Bones (2001) Poster

(2001)

User Reviews

Review this title
90 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Starts Promising... Ends Illogically.
Kraemorr11 March 2004
This film starts out promising and carries that promise a fair way into the movie, but when everything falls into place we are left with illogical character developments purely so the film-makers can end the movie on time. The fact that Snoop's character is not a villain, but the script unjustly makes him one, is probably the worst thing about the movie. However, this film is still worth the watch for Snoop Dogg's interesting performance and some actually creepy moments.

This film as a whole is not a success, but for fans of B-grade horror (which admittedly I am), this has some value to it.

6.5/10
13 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A wild,very entertaining horror movie
Hellraiser-111 March 2002
I was doubtful about this movie when I went to the cinema to watch it last weekend, but after having watched it I reinforce my good opinion about the products made by New Line Cinema. The film is very well done but apart from that, I think it shouldn´t disappoint any fan of horror, it has everything that a good movie of the genre must have, including great amounts of blood, a very good rhythm and effective actors such as Pam Grier(Jackie Brown), the muse of blaxploitation genre from the seventies, a genre which is paid homage in this movie as well as some classics of the genre such as "Hellraiser" or "Reanimator", although the introduction of the comic element paying homage to that movie was for me the weakest element of the whole(it broke the so tenebrous atmosphere).Finally, director Ernst. R.Dickerson who also directed the not so good but entertaining "tales from the Crypt: Evil Knight" assured that this movie had elements from Italian horror cinema, I don´t know but perhaps there is one: The warms.A homage to Lucio Fulci?, I know there is many homages here but it is the same for other movies and the cocktail is far from being so effectively combined as here.I don´t think they are going to make a sequel, but I am looking forward eagerly the next movie from this director and I wish "Resident Evil" was so satisfactory.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10 on my scale. What a good horror/revenge fick should be
billybrown4113 April 2002
Yeah, like pretty much every other horror movie that hits the theaters, this one took a pretty heavy trashing both, from the critics and from the audiences who didn't understand it. However, I found "Bones" to be a highly enjoyable, entertaining, and (at times) creepy horror flick that I hope, is the birth of a new franchise. It's very refreshing to see a horror flick that can take a standard premise and make it seem fresh again. Also, I enjoyed the killer being a someone who we can sympathize with. Let me break it down a little bit.

Back in 1979, Jimmy Bones was the man of his neighborhood. Just what all he was into is never fully explained, but we do know that he runs a pretty classy little nightclub and loves to dress in full-pimp get-up. Basically, Bones is a good guy. All he wants to do is run his business and take care of his people. However, when he is propositioned to bring in crack, he refuses and is double-crossed then murdered by people he thought he could trust.

Jump twenty years into the future and we get a group of twenty-somethings who have just bought the building where Bones was murdered. Hoping to turn the place into a club, they ignore all warnings of the place's evil and pretty soon, they mess around and wake the dead. Now that Bones is back, he's upset, understandably, and wants revenge on the people who did him wrong.

That's it. Kinda sounds like Nightmare On Elm Street right? Well, it's a lot like it and a lot of others you may have seen. What set this one apart for me was the lead. Casting Snoop Dog as Jimmy Bones was perfect. I've never been a big fan of his acting, but here, he pulls it off great giving us a villain that we can sympathize with, care about, and root for. We know where he's coming from and watching him take his revenge on the dispicable villains was fun fun fun. I also enjoyed the romantic angle brought to the film by the chemistry between Snoop and Pam Grier. I don't think that it would have gone down near as well had there been a different set of actors, but it gave a real soft side to Bones and made me like him that much more.

