Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 21 reviews in total 

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

I enjoyed this more than the first one

7/10
Author: udar55 from Williamsburg, VA
29 April 2009

This might be the only Lovecraft movie sequel to actually adapt a Lovecraft story ("The Statement of Randolph Carter," which actually preceded "The Unnamable") and is a superior sequel. Well, I think it is superior since I can't remember liking THE UNNAMABLE that much (outside of some nice make-up). Stephenson is an unusual lead, a very intense nerd totally focused on his task at hand. Klausmeyer, who inexplicably sees his character renamed from Howard Damon to Eliot Damon Howard, is good as well. Completely underutilized David Warner slipped in for one day to shoot a scene as the college chancellor and Rhys-Davies might have been there for a couple of days. The film offers lots of gore and, again, the creature design is pretty damn spiffy. The real star, however, is b-movie actress Maria Ford. This might actually be her strongest acting role as the displaced 17th century girl (and I'm not saying that because she spends 50% of her screen time nude). Sadly, I decided to look her up online and she has had some horrific plastic surgery in the ensuing years.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

A Lovecraftian Gore Fest!

8/10
Author: Clayton07 from United States
3 July 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The Unnameable 2 is loosely based on Lovecraft's "Unnameable" and the "Statement of Randolph Carter". The film strays from the two stories quite a bit, but it has tons of Cthulhu Mythos elements. Mark Kinsey-Stevenson and John Rhys-Davies really propel this film. I think their acting is top notch.

The blood quotient is very high in this film. And the gore effects are the good old fashioned kind! The film is fast paced unlike other horror movies that can put you out (such as the first Unnameable that had a slow middle). If you enjoy Lovecraft, gore, and good acting, this movie is right up your alley.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Entertaining Lovecraft

6/10
Author: skallisjr from Tampa, FL United States
14 May 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

How do you make a sequel to a Lovecraft short story that ends without any follow-on? Possible spoilers follow: You take an entirely different Lovecraft short story and make it part of the second film. "Statement of Randolph Carter," an entirely unrelated short story, was made an element in this film. The character of Professor Warren was originally a friend of Carter's who explored the underground tunnels using a telephone set using wires. The basic outcome was the same, though.

The film is full of Lovecraftania and has good touches of humor in it. It falls to the edge of the Cthulhu Mythos, but is part of the Mythos. IMHO, it's a better film than the first, but requires the first really to appreciate it.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

The Unnamable II

7/10
Author: Scarecrow-88 from United States
2 September 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Randolph Carter(Mark Kinsey Stephenson)decides to pursue the she-beast which attacked and killed some of his college chums. Eliot(Charles Klausmeyer), haunted by nightmares of the beast's hideous face, survived the incident with nasty gashes on his chest and reluctantly joins Carter in his search for it. Seeking guidance from an authoritative figure he can trust and respect, Carter goes to Professor Warren(John Rhys-Davies, a delightful presence)whose field of expertise in in ancient history, among other things. On an expedition where the beast was seen nearby, Carter, Eliot & Warren find the entrance to an underground tunnel in an ancient graveyard which leads to the "prison" of the she-beast, whose caught in a thicket of heavy sticks and tree-branches. Having found the Necronomicon in Winthrope's home, Carter and Warren discover that the she-beast is actually Winthrope's beautiful daughter, Alyda(Maria Ford)"invaded" by the demonic spirit of an evil winged creature. Warren concocts a successful plan to release Alyda of the evil creature by using insulin tricking the monster into believing that the human host was dying. The spirit fleeing Alyda, she is awakened to a brand new world..but, the demonic winged creature, with sharp fingernails that rip human flesh easily, wishes to retrieve it's host and will kill anyone who stands in her way. After Warren discovers too late that the creature has remained in the tunnel, Carter and Eliot will attempt to find Alyda help(..she was kept in an attic during her young life and only knows the "Cthulu" language taught to her by pops)while staying one step ahead of danger. Unfortunately, students of Miskatonic University and Arkham County's finest will not be so lucky as the demonic winged creature goes on a killing spree ripping the throats of everyone it comes in contact with. The creature seems impervious to the bullets fired from guns as it pursues Alyda with an intense will. What will Carter do to help keep Alyda safe from harm? Can he stop the beast from "infiltrating" the body of Alyda once again?

Inspired by the works of Lovecraft, like a lot of horror films coming out in the late 80's and early 90's, "The Unnamable II" is more of a monster movie. The demonic creature's rampage is not as gory as I would've liked with a great many of the murders occurring off-screen. Too bad. But, substituting those potential thrills is Maria Ford practically naked under long hair(..which amazingly keeps her breasts hidden)for nearly the entire film, only wearing a gown when a female student pal of Carter's influences her into putting it on by disrobing. The love that strengthens between Carter and Alyda is rather sweet and Ford is adorable and convincing as a newborn pup introduced to a new world she's never known. The creature itself is none other than sex siren Julie Strain, unrecognizable under the scary make-up and costume. While there's little actual violence shown, you are treated to the creature's hand going through a man's chest. And, there is some fantastic make-up grue displaying ripped necks. Stephenson as the nerdy intellectual with craziness and chaos all around him, wisely plays his character completely straight, displaying a calm and reserve needed by the leader in charge of keeping Alyda from danger. David Warner is rather wasted in a cameo as Miskatonic University's Chancellor who warns Carter to not pursue the creature. Most of the other characters are fodder for the beast to destroy. Spirited direction from Jean-Paul Ouellette(..this is definitely an improvement over the first film which is more of a slasher flick), a nifty creature with cool wings, and a likable cast really enhance what could've just been yet another Lovecraft "adaptation" that missed the mark. The climax takes place in the Miskatonic library as Carter and Alyda have ran out of places to hide, discovering the missing pages of the Necronomicon within a secret room of books thanks to an air conditioning duct. The use of a wooden chair in battling the demonic creature when attempting to invade Alyda's body is kind of neat. Truth be told, though, my favorite scene would have to be when Alyda discovers a bed and is caressing her naked body throughout it..Ford's sensuality, even while portraying an innocent, is very present.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

We need more Cthulu movies....

