From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 16:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 155 reviews in total 

36 out of 46 people found the following review useful:

Not nearly as bad as people say it is

Author: Barry Iverson from Washington, USA
9 June 1999

After hearing countless people tell me how crappy this movie is, and after reading tons of reviews that make it sound totally unbearable, I decided to watch it myself. You know what? They are all wrong. Most of the movie is at LEAST average direct-to-video work. Of course it isn't as good as the original, but this movie was just as gory, more action-packed, and had some very funny moments (they watched Mexican porno for a VERY long time in that motel room). I was not disappointed watching this movie, because I didn't take it seriously. I suggest you relax and give it a try, you'll laugh at how funny they tried to make this a good movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

OK B-Movie, terrible plot...

Author: Rasmus Petersen (swacs@hotmail.com) from Kolding, Denmark
29 August 2000

Making a sequel to the original From Dusk Till Dawn seems impossible, and this joint shouldn't be seen as a sequel. The only things featured in the original is a few actors and nothing else. Anyways, the movie has many funny B-movie shots, overdone one would say, and it seem as if the director Scott Spiegel is tryin' too hard to make it like his friend Sam Raimi's Evil Dead films, including cameo by Bruce Campbell. The acting is pretty bad, the plot is even worse, but still there's some quite good ideas. But it's only a made-for-video film, so I didn't have any expectations at all, even though From Dusk... being one of my all-time-favorite. It's actually impressive that Tarantino & Rodriguez even wanted to executive this movie.

Check it out, I'm on my way to rent the 3rd one... Peace Out!

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

For a DTV, it's PDF!

Author: Robin Warder (r&pwarder@gbd.com) from Orangeville, Ontario, Canada
5 October 1999

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I obviously didn't have high hopes for "From Dusk Till Dawn 2" after its opening reel. Like the infamous "Congo", it makes the grave mistake of killing off the multi-talented Bruce Campbell in the first five minutes, and also does the same thing to Tiffani-Amber Thiessen, despite the fact that all the ads for the movie had mislead one into believing that she has a sizable role in it. The fact that their death scene has absolutely NOTHING to do with the main storyline doesn't help much either, but amazingly, "FDTD 2" eventually makes up for these miscalculations and becomes a surprisingly fun direct-to-video quickie. Whatever flaws it possesses are redeemed by the enthusiasm of the cast and the filmmakers, who probably realized that they were making an inconsequential film, but seemed to have had a ball doing so nonetheless. It's directed by Scott Spiegel, who co-wrote "Evil Dead 2" and has been a long-time associate of Sam Raimi's, and he gets help on the script from Duane Whitaker, who has a major role in the film and is probably best known for playing the bizarre pawn shop owner, Maynard, in "Pulp Fiction". The two of them may not have the same polish as a Quentin Tarantino-Robert Rodriguez combination, but they both have an obvious love for the genre and at the occasional moment in the film, some fresh new ideas to add to it.

The original "From Dusk Till Dawn" was one of the most enjoyable genre efforts of the 90s, which unfortunately, received a lot of criticism from non-horror fans who thought that Tarantino's screenplay started off as a potentially interesting drama that sold out midway through, opting instead to become a over-the-top gorefest in the second half. Of course, most genre aficionados found those horror elements so entertaining that they didn't care at all about the detour in Tarantino's script. Of course, "FDTD 2" doesn't near measure up to its predecessor, but if there's one thing that it does to improve upon it, it's that it doesn't even try to pretend that it has the potential to be anything else, and just presents itself as a good ol' horror outing, mixed in with a fairly standard heist story. It also helps, however, that the characters are more sharply written and the dialogue is more witty than you'd expect for a flick of this kind. The fine B-movie cast somehow makes you care in spite of yourself, and by the time the movie reached its climactic bloodbath at the bank, I was surprised by how much I was into the film. But when all is said and done, what really matters is if the horror elements deliver, and Spiegel does just that, providing some very inventive death scenes and some show-off Raimi-esque camera work (including a neat point-of-view shot of a key going into a keyhole). Sure, the gore and the F/X aren't exactly up to the "Saving Private Ryan" level of realism, but it's not like they were that great in the original either. It's not the slickness of the production, but the enthusiasm and spirit of it all that matters. And since "From Dusk Till Dawn 2" has that kind of spirit and delivers what it promises, it comes across as a direct-to-video production that's pretty-damn-fun!

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

Cheesy B-horror fun!

Author: Jesse-45 from Florida
6 April 2000

OK. This is probably my guiltiest pleasure ever! The acting is extremely awful, and the movie is filled with immature draggings of the originals material. But still I like this movie. A cinescape reviewer wrote that some horror fans desperate for something new in the genre, may forgive the film for its problems. I think I'm probably one of those horror fans.

Its more entertaining than a lot of recent theatrical releases. I think the gore is great, and the Evil Dead qualities: Sam Raimi-ish camera angles (overdone), demon-like vampire deaths make this movie even more entertaining. I think its really a great cheeseball B-horror movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

Fun Movie - But Where's The Plot?

6/10
Author: Gislef from Iowa City, IA
6 March 2000

I only caught the "edited" version on Sci-Fi Channel, but must admit that I found this to be a mildly entertaining film. It takes a basic ideas (vampires robbing a bank) and goes with it and runs.