I really loved the cinematography and having the blood look intentionally fake, was also a nice touch. Unlike some others, I really enjoyed the shifting in tones. The first 2/3 of the picture had a really dark and gothic tone to it while the latter third had a little bit of comic relief thrown in. Yes, it went WAY over the top (the severed heads, that whole "world of the dead" bit) but, for me, that added to the overall joy of the film and made it that much more. It also made it VERY hard to take it serious. It's pretty hard to find a good horror flick these days (and a mainstream one, at that) and I'm sure that I'll be adding this one to my dvd collection pretty soon. Oh, (I don't think I'm giving too much away here) the door is left open for a whole slew of sequels. I can't wait.
14 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
'Bones'
rah6046 May 2004
With a growing trend of rappers starring in their own movies, Snoop Dogg joins the pack with 'Bones'. Snoop plays Jimmy Bones, a 70s hustler, who is betrayed and murdered by some of his closest associates. Since the time of the murder, Jimmy's corpse is buried in the basement of an abandoned house in Bones' now seedy neighborhood. When a group of empty-headed teenagers buy the abandoned house, they unsurprisingly wake up Jimmy's spirit, resulting in Bones going on a bloody rampage for revenge.

What the heck are we to do with a movie like 'Bones'. Are we supposed to take it seriously as a horror movie. Or laugh at its silliness and Snoop's attempt at becoming a real-life 'Doggfather'. Whatever its intentions are, this movie doesn't have the feel of a horror movie. Rather, it feels more like one of Snoop's pot induced fantasies.

Rating: 5/10 or (2 stars)
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The Perfect Midnight Movie
EdYerkeRobins6 November 2001
Ahh... the midnight horror movie. Cheesy, silly, and not in the slighest bit scary, its sole purpose is to provide a cheap thrill or induce sleep. As anyone who's read any of my other reviews can see, I like cheap thrills just as much as a good movie, and although Bones certainly was cheap, cheesy, silly, and not in the slightest bit scary, I didn't enjoy it as much as I'd thought I would.

The reasoning for this is that Bones is exactly like any other direct-to-video, midnight cable fare, only at theatrical release, midday pay-per-view pricing. The reason I like other cheap films so much is because they are just that - cheap. I'm biased; I expect a lot more from a movie that I shell out $9 for in a theatre than a $2 5-day rental.

In 1979, Jimmy Bones (Snoop Dogg!) is your friendly neighborhood numbers-runner. A crooked cop, a drug dealer, and his business associate try to convince him to bring crack to the hood. Bones is a numbers-runner with morals and a love for his people, and won't allow it. The business meeting ends with his murder.

In 2001, the neighborhood has gone to hell, especially Bones' old mansion, which is currently haunted by a big black dog with blood-red eyes. A group of teen wanna-be DJ's (who also just happen to be the children of Bones' old associate) decide to fix up the mansion and turn it into a happening nightclub. They discover Bones' skeleton buried in the basement, and a stray dog, whom they name Bones (how original!). This dog just happens to be the same killer incarnation of Jimmy Bones' ghost, and every life he takes adds life to the bones in the basement, until Jimmy is resurrected from the dead, and he sure is angry!

This film, equal parts horror, comedy and blaxploitation, begs you not to take it seriously. If you do, like most films of this type, you'll notice the atrocious acting and cheap special effects. If not, however, you'll be intrigued by bleeding pool tables, talking severed heads, and a climax in the "city of the dead", that is actually well done and far surpasses the rest of the film. Unfortunately, it lacks the campy "charm" of any of the above mentioned three genres.

