man, did you see that
Lakers game last night?"
"Rental": This rating
indicates a movie that you see in the previews and say to your
friend, "I'll be sure to miss that one." Mostly forgettable, you
couldn't lose too much by going to Hollywood Video and paying $3 to
watch it with your sig other, but you would only do that if the
video store was out of copies of "Ronin." If you can, see this
movie for free. This is what your TV Guide would give "one and a
"Hard Vice": This rating is
the bottom of the barrel. A movie that only six other human beings
have witnessed, this is the worst movie I have ever seen. A Shannon
Tweed "thriller," it is so bad as to be funny during almost every
one of its 84 minutes, and includes the worst ending ever put into a
movie. Marginally worse than "Cabin Boy", "The Avengers" or
"Leonard, Part 6", this rating means that you should avoid this
movie at all costs, or no costs, EVEN IF YOU CAN SEE IT FOR FREE!
(Warning: strong profanity will be used in all reviews of "Hard