From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money (1999 Video)
User ReviewsAdd a Review
Check it out, I'm on my way to rent the 3rd one... Peace Out!
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.
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!
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.
This is the kind of movie that leave you befuddled not knowing whether you should laugh or cry.
Horror sequences are predictable yet utterly stupid. There are major gaps in the plot. One of the more obvious being the main plot: Going to Mexico to rob a bank. It's basic movie trivia that you commit a crime and then you go to Mexico to escape the long arm of the law.
The dialog makes clumsy attempts at being clever, Tarantino-ish if you will. Unfortunately it all just falls flat. Tarantino has an odd gift for allowing actors to fluently deliver the dialogue no matter how cliché it might be. This lacks here. Instead just about every sentence spoken sounds contrived and forced.
Action sequences are horrendous. Vampires and cops alike line up in order to die in a gruesome manner. We're talking really lining up. Not in the sense that everybody dies but in the sense that there seems to be a veritable queue. The camera focuses, slightly off-focus on one killing, then moves on the next.
I think this movie is a bit of a hit and miss. I got the sense that they tried to create something and failed miserably. If you watch it, try to think of it as a movie that doesn't try to be anything. That way you at least won't have any expectations of it.
In the end however this movie is probably best remained unseen.
Where in part 1 the switch in genre from action to horror is successfully made, there isn't any switch at all in part 2!
Part 2 is to me a very bad horror movie. It's nothing compared to part 1.
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.
From its opening fake-out with Bruce "Evil Dead" Campbell to the final boredom of its closing reel, "FDTD2:TBM" fails to add anything of note to the genre whatsoever. It's only stylistic flourish, if you can even call it that, is camera shots from oddball perspectives, such as the inside of a decomposing vampire skull, none of which add anything to the lackadaisical storyline. I promise you, the less said about this abortion, the better; it practically defines the word "fodder." I'm sure everyone involved had "fun" making this dreck, but I'm equally sure that they all knew they were just taking a paycheck, and I'm also pretty sure none of them are bragging about their participation.
Do yourself a favor, gentle reader, and pass this one by. You won't miss it for even the briefest of seconds.
Most disappointing was touting Yasmeene Bleeth and Bruce Ashwood as stars of the movie. Both are involved in the first few minutes, as stars in a vampire movie that one of the characters in our vampire movie is watching.
The only redeeming point of the movie was the brief discussion of whether or not adult movies need a storyline. (They do.) Too bad they didn't concentrate on making a convincing storyline for this.
But in 1999 I rented From Dusk Till Dawn 2: Texas Blood Money, Directed by Scott Spiegel and written by Scott Spiegel and Actor/writer Duane Withaker.
The first film is so cool because the first half is a gangster film, and then it just changes into a vampire film. This sequel also tries to do the same thing. But it fails.
The original had George Clooney, Quentin Tarantino, Danny Trejo, Harvey Keitel, Juliette Lewis and Salma Hayek. The most knows actor in this film is Robert Patrick from The X-files. Also the crew is nothing like the original. Tarantino and Rodriguez is Exec. porudcers, but nothing more. The man at the helm is Spiegel most known for....well nothing.
The SFX? THERE IS NO SFX. I mean the blood is so bad in the film, the could just as well used red paint.
The direction is some of the worst I`ve ever seen. The camera angels is so f***ed up. They have placed the camera inside the mouth off a vamp. The script is so bad that I laugh out loud. Some of the dialouge is so bad, it coould be of been written by a ten year old.
I mean really what can you expect from a film where the main cast consists of Robert patrick and Raimond Cruz?
0/5 - Stay away!!!!!!!!
Don't get me wrong. I absolutely love a good vampire movie, but can I sit down with my wife and 14-year-old daughter to watch the first and third one???
I was not surprised that many thought the first version was a "masterpiece". After all, the first and third came complete with NONSTOP explosions, lap dances, topless lady vampires, gunfights, fistfights, and let's not forget the post-rape crime scene that came near the beginning of the original.
Texas Blood Money is much funnier than the original, but managed to have some cool action shots as well. In other words, you won't be bored unless you need twisting t*ts to keep you awake.
Hey, married guys that share your viewing privileges with your family. Go to the discount video store and sacrifice $1 and 90 minutes. You will see what I mean. It is worth a look.