I knew from the trailers and movie posters not to take this movie seriously. Even taking it as nonseriously as I could, I just couldn't enjoy it; it's a lowbrow wolf of a film trying to pass itself off in theatrical sheep's clothing. Honestly, if I had found this on the back shelf of some cheap video store I would've loved it. In a theatre, I just expect more from films.
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not too bad, not too good...
seal_point_siamese23 November 2003
I must say this film was a little better than I expected, however, having said that I wasn't expecting much in the first place. Im not giving anything away - the storyline is very straightforward and the blurb on the back of the dvd/video cover is quite sufficient in explaining the plot. <p> If you like your horror movies whether they be A or Z grade (like I do) then this film is worth a peek. The horror scenes are quite decent. There is a surprising amount of genuine suspense (even I jumped a few times)and quite a few laughs - but dont even try and look any further into the film than this! If you are one of those people to whom the quality of a plot must be in league with films such as "The Shawshank Redemption" and "The Godfather" - AVOID AT ALL COSTS. This film should only be viewed by those who are fans of the horror genre. <p> This is a messy film when taken seriously, it makes very little sense, the explanation as to how Mr Bones became of the undead is limp to say the least. Pam Grier (Jackie Brown) is wasted in this film - she has no room to show any of her (in my opinion) excellent talent and comes off wishy washy. Snoop Dogg is a terrible actor and I was very glad that his main roles in the film were limited to flashbacks and the climax. Unfortunatley once again the directors and writers had no idea how to finish the film and resorted to the old "spirit of the thought to be defeated demon managed to slip into someone else for no apparent reason" cliche. Also I was HIGHLY dissapointed with the death scene of Bones that caused the whole thing -very weak. For horror fans out of interest only. 5/10
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
* * out of 4.
brandonsites19814 June 2002
Gangster (Snoop Dogg) who was trying to clean up the streets is killed by his friends back in the 70's. He comes back to life after 20 years to seek revenge on those responsible for his death. Atmospheric thriller with good visuals and a commanding performance by Snoop Dogg, but it is uninvolving, poorly paced, and comes off as a Nightmare on Elm Street clone. Pam Grier is wasted in a supporting role.

Rated R; Sexual Situations, Profanity, Drug Use, and Graphic Violence.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Suspenseful? Maybe not.
cwhoward-113 February 2004
This movie is not the worst of horror movies that I have seen, however it is far from the best also. This movie has some pretty decent special effects, and doesn't have a bad story line. Who better to play a drug pusher in the 70's than Snoop Dogg. Snoop is not the best actor in the world but does show a better job in this movie than previous movies. 7 out of 10 stars. Not great, but not bad.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Awwww - It really isn't that bad!!!
nukulardave20 February 2006
I've read the other comment referring to Snoop Doggs'horror film, Bones....When this first came out it was my favourite horror film but I watched it that many times that it lost its' lustre.

The effects are great and plenty of blood and some gore from the outset. The beginning sets the tone for the rest of the film as it's one of those films that you just NEED to get to the bottom of why it is happening and what actually took place to cause it. It all unfolds at a pace enough to keep your interest as a viewer. This film is still a very watchable and enjoyable film in my opinion, even today.

It was nice to see Snoop in something different and anyone that is a Snoop Fan will enjoy this film all the more.....7 out of 10.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A Nightmare on Bones Street!
tommy23015 August 2002
This was a very good film if you dig any of the "Nightmare on Elm Street" series (preferably Parts 3 or 4). You can see it has that Freddy Krueger vibe running through its veins. Right down to the colorful shadows, neato killings, and anti-hero villain. But it also stands on its own much more than some similiar Nightmare knockoffs (Leprechaun comes to mind, in fact this film plays like a much more effective Leprechaun 4: Lep in the Hood).

Snoop Dogg does very well in the role of Bones, making lines like, "The Gangster of Love don't need no fried chicken" sound very serious and convincing. Pam Grier once again returns to her roots and I for one am not complaining. Maybe I'm slightly partial to this film because it features Katharine Isabelle from one of my favorite horror films "Ginger Snaps". But beyond that I very enjoyed this ride of movie.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not so bad...5/10
noizyme13 August 2004
Ok, this movie wasn't all that bad. It wasn't quite a B-movie, but it's not worth anymore than 5 points, though. It had decent flashback sequences (and note the blacksploitation theme throughout the movie to go along with those) with good music and a good feel to add to a "horror" movie. Snoop did a pretty good job as well, even though not changing his damn voice around the end would have helped for an extra point. And it had a new hot face for the sexy girlfriend in trouble, Bianca Lawson.

BUT, it did get goofy and unbelievable in MANY scenes. The complexity seemed to be added on after the script was written. The cutoff head scene was funny and actually a pretty good thing to add to the movie to lighten the mood. And the whole idea that we are to be afraid of Snoop coming back to bitchslap the lot of us is ridiculous. What was up with the fake blood? The worst looking around...