The problem is that that's really all there is, and there's not much running track. Like the original, it tries to stay "reality" grounded as a caper flick, but given this is a shorter movie, this goes on _way_ too long before you actually get to vampires.

Once we get the first guy bit by a vampire, it moves along to "vampires rob a bank" and "vampires shoot it out with police." But...that's really about it. The writers seemed to have run out of ideas, and so we just get interminable variations on these two basic ideas. There is no real climax - the vampire bad guys are subsequently interchangeable, and the only really competent one (Jesus) gets killed before the formerly-dimwitted one. The ending is just one big shootout, prolonged by a convenient solar eclipse. Which is another pointless plot point - if you want vampires to be in the darkness, just keep them in darkness and have the sun come up normally. Adding the solar eclipse does nothing here. It's stuff like this which suggests the writers didn't know quite what they were doing.

As for the Raimi-esque POV shots, a little goes a long way - something that Scott Spiegel should have learned from the master. It's kinda fun the first twenty times, but after that...

Overall, I'd recommend it if you can catch it on the cheap. It's no classic, but it's mildly amusing.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Fangoria Geeks: Lighten up!

Author: matthew wilder (picqueur@aol.com) from matthew wilder
29 May 1999

It goes the genre-blending of the original one better: it melds the heist movie, the vampire movie, and the good-ole-boy movie. The co-writer Duane Whitaker, who has made a number of witty and flavorfully scripted independent movies, is probably responsible for the Texas atmosphere, and the idiosyncracy of the gang of redneck layabouts who make up the cast. Despite the stripped-down special effects, you might feel grateful to the movie for being the first B picture in eons to feature actual characters. Robert Patrick is superb as the hero--who, in the fashion of the first film, seems convincingly about to be revealed as a hotheaded sociopath, then veers in a very different direction. Muse Watson as the safecracker C.W. and Bo Svenson, now ripened in late middle aged, is marvellous as the skeptical sheriff--he could play doubles with L.Q. Jones. The movie isn't much, but it has actors, characters and dialogue--three things that are by now extinct on the direct-to-video shelf.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

a terrible film from start to finish.

1/10
Author: cygnus x-1 from roanoke, va
25 January 2000

i'm always wary of sequels (especially direct-to-video sequels) and hesitantly rented this film. now, i wasn't expecting it to even come close to the original (which is one of my personal favorites), but god forbid i wasn't expecting it to be THIS bad!

First of all, the director does nothing but rip off Sam Raimi's old evil dead directing style, but in a second rate style. the most inspired bit is the beginning movie-within-a-movie that has a cameo by the great Bruce Cambell.

the special effects, while appropriately gory, look really cheap and dumb. also, all the point of view camera angles of everything from hat bills to fans got on my nerves and made me sea sick.

the plot is really poorly done and the film doesn't seem to go anywhere. the acting is okay with an odd turn by Robert Patrick (the evil terminator in T2) who seems to be slumming big time in this film.

steer clear of this one and instead go to the well done third film called the hangman's daughter. act like this film never exists.

rating:1.5

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Horrible

1/10
Author: pkcoombs from United States
15 June 2004

When i watched the first FDTD, i thought it was far from a masterpiece but an excellent movie. Then i couldn't wait to watch the sequel. I didn't believe what this site was saying about this gruesome sequel so i bought it for 13 dollars. I couldn't rent it because they didn't have it, probably because it was so terrible! The special effects are laughable and the acting is worse. Scott Spiegel has no idea of how to direct movies and his camera angles? What is up with that. All in all don't waste any money on this movie... It is TErrible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! on a 1 to 10 scale i would give it a -500. Don't watch this and don't be like me and but it.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Horrible Movie

1/10
Author: BigGuy from United States
17 April 1999

The original was a pretty "bad" movie, but it had a style that made it worth watching. This sequel was junk, plain and simple. Annoying camera angles (inside the vampire's mouth cam, inside the skull cam, etc). The sad thing is that Bruce Campbell and Tiffany Amber-Thiessen were listed top on the list of actors and showed up for a total of 5 minutes! Save your money and don't rent this movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

From Dusk Till Dawn 2? Is that how long I slept?

1/10
Author: Stephen Philpott from Charlotte
14 March 1999

A friend of mine got me a copy of this movie and I must say I was psyched. Bad idea. The second I put it in, I saw what looked to me like a made for TV movie. Then a smile returned to my face when I saw Bruce Campbell. Once again the smile left my face when Tiffany Amber Thiessan begins screaming as Bruce gets his head bit off by obvious rubber bats.

Bored yet? I was. For a movie that had so much potential it lost it. The movie was loaded with horrible special effects, bad directing, a medium which looked like Digital made for TV, and bad acting on everbody's part. Was the director trying to spoof eighties camp horror flicks or is he really that stupid when it comes to scaring people?

There was only one pleasing thing about the movie and that was a great line said by Robert Patrick.

In short - if you just want to see Robert Patrick or Bruce Campbell, rent it. Actually, if you're a movie buff and you like to analyze all movies, see it. But if you are the average fair weather film goer - stay away.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 16:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history