Urban Legend 2

English

العربية

Filipino

Français

हिन्दी

Indonesia

বাংলা

اردو

123movies search icon

muted

Urban Legend 2 - 123Movies

Urban Legend 2

4.4

/10

20131 rating

2000•1 h 37 m•Canada

A film school is the center of a fresh spate of killings based on urban legends.

Horror

Mystery

Rekomendasi

Ulasan

CSK Fans

21/03/2026 03:29

Urban Legends: Final Cut

Landa

20/08/2024 15:09

A lot of people seem to hate this flick URBAN LEGENDS:FINAL CUT, but I don't. It's an interesting, solid sequel to the original URBAN LEGEND, a nifty whodunit/slasher/horror flick w/ the twist of the killer dispatching his victims based on urban legends. Interestingly, this 'sequel' really has no connection to the first except for the re-appearance of one of the characters from the original who survived the killings. This might be where this sequel partially screws up. There is a contingent that believes the original flick was really just an urban legend wrapped within an urban legend as the ending might imply. By having one of the characters from the first one in this one, it makes it seem as though the stuff in the first one really did happen making it just a standard horror flick. In any event, FINAL CUT is very watchable IMHO. The main thing it has going for it is the tip of the hat to Alfred Hitchcock in it's tone, presentation, and references. The film is set at a film institute where students aspire to be filmmakers (directors, writers, actors, editors, camera operators, etc.) and the prize they are all trying to win is the aptly named 'Hitchcock Award'. The front-running student is Travis Stark (played by Matthew Davis), but upon getting a grade of C on his final project, he apparently commits suicide thinking his career as a filmmaker will never get off the ground. The lead character is Amy Mayfield (fresh, young Jennifer Morrison), whose father was a famous filmmaker. Amy has a lot to live up to and feels the weight of her dad's fame. She is a very likable, identifiable character which I found refreshing. She really keeps you involved. Similar to the first film, all these killings are occurring, but only Amy believes they are happening. EVERYONE else seems to have a logical explanation for it, as in the first one. But this sequel, to me, does good job of combining those Hitchcock elements of involving the audience in the story as well as the fear of the unknown; there's actually a scene in the film where a bunch of students are watching film of a girl die, not realizing that she was really being murdered; this scene is really good. Then there are the direct homages to Hitchcock w/ scenes reminiscent of some of his most famous films (THE BIRDS, VERTIGO, PSYCHO, etc.). I also really like Amy's film crew and group of friends, who are very funny and engaging. They include Graham (Joey Lawrence), Vanessa (Eva Mendes), Toby (Anson Mount), Stan (Anthony Anderson), Sandra (Jessica Cauffiel), and Simon (Marco Hoffschneider). They all seem like a tight-knit group and the acting in this film is much better than in many such type films. Not the greatest horror flick, but not even close to the worst. I recommend it.

user7164193544460

20/08/2024 15:09

A film that can generate the most fiendish criticisms of all time, such as "pure crap" and "worst film ever made" etc etc, yet still manage to actually entertain some people, not because it is "so bad it's good" but because it is actually quite good must be hiding something from most of its audience. Basically, I think very few people "get" this film. In years to come this will be remembered as quite a well done little slasher flick, and will garner the kind of cult status that films like April Fool's Day and Prom Night achieved.

Blaq Mushka

20/08/2024 15:09

Horror movie fans will enjoy this movie. It's not great, but it has some really nice moments in it. One of the very first murder scenes is spooky and disturbing, but after that the movie just falls apart. There's suspense, but no real pay off for the suspense. It's a little snack for horror movies fans, nothing more.

user9926591043830

20/08/2024 15:09

Urban Legends: Final Cut starts off on the right note just like the original. It doesn't have horror classic written all over it like the first one did when it began but it still starts off above average. However just like the orignal once the film begins to progress it slowly turns into another crappy slasher film. The premise uses the whole movie within a movie tie in that is quite frankly getting a bit tired. Our new heroine is trying to win the prestigious Hitchcock Award for her new film which is about a serial killer who kills his victims based on Urban Legends. however once murders begin to happen on the set it becomes much harder to seperate fact from fiction. What i Liked: The heroine in this film is far more engaging than the one from the first film. She gives an honest performance and despite a tepid script she holds her own. Very interesting to see Joey...no i mean Joseph Lawrence in this film. I joked about him being in it when i first heard about it but he was actually kinda good. In fact i wish he could've been in it more because he provides some pretty funny moments in the film. i liked how it wasn't just a slasher film. During certain moments it played like a thriller and for at least the majority of the film the whodunit aspect is quite engaging. i liked the use of seperating fact from fiction. That was a bit interesting. The scene where thry begin to watch Amy's reel and the killer switches it to the death he filmed was pretty intense. What i didn't Like: Where in the hell were the urban legend deaths. We got one and that was it. The one they has was pretty good but the film is called urban legend you would tihnk they would utilize that. The last half of the film is even more ludicrious than the one in the first film. i found my self dumbfounded that they actually were allowed to produce the last half of this film. what a disappointed. You can tell that we're running out of costumes for the killer to wear. The fencing mask and black apparel might seem frightening to some but all i kept thinking was the killer looks like a giant micro-phone. The acting, with the exception of two people, is so painfully bad. My two year old brother could even act circles around these people. This might not say much but at least this sequelis better than something like I Still Know What you did Last Summer. It barely sinks below the level of the original and i guess that says something. It's no film masterpiece but i tihnk fans of the first film may enjoy it. 5/10