I don't anyone who is a fan of horror films will appreciate this film. It seems to have been made for Snoop fans or people going out to watch a bad horror film (for it's humor, not for scare tactics.) It was a cool club in the movie, though!
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
I loved it!!!
bcameron19 March 2002
The time is 1979. Jimmy Bones is respected and loved as the neighborhood protector. When he is betrayed and brutally murdered by a corrupt cop, Bone's elegant brownstone becomes his tomb. Twenty-two years later, the neighborhood has become a ghetto and his home a gothic ruin. Four teens renovate it as an after hours nightclub, unknowingly releasing Jimmy's tortured spirit. It's thrills and chills as blood spills when Jimmy's ghost sets about its frightful revenge, his killers unaware of the gruesome fate that awaits them. I thought this movie was great! Everything about it is good. It has excellent camra work and scary lighting. This was no doubt one of the best horror movies of the year 2001. If you have not seen it and like horror movies I would highly recommend you go rent it or even buy it. The DVD is great with some really cool Documentaries and deleted scenes. I give Bones *** stars out of ****. UNLEASH THE DOGG!
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Amusingly awful. (spoilers)
vertigo_141 December 2004
Caught this on BET one night. Bones was utterly horrible, but so bad that it was actually funny. And I must say, that while it is a pathetic teen-targeted horror film (and directed even further at Black and probably Hispanic audiences), it was about a zillion times better than most of the pretty white teen "horror" movies I have seen (Scream, I Know What You Did Last Summer, Urban Legend, and all of their nauseating sequels to boot).

This is the story of what I guess was a drug dealer (gee...does Snoop ever do anything different than play a street thug of one sort or another). And his ghost floats around this bizarre, abandoned mansion, that is suddenly claimed by a handful of neighborhood teens who want to turn the pit into a party palace. Bones (Snoop) is terrorizing the people in the house as his ghost floats around in pergatory aiming to take revenge those who stabbed him in a drug deal gone wrong. Why he chose that moment to take his revenge, or why he goes after the teens is unclear. Bone's old woman, played by Pam Grier (a good actress wasted in yet another trashy movie), is psychic and can tell that something bad is brooding in the air.

