I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer
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 11:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 104 reviews in total 

20 out of 29 people found the following review useful:

Can a movie really be this bad?

1/10
Author: LoneWolfAndCub from Australia
16 November 2007

Apparently it can. I don't know why I decided to watch this movie, I think it was out of curiosity. I thought the first one was average, the second was terrible and I really did not expect much from the third (a STV sequel). Maybe I thought it would be one of those "so bad it's good" slashers. No, it was a "so bad I would rather be castrated and burnt alive" slashers. This movie honestly had no redeeming values apart from being unintentionally hilarious. The acting from everyone was just bad, the story was a rehash of the first and second, the kills were unoriginal and the editing was vomit-inducing.

Five teens decide to pull a prank. Said prank does not go down so well for one of them, he dies. A year later, the four have *gasp* gone their own ways. Our lead girl gets 52 text messages which say *shock* "I know what you did last summer." She decides to group up again and investigate and then one by one they are all killed off.

I'm not going to spoil the revelation of who the killer is, but let me tell you now, it is without a doubt the stupidest twist you will ever see. It is nonsensical and to me, quite funny. There isn't much to say that hasn't already been said, everything is crap. The worst being the editing, it is unbearable, like watching a music video.

Avoid like the black plague, I beg of you, do not watch this movie.

0/5

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

Unoriginal Collection of Clichés

4/10
Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
18 November 2007

On July 4th, in the small Broken Ridge, Colorado, the teenagers Colby (David Paetkau), his girlfriend Amber (Brooke Nevin) and their friends Zoe (Torrey DeVitto), Roger (Seth Packard) and PJ (Clay Taylor) play a prank with the legend of the Fisherman that kills teenagers with dirty little secrets with his hook in an entertaining park. However, when PJ jumps with his skateboard, there is an unexpected accident and PJ dies. The group stays together and makes a covenant to keep their secret. One year later, Amber receives messages in her cell-phone telling that "I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer" and she gathers her friends to find who might have told about their prank. They find that PJ's cousin Lance (Ben Easter) also knows what they did. Sooner they find that a dark man wearing slicker is chasing them with a hook to kill each one of them.

"I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer" is an unoriginal collection of clichés. The forgettable story is very weak and a rip-off of the two other movies, only worse. The deaths are not original; the acting is average; the situations are predictable in accordance with the worse clichés of the genre and the conclusion is awful. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Eu Sempre Vou Saber o Que Vocês Fizeram no Verão Passado" ("I Will Always Know What You Did Last Summer")

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

For a Video Release Sequel, Actually Very Watchable

Author: gavin6942 from United States
26 January 2007

After accidentally causing their friend to fall to his death, a group of teenagers is stalked one year later by a fisherman with a hook who knows what they did last summer. Will the gang find out who is behind the fisherman's mask in time to save themselves, or are they going to get what they deserve? As I say in my headline, this film was watchable for a video sequel. While not of the standard that "Final Destination 3" is, it comes close -- and didn't even push for a theatrical release. The story uses the same elements as the first movie without using any of the same characters (though it does reference the first two movies). That's not really different from what "FD3" did, so for those people who bash this one but give "FD3" a pass, you're not really being fair.

My only real complaint with the plot is that I don't see why the kids deserved to be stalked. In the original, the kids are drunk driving, hit a man on the road and then hide his body. So we have three crimes: driving while intoxicated, vehicular manslaughter and hiding a corpse. Serious stuff. This time, the friend who died was in on the prank and fell to his own death on accident. No drinking, no pushing him to death, no hiding a body. A perfectly reasonable accident.

Ignoring that, the characters are decent (although one -- Colby -- reminds me a bit too much of Jake Busey) and the story is told at a good pace. The inclusion of the Zoe character was a good move, as all horror films benefit from a punk or goth chick, especially one in a band. I draw your attention to Trash (Linnea Quigley) from "Return of the Living Dead" and rest my case.

The movie has its faults and I admit I found aspects of the climax to be unsatisfying, but over all this was a good film. I have no strong urge to push for a fourth film, and hopefully we will never see one. But for a movie with no big actors and a recycled plot, this one is entirely adequate.

Was the above review useful to you?

23 out of 39 people found the following review useful:

Decent but not spectacular...

6/10
Author: sawilson-2 from United States
18 August 2006

This was a decent movie, nowhere near the quality or the caliber of the first two but it was okay. I don't like the direction they took with the fisherman (Ben Willis) character at all. I think it was pushed through and that's the main reason it went straight to video. They should have written a killer script and enticed the original remaining characters to return for one last go round. But they didn't and that's why they have a straight to DVD movie. Is it a good film? Sure it is, but remember one thing... When you're watching it, forget that it is part 3 of the "I know what you did last summer" series and just watch it as a horror flick. That's it, don't expect anything new, don't expect to be blown away, just watch it. Pop you some pop corn, turn out the lights, grab your honey and just watch it...

