Embrace the Darkness II (2002 Video) User Reviews

More of the same but more

[augustian · 5/10 · 3 September 2009]

The second in the Embrace the Darkness trilogy sees Jennifer now played by soft core stalwart Renee Rea, but unfortunately the story is very similar to the first film with a similar vampire couple - good guy but nasty girl. We do however get a proper vampire hunter called Van Helsing so that is a difference.

Jennifer (Renee Rea) is slowly coming to terms with her life as one of the undead. She moves into an apartment close to a night club which is owned by Jack (Tristan Coeur D'Alene) and Lizzie (Catalina Larranaga). Jack and Lizzie recognise Jennifer as being new to the vampire existence and so take her under their wing to teach her the ways of the vampire and to hone her power and skills. As in the first film, there is an old flame, Peter (Sean Vossler) who is looking for Jennifer but when his attempts to contact her fail, he teams up with vampire hunter Van Helsing (John Maryland). Meanwhile, Jack has taken a shine to Jennifer, much to the chagrin of Lizzie, who plots her revenge.

It is a pity that the writers could not have used a bit more imagination when scripting this story - it is too much like the original. On that score it is marked down but there is more sex and nudity so for that it is marked up. The acting is on a par for this type of film and the women look good with a commendation for Diana Espen for her scenes. 5 stars.

So sequels can be better ...

[kosmasp · 3/10 · 19 September 2012]

Although this doesn't say that much, coming from a really bad movie. But replacing the lead actress from the first one, was a step in the right direction. This still is soft-core don't get it wrong, but it does have a decent story to hold together the raunchy things going on every 5 minutes or so. Actually it makes you wish, there was more story and less smooching (code for simulated intercourse), but you can't have it all now, can you? Exactly.

After the awful first one, I shouldn't have continued watching, but I went ahead. I did fast forward the inappropriate scenes, to get the most out of the story, which is a continuation of the first one. Not great by all means, but made with more effort than the first one and more emphasis on the "story" part.

If you take out the soft porn all your left with is a really bad movie

[Excalibur36 · 27 April 2004]

This movie is exactly what you'd expect after looking at the cover. The leading male constantly switches between a bad English accent to an American accent and sometimes even throws in some bad Irish. Being a vampire movie fan I always enjoy watching them, but this isn't really a vampire movie, it's a soft porn where the 'actors' are trying to accomplish that ever so difficult task of wearing vampire fangs and having sex at the same time.

On a more shallow note, the chick who plays Jeniffer is really attractive and if you want to see a hot vampire have a bunch of sex then this is your movie.

don't embrace the dorkness

[movieman_kev · 2/10 · 12 May 2006]

Jennifer (now actress Renee Rea as opposed to Madison Clark of the first one) is now a vampire and moves to LA to be at Gaylen place, the Vamp who turned her. Gaylen being an apropo name for how vampires have been defanged since the vastly overrated Anne Rice. She of course meets other trendy vamps and they all chill at a nightclub. Because we all know vamps and nightclubs go together like Rip Taylor and confetti. Meanwhile the horrible techno-driven theme song plays numerous times. This is a pretty lame soft-core movie, and as a vampire film it sucks, so par for the course there. The dialog seems to be made by those dreary goth clowns that you avoided like the plaque in high school.

Eye Candy: Jezebelle Bond, Renee Rea, April Flowers, Catalina Larranaga, and Katie Lohmann show various amounts of skin

My Grade: D-

Where I saw it: Showtime Beyond

Madisson Clark was replaced by a porn actress

[hugobolso-1 · 2/10 · 31 July 2023]

Catalina Larrañaga is the only highlight from this movie. The worst by far of the trilogy.

Jennifer is back. Now a vampire she needs the help of a couple of vampire in order to survive and success in her New afterlife.

Rene Rea a software and hardcore star replace Maddison Clark. And dont get me wrong she makes a fine work (much better tham the third Jennifer), just fail in comparison.

In fact all is worse. All is cheppear, the sex scenes are more more graphic but also raunchy without good taste. The plot is more or less the same but with a less attractive cast.

The main exception is Catalina Larrañaga who makes a great villain.

The continuing adventures of Jennifer the vampire.

[dbrown-070204 · 8/10 · 7 May 2004]

This review contains spoilers.

This movie picks up right where Embrace the Darkness left off. Jennifer is now a vampire. She's also played by a different actress (Renee Rea). I liked the original Jennifer better but Renee is plenty attractive as well.

The rest of the movie plays out very much like the first one did. Jennifer meets two other vampires. The girl vampire (Catalina Larranaga) is bad, but the guy vampire is good. Most of the movie follows the same formula. Vampire gets hungry. Vampire finds a mortal who looks tasty. Vampire has sex with mortal. Vampire feeds on mortal. These vampires are all wussies though. They only kill a couple of people in the entire movie. Obviously, the story wasn't too memorable, but it held my interest enough to keep my finger off the fast forward button. There's also some pretty cool special effects used throughout.

There are nine sex scenes. Six are boy/girl. One is girl solo. One is girl/girl. One is guy/girl/girl. For the most part, the sex scenes were good and decently explicit. They all play out to completion and the actors and actresses are always audible over the background music.

The women are all attractive and deliver good performances. There are five of them that participate in the sex scenes.

There was definitely room for improvement. Katie Lohmann's masturbation scene could have been done better and Catalina Larranaga should have removed her clothes for the lesbian scene.

It's no better or worse than the first movie. If you liked that one, you'll probably be happy with this one.

Above Average

[Carrigon · 6/10 · 25 May 2005]

I liked this movie. I thought it was above average for a soft porn. The music was pretty good. The acting really wasn't that bad. And the story was descent. The sex scenes were okay. It's not a bad movie if you're looking for soft porn with more of a story to it. I liked the lead actress and how her character went from innocent to tough. The plot is about a girl who gets turned into a vampire, but the vamp who turns her disappears and she's left on her own. She meets up with more vampires at a Goth club and they teach her a few things. Sure it could have been better, but for what it is, it's not that bad. And it's a vampire story with sex, so you really can't go too wrong there.

Absolutely great and sexy!

[insomniac_rod · 9/10 · 22 May 2011]

I can't understand why some people dislike this one. There's plenty of hot sex, beautiful women, not so bad plot, striking visuals (all about the club sequences), and more.

Catalina Larranaga looks at her best. Really, she hasn't looked sexier. She has at least 4 kinky sex scenes where she demonstrates her excellent abilities in bed (and standing up!).

Renee Rea looks very cute and sexy at the same time. The girl has intense sex sequences.

Jezebelle Bond also shows why she's a favorite in the genre.

You can't ask for more. There are plenty of things to enjoy from this one.