There was a special effects paradox at work in this film. On the one hand, the production crew goes out of their way with some fantastic, if not innovative, special effects moment (and you need plenty of them with a story so thin as this). And towards the end of the movie, they really take advantage of all of this. On the other hand, for all of the bloodbath scenes, the production crew is very generous with this cheap looking "fake blood," which is nothing more than bright red paint. How stupid. Actually, the whole movie was pretty stupid. But, at least they did try here and there to do something a little different (both in story elements and special effects), although it was still a bad movie. And, at least it was something you can really laugh at whereas the other movies I mentioned can just really make you homicidal, they're so dreadful (in story and special effects).
7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Not quite complete crap, but close enough...
El_Rey_De_Movies23 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
An attempt to make a modern-dress Gothic melodrama that is just not successful. Ernest Dickerson has a good grasp of the iconography of horror films, but he can't put them together well enough to make a good scary movie. He borrows concepts and images liberally from Clive Barker, Dario Argento, and Mario Bava - but all it shows is that he's a good copycat, not that he's a good stylist. From the idea of evil reviving itself by consuming a victim (Barker's "Hellraiser", but cinematic ally dating at least back to Hammer's "Dracula, Prince of Darkness" from 1965), thru the rain of maggots (Argento's magisterial "Suspiria"), to the disembodied hand reaching out of the darkness to torment the dead man's lover (Bava's masterpiece, "Whip and the Body"), there really is nothing here that we haven't seen before and better. The conceit of setting it in a ghetto with an all-black cast promises an interesting variation on your basic "revenge from beyond the grave" scenario, but beyond the music and fashions it's still a pretty clichéd film. One of the problems is that Dickerson just can't seem to leave well enough alone - like the maggot scene. OK, it's raining maggots and it's terrifying, we get it already, is it really necessary to go for the gross-out by showing people EATING them? Or the scene where Maurice is killed - again, the dog-spirit eats Maurice to give form and substance to Bones' cadaver, we get it, it's not necessary to linger on the details of the chow-down. It's never scary - just disgusting. Even his attempts to inject humor are forced and heavy-handed, with the idiotic scenes of Bones carrying the heads of his victims and having them carry on an interminably pointless conversation. And again, he doesn't show it to us once, there's at least three long scenes with the chatty heads so whatever humor there was is pounded into unconsciousness thru repetition. But the most glaring problem with this movie is that we are asked to sympathize with a character who is, at bottom, just as big a bad guy in life as the crack dealers who murder him. Dickerson tries to show us Bones as the protector of his 'hood, but come on - he's exploiting his people just as much with his numbers game, or did it never occur to anyone to ask how Bones got the money for his supah-dupah fly crib when everyone else around him lives in complete poverty? For a MUCH better horror movie that reflects the black urban experience, rent "Tales from the Hood" instead.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
okay
callanvass2 January 2004
okay horror flick is not that bad but isn't that great either it has lots of gore but it is pink looking and its poorly done the acting is bad and it has an intriguing premise but is sometimes dull although it is fairly entertaining it is really nothing special ** out of 5
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
**** out of 5
casey_choas666 October 2002
The name Jimmy Bones strikes fear into the hearts of all who hear it. Back in 1979 he ruled the street, now after his death, over twenty years later Jimmy Bones is still in charge. After a group of teens buy Jimmy's building and turn it into a dance club, his sprit is released and he goes on a bloody rampage, seeking revenge on his killers. Sounds like a horror movie doesn't it? It even looks and feels like a horror movie. But if it's a horror movie your expecting you may be in for a little disappointment. We spend the entire film switching back and forth from 1979 to the present day. The 1979 scenes seem to be knocking on blacksplotion flicks. The present day scenes are a parody of new age fright flicks. Between the two settings everything seems to be played for laughs and it works wonderfully well. Back in 1979 there is everything you would expect to see in a blacksplotion flick, the afros, the sideburns, the stylish clothes and they even use phrases like "kracker Saturday mourning special" and you know what? It's pretty darn funny. Now we move to the present day. Seems like everyone in the film knows that they are ripping off House on Haunted Hill, there is even a reference to Vincent Price in there somewhere. You can also see all of your favourite old school horror cliches, projectile vomit made of maggots, the pipes that bleed, the severed head that still talk even after they have been decapitated, the pool table that bleeds after it is cut and the perfect silhouettes of blood that splatter on the wall. But what makes it so enjoyable is not the fact that we have seen it all before, it is how we get the feeling that film makers don't want us to take the film seriously, they just want us to sit back and enjoy. The film has a very "fun" atmosphere surrounding it and that is something that you don't find often in horror flicks today. The script is so clever you almost have to let out a chuckle because everything that happens is so predictable. What do you think will happen when a turn table group called the Resurrection Brothers enter a haunted house or when you find a dog with glowing red eyes that attacks you and you keep him and call it Bones? It's almost like the fact that everything is so stupid and cliched that it comes off as being smart. Now I'm not saying that everything is all fun and games. Director Ernest R. Dickerson throws in some very distorted camera angles and creepy imagery to keep the horror fans please and the meek on the edge of their seats and it comes off rather effective. Snoop Dogg is wilding over the top and entertaining as Jimmy Bones who could very well have been making the next Crow film right here without anyone knowing and blacksplotion queen Pam Grier can also be seen as Bones' girl. The special effects are very enjoyable whether they are serious (the night club explosion) or amusing (the talking head) or even just plain bad (the fake looking blood) and not to mention there is never an absence of gore through out. If I didn't know any better I would have to say that this is a feel good movie. So if you are looking for an entertaining nod to the old school that doesn't require and thinking or logic than you are in for one of the summers best horror flicks, it not you'd better just pass this one by.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Gripping Until the End
FilmScores19 March 2002
I watched this with my roommate Saturday night and I must admit that it had me on the edge of my seat, until the very end. The special effects and camera work is very impressive. It is what it is, a fun movie that has some redeeming qualities. Believe me, I've seen worse and some that weren't this fun. This is definately not a keeper but it should be viewed once.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Good horror movie
cruppel17 March 2002
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILER CONTAINED