user9383419145485

20/08/2024 15:09

"Urban Legends: Final Cut" is about as good or as bad as you'd expect it to be. A sequel to 1998's teen-slasher flick, "Urban Legend," your enjoyment of this film is hinged solely on how you view the original. Personally, I felt the first movie was kind of flat and dull. Some interesting elements, but overall, not the best of the late 90's slasher craze. Enter "Final Cut." This film, on the other hand, is a solid little slasher with a similar mindset to that of the 80's slasher era. It hardly has the smarmy, self-referential winks to the camera that it's peers in "Scream" and "I Know What You Did Last Summer" had and despite some flaws, is a fun way to burn a couple of hours. Directed by John Ottman who is primarily known for his work as a composer and featuring a surprisingly extensive cast that includes Hart Bochner, Eva Mendes, Anthony Anderson and Joseph "Whoa!" Lawrence, this legend revolves around a film school where students are competing for a prestigious award. The Hitchcock award, to be exact. When innocent Amy Mayfield (Jennifer Morrison) decides to make a movie loosely based on the events of the first film, her crew finds themselves slowly being picked off one by one by a killer sporting perhaps some of the most ridiculous garbs yet: a fencing mask and a black rubber slicker. As in the first, he uses a few classic urban legends to accommodate his dirty deeds, but like most villains in sequels, he gets lazy and some of his kills are just straight-forward and messy. Surprisingly grisly and gory (especially in the case of the first victim, who had no relevance to the rest of the film to begin with), "Final Cut" is more cheap fun than anything. Although Ottman puts on a good show, his references to Hitchcock himself hardly mean that there is any genuine suspense to be found here. Instead, like the movies it subtly pays homage to such as "Friday The 13th" and "My Bloody Valentine" this little sequel is simply a fun, down and dirty little romp that forgets it's a sequel and goes for the gusto. It's not an amazing film by any stretch of the imagination, but far less pretentious than other films of it's era, and certainly a mind-numbing good time for genre fans who aren't afraid to slum it a little bit with fare such as this. Fun to sit down with a beer and a pizza, nothing worth taking too seriously, and certainly better than the first flick.

🇱🇾ٱڸالـ۾ــــــانێ

20/08/2024 15:09

I liked the original "Urban Legend" and I liked this one to. It has some suspense, and pretty much does what it's supposed to do. Another thing that I liked about this was that it didn't bring back the killer from the first film. It showed some originality by setting a "sequel" in a different location and dealing with, mainly, a different cast. My rating for both "Urban Legend" and "Urban Legends: Final Cut": 8/10

Noella Joline

20/08/2024 15:09

Urban Legends: Final Cut is set in the Alpine University film school in Los Angeles where student Amy Mayfield (Jennifer Morrison) is about to make a film in a bid to win the much coveted Hitchcock award, she rounds a few friends up & begins production on a slasher film about a killer who uses urban legends to dispatch his victims. At first things go alright but that changes when Amy discovers a security tape that shows her DP Simon (Marco Hofschneider) have his head bashed in with one of his own camera lens, unfortunately the tape disappears & no-one will believe her when she says she's next on the killers hit list... This Canadian American co-production was co-edited, co-scored & directed by John Ottman & despite it's bad reputation I will both freely & proudly admit that I really rather liked Urban Legends: Final Cut as one of the better recent slashers out there. The script by Paul Harris Boardman & Scott Derrickson is actually quite cheeky, quite bright & manages to just about distinguish itself enough from the original Urban Legends (1998), it moves along at a really good pace & it certainly never became boring neither did it drag. At heart it's basically a teenage slasher much in the same vein as Scream (1996) & it's imitators but I think there's enough here in Urban Legends: Final Cut to entertain in it's own right & it ended up being a lot better than I had expected, the character's & dialogue are much better than usual, I liked the way the story is based around a film school & there are a few nice ideas here like the Peeping Tom (1960) style murder of Sandra (Jessica Cauffiel) as the killer films her death from his point-of-view & the Twilight Zone (1982) homage at the very start. Then there's the Hitchcock award, I like to think that the name was knowingly picked to deliberately poke a bit of fun at the film itself. Then there's the outlandish ending which I thought was great & showed a knowing sense of humour, on the negative side the kills could have been a bit gorier, I could have done without the fat comic relief cop & the final twist at the end is a bit too silly to be taken seriously. Director Ottman does a good job here & the film looks pretty stylish with some cool lighting & cinematography, again much better than I was expecting. It's not really scary & I suppose it could just as easily be classed as a thriller as opposed to horror as it's a bit light in the gore department, there's a great kill where a woman wakes up to discover she has had her kidney removed & in her attempts to escape gets her head cut off with a broken window pane guillotine style. Unfortunately that's where it stops & the rest of the kills are rather tame & unimaginative & upon further investigation it seems that that decapitation sequence was shot months after the rest of the film had finished shooting as it was felt there needed to be another murder & it also explains why no-one ever mentions this murder or the character who gets murdered. With a supposed budget of about $15,000,000 I thought Urban Legends: Final Cut looked good, had decent special effects & good production values throughout. The acting was OK although that fat cop was annoying... Urban Legends: Final Cut turned out much, much better than I had anticipated & I'd even go as far as saying I rather liked it for what it was. It seems to have a lot of bad press so maybe I'm just mad but I reckon you could do a lot worse than this, I really do... Followed by a further sequel the straight-to-video Urban Legends: Bloody Mary (2005).

