Trilogy of Terror II

First off, I haven't seen the first one, so I can't draw any comparisons between the two. The film is a trilogy, a collection of three horror short stories. Each lasts about half an hour. They are reasonably entertaining and scary, but on repeated viewings, the effects and the acting seems cheap and tame. The stories are all three pretty good, but they could have been more well-done. The acting isn't all good; the leading lady isn't a terribly good actor. The supporting cast are of varying talent. The first time you see the film, it might be reasonably scary, but on repeated viewings it quickly falls apart, due to the low-budget cheap special effects and less than impressive acting. Especially the effects on the final story, not to mention the overdone sound effects, often actually inspires laughter, rather than fear. Also, according to many people, the story of the doll, the last story in the trilogy, is basically a remake of the first. I'd like to see the first Trilogy of Terror film, from '75, since it seems to be far better, judging from all of the reviews. All in all, it makes for a decent watch, once, if you can see it for free. I recommend it to fans of horror movies, who can see it once, for free. Just don't expect anything great. 6/10