I can't see why everyone is complaining about this movie. The plot was a little weak, but it's a horror movie. say that to yourself while you watch it and you won't hate it so much. Think about it. there is a very small fraction of horror movies made that have 'good movie' components. plus, snoop dogg is in this. that's the first reason to watch it. i realize this doesn't sound like a sound argument to you people that think Traffic was a good movie, but get a life, loosen up, and watch horror movies with the expectation that they'll live up to the legacy of The Horror Movie, not some brainy flick that people superficially latch on to becuase they don't understand it.

anyway, Bones was a good horror movie because it did the job of a series of movies in one installment. usually if there is a lapse in time it's between moves and not in them.

***SPOILER*** I also appreciate how he is never vanquished by the end of the movie. It's a plot twist that is not often used. ***END***

if you liked this go rent Killer Klowns from Outer Space
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good silly horror fun
bburns6 November 2001
Although the best horror films ever made are genuinely frightening ("Psycho" "The Sixth Sense" "Nosferatu"), most of the good ones were not meant to frighten but to provide light escapist entertainment with lots of thrills. Think of "Poltergeist", "Nightmare on Elm Street" or the classic Universal horror movies of the 1930's through the 1950's. "Bones" falls into that category. There are no surprises, the special effects are subpar, but it's still a fun thrill ride.

When four inter-racial siblings purchase an old deserted house in the ghetto with plans to turn it into a nightclub, they come across a black dog with red eyes. One of the sibs thinks the dog is cute and names him "Bones". Of course the dog is really the ghost of '70's drug kingpin Jimmy Bones(Snoop to the D to the O double-G) who was murdered in that house. But wait, there's more. Turns out the kids' dad was one of the ones who betrayed Jimmy. And there's even more: the oldest of the clan, Patrick (Khalil Kain)has fallen love with a girl named Cynthia (Bianca Lawson) who is Jimmy's daughter by psychic Pearl (Pam Grier).

Gradually Jimmy resumes human form and goes out to kill everyone who ever betrayed him when he was alive, plus their meddlesome offspring. Will Jimmy achieve his goals? Will the daughter he never knew betray him? Who cares? The plot ain't the point. The point is watching Snoop in all his mack daddy (am I dating myself?) glory and Pam Grier bringing an A-caliber performance to C-caliber material. And of course to have fun pretending to be scared.

This is not a great film by any stretch of the imagination, and some of the political overtones (whites brought crack to the ghetto, only sellouts leave the 'hood) are distracting and annoying. But it's good old-fashioned empty-calorie silly horror fun. 7 out of 10
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Packs about as much bark as a goldfish
The_Void19 June 2005
Hey, don't you think it's kind of odd that someone would stab themselves in the chest with a flick knife and then bury themselves?

If your answer to the above question is "I agree", then you could have been, or may well be part of the team of monkeys that came up with the idea for, wrote and cast this movie. It's a huge shame that stuff like this gets made when there are screenwriters and directors with good ideas and just need some money. Speaking of money, if you want to waste it; Bones is as good a film as any to waste it on. Well, if you like to waste money and you enjoy pain, that is. Bones is notable for one of the most incredible reasons a film can be notable for, and that is that it stars a rapper. The rapper in question is Snoop Dogg (a.k.a. Dogg, Snoopy, Snoop Doggy Dogg, Snoop and just about every other lame variant of the words 'snoop' and 'dogg' that you can come up with). The tired blend of Hellraiser and rubbish movie starring a rapper see Snoop Dogg get to flex his acting muscles, and he proves with his one-note performance in this movie that he is just as adept at the art of acting as he is at the art of music making. If you catch my drift.