normesi_hilda

20/08/2024 15:09

URBAN LEGENDS: FINAL CUT Aspect ratio: 2.39:1 Sound formats: Dolby Digital / DTS / SDDS Several film students at an isolated university campus are targeted by a serial killer who patterns his/her crimes after various urban legends. John Ottman's unnecessary sequel is a disastrous jumble of humor and horror which isn't nearly as funny or frightening as the filmmakers might have hoped, and the visual references to various classic movies (most notably the VERTIGO-inspired climax) seem entirely superfluous. Most of the murders are routine, except for a grisly decapitation inspired by a similar sequence in Dario Argento's INFERNO (1980), but the rest of the movie adheres strictly to formula, as a masked killer strives to frame weak-willed heroine Jennifer Morrison for a series of brutal crimes. Only two of the characters from the original URBAN LEGEND (1998) have been retained: Loretta Devine as the campus security guard whose aspirations toward COFFY-style bravery are finally realized during a climactic confrontation with the killer, when he/she makes the mistake of trying to punch her out (Devine retaliates with the best line of dialogue in the entire movie!), and Rebecca Gayheart in an unbilled cameo which should raise a smile amongst devotees of the original film. The supporting cast is handsome but interchangeable, including Matthew Davis (TIGERLAND) as Morrison's potential love interest, Jessica Cauffiel (VALENTINE) as a dizzy would-be actress whose final sequence resembles one of the more famous set-pieces from PEEPING TOM (1959), Eva Mendes (ONCE UPON A TIME IN Mexico) as a statuesque lesbian beauty whose fondness for Morrison lands her in a whole heap of trouble, and Hart Bochner (APARTMENT ZERO, SUPERGIRL) as an unlikely college professor. Production values are polished, but the movie amounts to little more than an uninspired rehash, and represents an inauspicious debut for former composer/editor Ottman (THE USUAL SUSPECTS). Also starring Joseph Lawrence, Anson Mount and Marco Hofschneider.

christ guie

20/08/2024 15:09

What was John Ottman thinking when he made this film? Did he actually believe this would be a good movie? This is nothing but your stereotypical slasher film (AGAIN), where another masked killer is off killing college students. I'm tired of these kinds of films. It's the same thing all the time, either with high school students or college students. Hollywood needs to come up with some original stuff for a change. Anyway back to the movie. It starts off on a set of a film in the making and the cast gets introduced into the picture. The killing really doesn't start 'till about 15 or so minutes into the film. The plot itself is so stupid because the only reason they can explain why the person is killing people off is because of some Hitchcock award. What the heck? It's not like if I don't win some award that I'm gonna start killing people off. Another thing that kinda makes no sense is that there's only one cop in the whole college campus. I mean are we to believe that this is some super cop that needs no partner? A modern day superman? I would think that after the first two deaths or so that they'd get enough sense to bring in another officer, but nooooooo. So many plot holes, so little time to bash them. Also, what's with all these stupid masks that's been in these slasher films recently? First we get a ghostface (the best by far), then an oversized raincoat, then a giant snowjacket, and then there's this fencing mask. I'm sure there's more, but that's all I can think of right now. I mean if a killer really wanted to conceal his identity that he'd kill the people off then get the heck out of the city, but no he chooses to hang around until someone figures him out. I'd like to see one slasher where the guy wears some sort of wicked facepaint instead of a stupid jacket or a ridicules mask. Well anyway, the only thing really bad about this film is what's the most important of all, and that's the plot. It was just too overdone and predictable. There weren't even any good scares. I wouldn't be surprised if they made another sequel to this though. Maybe this time the killer will be someone's half brother or great uncle or maybe even the neighborhood kid who constantly stairs out the window. Geez.