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

On July 4th, Secrets Can Kill

6/10
Author: Kittysafe from United States
8 August 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I come into this straight to video sequel of a franchise I never have been enthusiastic about, but with an open mind. I love to see new actors and actresses find their shine, you never know what talent is waiting out there with something a little new and untainted by cockiness and arrogance, still really feeling it, and giving 100% to the craft.

The movie begins at an amusement park, and a discussion of the folklore killer known only as The Fisherman, a character you might know from the prequels in the series. A group of kids bored with their urban lifestyle, decide to shake things up with a prank, but things go horribly wrong, and once a cover up is schemed the folklore is awakened.

You know what bothers me about the "I know what you did last summer" movies. The hook is just not a scary weapon.

It does make you wonder, the way the fisherman comes and goes. It's as if he is merely a psychological embodiment of revenge. Going back to the fears on the occult, that what you resist persists, when it comes to ghosts and black magic, what you dwell on, opens doors, and beyond those doors lay our worst nightmares.

The killer cannot be stopped by bullets or blades which is to be expected. Likewise, running him over with a car does no good. When you cut he him cries out like a wounded velociraptor and bleeds black oil. Also let it be noted that any time he is cut, he instantly vanishes using his super god mode powers of despawning. I think they eventually finish the movie by tossing him into a wood chipper.

This movie is hilariously bad, but the acting is decent by both male and female actors, and the directing is decent... seems to be slightly influenced by Gore Verbinski, which is fine I love Verbinski's work. If I could have asked for anything different it would be better kills, and better editing, especially in regard to scene transition which was far too choppy for me, lacking a certain intelligence I like to see in films of the horror genre. Not enough time was spent creating atmosphere that's for sure.

Rather unimpressive kills to be honest. Too quick and badly edited. Uninspired deaths. Definitely not as interesting as "Urban Legend"'s kills, but overall a somewhat light and enjoyable movie. I wouldn't say it scared me but it was nice to see some new talent. Brooke Nevin and Torrey DeVitto were great, and Ben Easter did a good job as well. I'd definitely look them up again. And you gotta love the use of Don Shanks as The Fisherman. That guy has done it all from Urban legend III, The Crow III, and Halloween V's Michael Myers.

Rating 6/10

On a side note, why is it every time I get a new cellphone, the very next horror movie i watch has my cell phone in the film? First cell phone: Motorola Startac - The Ring, Naomi Watts' phone Second cell phone: LG 1400 - I'll Always Know, Brooke Nevin's phone

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 32 people found the following review useful:

Not on par with the first two, but has its moments

5/10
Author: Jordan from London, UK
11 August 2006

Having just seen a press advance of this movie, I thought I'd post my first impressions.

I'll confess to being caught up in the teen slasher craze of the late nineties - movies like Scream and Urban Legend really floated my boat back then, and to a lesser extent, still do. I Know what You Did Last Summer and its over-criticised sequel certainly slotted into this category nicely.

A sequel more or less in name only, the plot sees a group of teenage friends deciding to keep the death of their friend in a backfired prank a secret... one year later, in the days leading up to the tragedy's anniversary, the four receive ominous 'I Know...' messages before being picked off one by one by a hooded character in the 'Fisherman' outfit from the first two movies. Who could possibly know what they did? Is it someone out for revenge? Or is the original fisherman back to wreak more havoc?

From the box art (and the seven year delay) it was clear that this was never going to have the same high production values or quality acting as those late nineties slashers, but I didn't quite expect as far a drop as this. White's direction, while lacking any genuine drawn-out suspense, is at least edgy and 'hip'; sadly, acting from all but the pretty lead Brooke is decidedly wooden. Four or five minutes into the movie, you can see why Sony decided to bypass a cinema release in favour of a straight-to-video one.

That said, if taken as a low budget teen slasher in the vein of 'The Pool' and 'Lover's Lane', it actually works quite well. The true identity of the fisherman is well hidden, with various red herrings keeping the audience guessing. The special effects appear to have consumed a large chunk of the budget, too - one gutting, akin to the 'hook in the throat' from the first 'I Know...' movie, is particularly gruesome.

Ultimately, I felt let down by the ending - but I would imagine everyone's opinion would really depend on their reaction to the killer's identity. As a sequel to what I consider two of the most enjoyable slashers of the late nineties, 'I'll Always Know...' fails miserably. Taken as a standalone low budget slasher, there's more of a hook. 2.5 / 5.

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

One of the most pathetic movie !!!!!!!!!!! **SPOILER**

1/10
Author: kundan-nitrkl from India
19 February 2008

I would have given it a zero if possible. The most pathetic suspense thriller I have ever seen. What made them do it? Isn't the money not dear to them or are they so full of it that they found out a way to waste it. I lost the interest from the very beginning of the movie. Basically there are two types of suspense thrillers. One that is very serious and the suspense is maintained till the end. You scream O my God at the end when the secret is out and you always go back and forth and analyse the events and know when to look for the clue. A fine example would be "Final destination" The second category is where its a total nonsense. There is no story but it has loads of humor. People watch such film without their brains so many enjoy them. I also like those. For eg "Scary movie". This movie falls in neither of the categories. It was full of craps but still tries to be serious. And when the secret is let out in this movie you are left frustrated and irritated and angry. You develop a strong urge to kill the makers of this movie. You feel cheated. The mystical figure would come out from no where and then vanish into no where. It was more surprising that the figure uses modern gadgets like Cellphone SMSs to scare his targets. Every thing in the movie was hard to swallow and total rubbish. The director and writer aren't aware of the term "Reality". This is a Humble request from me, Please don't watch this movie. If you can do anything (anything) else then thats always better than watching this movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