6/10
Author: TMAN247 from Traverse City, MI
29 March 2001

This movie was pretty good (Maria Ford being nude for over half an hour certainly helped!). It involved the Lovecraft Cthulu mythos, and they did a good job with them. I wish they identified what monster they were actually dealing with, but I guess the name wouldn't have worked then LOL. Peace.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Slightly more ambitious follow-up by the same team who brought us the original

5/10
Author: (Vomitron_G) from the Doomed Megalopolis of Blasphemous Technoids
12 September 2011

This sequel to "The Unnamable" (1988) is actually a bit more interesting, as it's much more a mixture of things than the original was (it combines two Lovecraft stories this time, 'The Unnamable' & 'The Statement of Randolph Carter'). It flirts with quantum physics and other silly theories, even adding some comedic scenes to the events (which oddly enough do work). John Rhys-Davies is amusing as always, but lasts only half the movie. The always reliable David Warner has a cameo. Being a creature feature, the creature design (worn by actress Julie Strain) lives up to the expectations. The story picks up right after the events of the first film and meanders in slightly different directions this time. Just like the first film, which was much more a slasher-orientated effort, this sequel's hardly a masterpiece. But it's got some spirited moments, a handful of nasty kills and it remains a fun, entertaining watch nonetheless. The beautiful Maria Ford steals most of the show here, as she's walking around completely nude during half of the movie's running time. Furthermore, "The Unnamable II" stays true to the spirit of Lovecraft with a lot of amusing inside references to his works. So fans should be pleased, since a lot worse Lovecraft adaptations have been made throughout the years.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

The Unnamable 2 rocks!

Author: Prolox from Canada
26 May 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Unlike a lot of sequels that fail to measure up with it's predecessor, I'm more than happy to say that UNNAMABLE II manages to be right up their alongside the original as being equal or is it better? RANDOLPH CARTER this time takes the lead (He never met or fought the creature in the first) in fighting off the creature while saving it's beauty full alter ego that was separated from it's beastly other half, while CHARLES KING's character ARTHUR takes the back seat (The lead hero of the original) this time there's even more inventive & bloody kills & the film is loaded with suspense & is never boring, as it keeps you hooked from beginning to end, with it's always involving situations & good direction & storyline, the actors also do a good job & the demon make-up is creepy. Despite being one of the top billed actors in the film, David WARNER only has a cameo appearance. Highly recommended for fans of horror & fans of both H.P. LOVEVCRAFT & for those who enjoyed the original. And no I can't decide which is my favorite of the two!

**** stars

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

Was crapping myself for hours after viewing!

10/10
Author: skidmarx77 from United States
7 May 2006

This may be one of the greatest (and when I say the greatest,I mean THE GREATEST) horror film I've seen since SHOWGIRLS! The lead actor, Mark Kinsey Stephensen, channels the Mr. Tamborine man-size cajones of William Shatner with the acting range of a toaster oven not plugged in and with no muffins in it. The presence of veteran actors David Warner and John Rhys-Sallah-Gimli-Davies only heightens the cheese factor to Limburger-sized heights. This film contains AT LEAST 12 rewindable moments, including the gratuitous butt-shots of ham-sandwich sporting actress Maria Ford, the attack in a library by the Unameable on a bunch of mullet-coiffed cops, and an Obi-Wan Kenobi moment in which the LA Gear wearing sidekick is visited by the ghost of the Gorton's fisherman. Kudos to the supporting cast as well, from obviously gay George Takei wannabe pal to the hairy-kneed college student who looks like bastard love child of Fabio and Corey Feldman. Stack 'em high and dig in.

Was the above review useful to you?

really good !

9/10
Author: david9492 from United States
7 July 2012

Much better than original. One of the better Lovecraft adaptations. Like "Cast a deadly spell" it decided to go the tongue in cheek route. Stephenson is an almost perfect Lovecraft hero, and Davies and Warner were perfect casting for this movie. Its truly remarkable for a Low budget b-movie. Lovecraft adaptations are always difficult because the monsters are supposed to be from an entirely different Geometry and they drive people insane because they cant cope with the violation of Known laws of nature. Older movies like the "dunwich Horror" tried making their monsters shining lights and stuff and failed. I short i would recommend both movies. while the first is clearly inferior it is sort of a necessary prequel.

Was the above review useful to you?

Not a bad sequel just a error on one part

Author: pradaguy762001 from United States
8 August 2010

OK i remember watching this movie when i saw this on video back when i was like 17 and i thought it was a good movie and they tried to take off where the last film ends but the only thing that they messed up on was that they said the creature was born from Joshua Winthrop daughter but that is false he was born from Joshua Winthrop wife in the first film, that really was the only error i found in the movie. The movie was a good overall sequel, i wish they could of had a little more blood and guts, let you know what happened to Tanya from the first film. She was just seen driving off in the police car and was really not mention again. Otherwise not a bad movie

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Ratings External reviews Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history