Seed is back, who'd have thunk it? Everybody? Yes OK, so they always come back and I am guessing you have watched the first one. Though even if you haven't, it's not really necessary (yes there is a connection, one you might guess anyway, but let's leave it at that). The movie tries to be clever, with its time-line jumping, but it's not working at all. Quite the opposite is the case.
Also having a disturbing scene twice (at the beginning and later in the movie) played out almost entirely, is not clever, but trying to make a movie longer than it actually is. Something that is really weak and shows that there was very little to start with. The main idea was not that good anyway. And the one naked blood covered female should not change your opinion on this movie ... unless it makes even worse that is, but that's not really possible. And while the first Boll directed (this is not his movie folks!) had more than a couple of issues, it tried to say something. This on the other hand ....
Also having a disturbing scene twice (at the beginning and later in the movie) played out almost entirely, is not clever, but trying to make a movie longer than it actually is. Something that is really weak and shows that there was very little to start with. The main idea was not that good anyway. And the one naked blood covered female should not change your opinion on this movie ... unless it makes even worse that is, but that's not really possible. And while the first Boll directed (this is not his movie folks!) had more than a couple of issues, it tried to say something. This on the other hand ....