20 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

Somewhat Enjoyable

6/10
Author: DiseaseRidden from United States
15 August 2006

I finally saw the movie today. Actually, I had purchased it from a local electronics store. Unfortunately, it was not as good as I expected...the way many people talked about it on here made it sound like a masterpiece.

I found the movie, however, somewhat enjoyable. I do not regret buying it.

There were many flaws though. One of the major ones being the camera angles. Some of them were fine, but others were completely terrible (For example, the opening on Roger's chase scene and Amber's face in the cart thing). Not to mention, most of Roger's chase scene was crap...Also, I hated how they had put together Zoe's quick dream, I found it quite unprofessional and I did not like how she looked when she was screaming, which sucked, being that Torrey DeVitto is a very good looking girl.

Also, the deaths were obviously rushed too quickly, unlike how they were in the first two films. The chase scenes were short, and the deaths were quick, but painful and gory, which I do give credit for.

When Zoe was sitting in the mirror admiring herself, it looked too staged. You know, like one of those obviously fake smiles on a Crest commercial. It wasn't the actress, it was how they had made her perform for her character, which didn't work out well in my opinion.

The rest of the movie was great; the acting, violence, dialogue, settings, etc.

I expected much more of it, but it was one of the best teen-flasher flicks I have seen in years, which I admire.

I hope that they do not make a sequel, because it might mess up what they already have created, which is a good franchise.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

Haven't we really said all we needed to with the first two "I KNOW" movies? Must we "ALWAYS"?

1/10
Author: yo-saff-brig from United States
7 September 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is, for those who don't know, the third installment of the I Know franchise. This one follows a group of teens who hear of the legend that a man in a slicker with a hook takes to killing people every July 4th. They stage an attack at a carnival which leads to the accidental death of a young man, so they decide to cover it up. The cops and everyone else thinks that there is a madman out there who is responsible. They destroy the evidence and make a pact never to tell the story. But surprise surspise one year latter they start getting threatening messages that someone knows their dirty little secret. They do have a nice little "who is the killer" mystery going but the film fell HARD with the reveal of the killer. Here it is...IT IS THE GHOST OF THE KILLER FROM THE FIRST TWO BLOODY MOVIES! What the *rhyms with PUCK* was the writer thinking when he pulled that out of his bottom?!? You don't build up a mystery for an hour and a half and have the killer be someone completely unrelated to the story you have presented to the audience. I'd give the film 1/2 of a star out of four. I was never really a fan of the "I Know" series, but this was astonishingly bad. The big surprise reveal of the killer was mind numbingly stupid! I am ashamed to actually have seen this film. The first ones at least worked on the so bad they're fun level but this was just a mindless retread of the first up until the redic ending. What the holy hell were they thinking. They turned it into a Friday the 13th drone. If you haven't seen the flick yet, please for the love of balls DON'T!

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

He's back!

Author: Prolox from Canada
19 August 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

In this third installment which has now become a direct to video horror series, a group of teens pull a prank on July the 4th at a carnival only to have their best friend get himself killed. Deciding to keep their involvement in the stunt a secret, they are soon haunted by messages given to them that states "I Know What You Did Last Summer" a year later & then the bodies begin to pile up, but who is the killer? has one of the friends snapped & went on a killing spree? could it be the kids father? or has BEN WILLIS the killer of the previous two come back from the dead? There's a very good reason I KNOW 3, went direct to video, despite being a few years late to actually make any real money at the box office, it's just the same old story presented in the original, only with less suspense & less interesting characters & acting & the directing appears to be a bit sluggish at times & the setting for the film appears to be wrong. The characters in the film are all poor shadows of those established in the much better first installment & to many of the scenes from that film are repeated here as well, even the dialog & situations in some scenes seems to be lifted from the original. There's a few decent murders that take place but unfortunately, they only occur in the middle of the movie, while it's first half after a pretty decent opening that had me hooked (no pun intended) follows up with far to many scenes of people talking to one another & when the killer does arrive on the scene he's only shown briefly in scenes where he kills his victims very quickly, but he lacks the demanding presence he had in the first two films, the ending is pretty cool including the scene where we get a look at Ben's hideously decaying face (That's right boys & girls he's a zombie now!) but the last sequence that closes out the film is far to predictable & is just a copy of the ending of Parts 1 & 2. Definitely recommended however to fans of the series & makes for a pretty decent watch, but in my eyes it fell short of the first two entries thrills. And for some odd reason he reminded me of the killer from RIPPER 2, I don't know why, he just did.

*** stars

Was the above review useful to you?


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

Add another review


Related Links

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