http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/56/Urban_Legend_film.jpg/200px-Urban_Legend_film.jpg

The original has really good plot and some great twists.

Urban Legend is a 1998 horror film and is based on the premise that a killer is using the methods of death described in certain urban legends (such as the fatal mixing of cola and Pop Rocks) as a means to kill his victims.

Alicia Witt's performance earned her a nomination for a Saturn Award for "Best Performance by a Younger Actor/Actress" by the Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/79/Urban_Legends_Final_Cut_film.jpg/200px-Urban_Legends_Final_Cut_film.jpg

This is the follow up to the first film and IMO is'nt as good. I also dont understand why Rebecca Gayheart makes a pointless cameo at the end of the movie - she should have had more screen time.

Advertised as a sequel to 1998's Urban Legend, the film shares little in common with that film aside from general themes and the character of Reese. It stars Jennifer Morrison, Matthew Davis, Hart Bochner, Loretta Devine, Joseph Lawrence, Anson Mount, Eva Mendes, Jessica Cauffiel and Anthony Anderson.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/45/Urban_Legends_Bloody_Mary_film.jpg/200px-Urban_Legends_Bloody_Mary_film.jpg

Havent watched this one yet, but looks like it could be the scariest of the lot...

Urban Legends: Bloody Mary is a 2005 horror film, the second "non-sequel" sequel in the series, that began with Urban Legend and Urban Legends: Final Cut. Further removed from the original than Final Cut was, this sequel contains no characters from either of the two previous films. Bloody Mary abandons the slasher element of the other two movies in favor of a supernatural element clearly inspired by such hits as The Ring and The Grudge. It went straight to DVD in mid-2005.

 

I ordered the boxset of all 3 movies from Amazon for a measly £8.90.

Anyone else seen 1,2 or 3?

Edited July 15, 200718 yr by coolnav

yes i loved it

I've seen this before, I really like it, the deaths are all really imaginative, but the killer's costume could have been slightly more inventive

The third one was a mess. They didn't run with the same theme, instead they used an actual ghost. :rolleyes:

The third one was a mess. They didn't run with the same theme, instead they used an actual ghost.

Yeah, if it works - dont change it i say! How was the 2nd?

To be honest, I see the "Urban Legend" films in pretty much the same way as I see films like "Scary Movie", "Scream" or "Shaun of the Dead" (only nowhere near as clever as SOTD or Scream..), the UL films are clearly Spoof Horrors, as none of them are particularly scary and they're all too damn busy being all "post-modern" or "self-reflexive" to actually give us any proper scares... "Scream" at least had that genuinely terrifying, claustrophobic opening 10 minute sequence, none of the "Urban Legend" films really have sequences to compare to that one....

The second one wasn't that good either. I wouldn't waste my money on them if I were you.

The second one wasn't that good either. I wouldn't waste my money on them if I were you.

Already have now :( Ahh well, only £8.

To be honest, I see the "Urban Legend" films in pretty much the same way as I see films like "Scary Movie", "Scream" or "Shaun of the Dead" (only nowhere near as clever as SOTD or Scream..), the UL films are clearly Spoof Horrors, as none of them are particularly scary and they're all too damn busy being all "post-modern" or "self-reflexive" to actually give us any proper scares... "Scream" at least had that genuinely terrifying, claustrophobic opening 10 minute sequence, none of the "Urban Legend" films really have sequences to compare to that one....

Maybe so, but i didnt compare it with other movies really, it may be in the same genre, but has a completely different storyline. I enjoyed everything in the movie, such as the massive twist at the end.

Just watched the second ... not as good as the first :(

The song they use in the third is quite nice....That's about the only decent thing, lol.

Oh noooooooooooo - so the 3rd is worse than the second?!

Yup, lol.

HA!

 

The first "Urban Legend" was enjoyable enough...the others...laughable.

Maybe so, but i didnt compare it with other movies really, it may be in the same genre, but has a completely different storyline. I enjoyed everything in the movie, such as the massive twist at the end.

 

I dont think can really just look at it without comparing it to other films of that type... It was obvious to me that UL was going down exactly the same "post-modernist" route as "Scream" (to far less effect IMO), not to mention Tarantino films, with all the movie references scattered around (particularly in the second film) which seem to be a vital element of the actual plot....

HA!

 

The first "Urban Legend" was enjoyable enough...the others...laughable.

 

I would say the first one was "watchable", but cant fault your opinion on the other two.... :lol: Laughable indeed.....

 

I really do think the first was one of the best slasher/horror/suspense films i have ever seen.

Watched the first one again last week - LOVE IT! Anyone else seen it recently?

The first one was ok, basic horror after Scream and I Know What You Did Last Summer...even thou not as good as those two. Very routine flick with no surprises or anything that you couldn't see coming ages before thay happened. The second part was poor excuse for a horror film. While the first at least had a few thrills, ok acting etc the second one had nothing. It had straight-to-video written all over it but thanks for being a sequel for a film that did ok at the boxoffice it made to movie theaters (and did very poorly, the first one made over $38m at the US box office while the second stalled at $21m). And the third one was made just to make the last money from a dying franchise. Very slow moving plot, poor acting, no thrills....this time instead straight-to-dvd this could have been a cable movie for some lame channel that no1 bothers to watch.