To be quite frank, despite his best efforts to look cool; Snoopy Doggy Dogg ends up looking like just as much of an idiot as his name suggests he is. I mean seriously, who goes by the name of 'Snoop Dogg' when they don't have to? Aside from it's star, this film has a number of other problems. It's plot is very tired, and it follows the exceedingly boring and familiar tale of someone who was killed being resurrected and then taking their revenge. The tacky dialogue, duff acting and illogical plotting don't help this, and not even the murders can save the film, as it's easy to say that even they manage to score maximum points on the dull scale. I will never forgive the people responsible for this movie for wasting all that time and money on it, when it could have been put to better use. How about giving one of the more experienced directors who could produce something good, if given a budget? I guess that's one of the many problems with things like rap music; if it sells, it will continue to be made.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
WOOF!
george.schmidt1 November 2001
BONES (2001) * 1/2 Snoop Dogg, Pam Grier, Khalil Kain, Ricky Harris, Clifton Powell, Bianca Lawson, Michael T. Weiss. Hodgepodge horror flick cum blaxploitation send-up with slain gangsta Jimmy Bones (Dogg at his silky surliest yet in this his first starring role) returning from the dead to wreak vengeance on those who murdered him with the usual genre violence and histrionics. Poor f/x (except the transmogrification/resurrection of Bones) and lame acting only hinder the potential of a franchise for the blunt rapper. (Dir: Ernest Dickerson)
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A decent b-movie.
tenten765 October 2002
I thought Bones was okay, and here's why:

The cast are pretty good, the story is simple (but nothing wrong in that), and it makes a change to see a mainstream sort of horror (in the same vein as Scream, or IKWYDLS) with a virtually all black cast - but without resorting, too much, to street-slang and negative stereotypes. There is some flashback in the narrative, but I didn't see this as any attempt at mystery - it's obvious from scene 1 what happened.

On the plus side, the ghost effects were pretty slick - even if the blood was totally unrealistic (like thick paint), and the model/monster effects were only at the Clive Barker level. Which fits with the whole Hellraiser aspect of the movie.

Apart from the paint, my only other quibbles would be the very silly aspect of Snoop's revenge on his two main enemies (more like a comedy sketch), and the way Pam Grier COULD have just got naked to save the day (dammit!)

Yes, the film could have been so much more (scarier, longer and deadlier for three things), but I still enjoyed it, If nothing else, I spent a good 20 minutes chuckling at the outrageous design of the house, and I don't remember 'Kendra' being nearly so beautiful.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
there is meat to this bone
PeterZ4 July 2002
I heard this movie sucked. It did not. It is not great film, but it is good film. The homage to the 1970s was there, the little "film buff" touches that remind one of urban horror's roots as far back as nosferatu.

this movie could easily have been a sell out, with Bones as "Snoop da CROW"

with the vengeance thing, but it did not.

the only "bad horror" gimmick was the last 4 seconds of the film.

I expected a crappy horror movie. This beats urban legend or scream 3.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
NOT WORTH THE TIME
ingLewood1927 June 2003
I rented this movie thinking that it would be scary and suspensful, but it is totally the opposite! It is dumb and boring, I even almost fell asleep. Don't waste money renting this movie, instead if you see it, throw it in the trash.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Snoop Dogg is da man!
videofreak20026 April 2002
"Bones" was a scarefest that scared up the goods. Director Ernest R. Dickerson's last time he taggled a horror movie was "Tales From The Crypt Presents: Demon Knight." On "Bones," he does a better job, but, what I was most impressive from this movie was Snoop Doggy Dogg as Jimmy Bones. He was creepy. There were alot of violence and gore in this movie. But, just the whole movie, from beginning to end, was very good. If you like Snoop Dogg, then you'll love "Bones!"

A+ 13/13 ****** (out of ****** stars)
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed