Urban Legends: Final Cut (2000)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Jeff "

  
  Sequel to Urban Legends is just as bad as the original. What is it with these films? These films are cool for the first two years they're released, and after that, people realize how bad these films were. In the case of Urban Legends: Final Cut, you have a film that is very… More
  Sequel to Urban Legends is just as bad as the original. What is it with these films? These films are cool for the first two years they're released, and after that, people realize how bad these films were. In the case of Urban Legends: Final Cut, you have a film that is very poorly made, acted, directed with a paper thin story. The cast that are before the camera are terrible, and shouldn't be in acting in the first place. Those who actually have slight talent; I wonder why they would be in this piece of trash. The first Urban Legends sucked, and this sequel is just as bad as the original. This is another terrible attempt at creating a new, hip "horror" film for the brain dead MTV generation. But really, this is a stupid film that has no point. It's a good thing that teen horror films such as this, gave way to better, much scarier films like 28 Days Later. This film along with the first and a lot of others in the "teen" horror genre are easily forgettable because they don't offer anything memorable to the genre in the first place. Urban Legends is a horrid mess of a film that shouldn't have been made in the first place. Simply awful filmmaking.

• Candy R

  
  Urban legends are like myths but they come true on a college movie set.

• Luke B

  
  A film centered around making films, written by people with no knowledge of film. This is incredibly bad stuff. It doesn't help that the screenwriter has obviously never encountered a living human being before. Otherwise they may have concocted a realistic or original character.… More
  A film centered around making films, written by people with no knowledge of film. This is incredibly bad stuff. It doesn't help that the screenwriter has obviously never encountered a living human being before. Otherwise they may have concocted a realistic or original character. Instead it's all the same shit, done at a low quality. The dialogue is painful to listen to, the kills aren't even interesting, and the constant mention of Hitchcock puts this film into some pathetic dream world. I'm not even sure how many Urban legends are actually followed in this film or if it just gave up on that premise. There's a literally pointless kill, that makes no sense and adds nothing to the film, as it was added in later to make sure a kill happened early in the film. It's trash, that just about gets by with a few laughs and an underused Eva Mendes.

• Dead A

  
  Liked the first one more than this.

• Dean !

  
  I quite like this sequel. Although not as good as the first, it's still better than many slasher films. It has a good location, ok plot and of course a young sexy cast. The finale is pretty good and creepy to. If you like horrors you should like this.

• Dean M

  
  Film students at a New England university compete for a prestigious Hitchcock Award given to best thesis film in a nonsequel (only one character has returned) that is as dull as it is grisly.

• Lafe F

  
  Loosely related to the first film, this has a group of kids at film school, being eliminated in ways which followed urban legends. The death scenes are skillfully done and imaginative. I was totally grossed out with the kidney removal scene. There was a great scene of the killer… More
  Loosely related to the first film, this has a group of kids at film school, being eliminated in ways which followed urban legends. The death scenes are skillfully done and imaginative. I was totally grossed out with the kidney removal scene. There was a great scene of the killer filming one of the students being killed, and putting it into the screening room, where the students were impressed with what they thought was well-done special effects. I liked the scenes in the mine-car caves. They should've checked the title of the first film, which was simply the singular "Urban Legend". The killer's fencing mask made little sense and wasn't very scary. The only carryover from the first movie was the police woman, who was now working as a security guard at the school; I wasn't too fond of her. The plotline became ludicrous with twins being introduced; this brought the movie down hugely. It also feels very much that it was filmed in Canada.

• Kylie B

  
  Okay sequel. Could've been better.

• Jason S

  
  Weak.

• Steven V

  
  The original was decent, but this sequel goes out on a limb to be the stupidest, most hackneyed, and cheesiest movie to have come out of the teen genre in years. The storyline mostly rides on clichés, but really becomes a pretty confusing and annoying slasher yarn. The gore is… More
  The original was decent, but this sequel goes out on a limb to be the stupidest, most hackneyed, and cheesiest movie to have come out of the teen genre in years. The storyline mostly rides on clichés, but really becomes a pretty confusing and annoying slasher yarn. The gore is merciless though, the opening murder being especially stomach-churning.

• Naughtia N

  
  Oh yay! another teen horror movie.. awesome! ...not! This movie didn't thrill me one bit. I loved the first Urban Legend movie but this one lacks so much of the features the first movie had. I couldn't really take this movie seriously because I couldn't figure out what… More
  Oh yay! another teen horror movie.. awesome! ...not! This movie didn't thrill me one bit. I loved the first Urban Legend movie but this one lacks so much of the features the first movie had. I couldn't really take this movie seriously because I couldn't figure out what the movie was trying to tell me (I highly doubt that the filmmakers have figured it out either). I lost interest for this movie after about 15 minutes (but I did watch it all the way through).

• Lord N

  
  For those of you who have read my review of the original, you know how much I despised it. It just was not good at all. Any horror film that wastes Robert Englund cannot be good. well, I was surprised to find that I enjoyed this one more than the original...but that still doesn't… More
  For those of you who have read my review of the original, you know how much I despised it. It just was not good at all. Any horror film that wastes Robert Englund cannot be good. well, I was surprised to find that I enjoyed this one more than the original...but that still doesn't mean that this one was good by any means. Acting/characters: Third-age slasher film stereotypes. however there were definitely a few moments that were actually well done. They were few and far between but they were there for sure. It shows that even with a cheap slasher sequel that good acting can happen...it just doesn't. I would love to have seen that kind of acting throughout the film. But on the whole the characters were unbelievable, cardboard cut-outs. I have never met anyone like these characters and thus, I see no reason to care if they live or die at all. I can't imagine anyone else caring either. They could be robots for all we know...wait...I may have figured it out!!! 1.5/10 Plot: it is the same plot as the original film...or at least, it says that it is. A killer kills using urban legends as his M.O. I gotta do a bit of a spoiler here and say that that doesn't really happen in this film more than once. it has the feel of a generic slasher film and you kinda get bored after not too long. It doesn't even try to make its kills creative. I mean, it just does not try at all. That's the one thing that is often a saving grace of films like this and it doesn't even have that. Or an interesting killer. But i do have to give it credit because it did have some good laughs that were ACTUALLY INTENTIONAL. I'm not talking huge laughs here but it did have moments (brief moments mind you) where I thought "okay, that was funny." But it was overall an uninteresting, underdeveloped, and boring plot. 1.5/10 Screenplay: There is a dialogue scene between two characters in the film. They are driving around just talking to each other. Man, my ears almost fused themselves shut just so I wouldn't have to hear the 'fingernails on chalkboard' quality dialogue anymore. It had absolutely not quality to it in the least. I just sat there thinking "who wrote this and have they ever had a conversation with a normal human being before?" The rest of the dialogue was just as bad as the car scene. it was just horrible. But once again, a few intentional laughs gave this film a few good moments. 1/10 Likableness: Not much really. It didn't have creative kills, it didn't have a good killer, it didn't have a good motive, it was thrown together and had no value to it whatsoever. Its like they didn't even try. Plus, look at the poster, do you notice that that poster layout (main cast looking blankly forward while the killer is somewhere on the poster as well) is the same layout as a ton of other slashers from this era? And guess who did it first? SCREAM! Just like everything else in this age. This is a film that I would suggest to nobody. You've probably seen this film already. it has a dozen other films just like it. 1.5/10 Final score: 4/40 10% (S) Tomatometer rating: 9% Tomatometer rating if my review was added: 9% TRIVIA TIME: 1. The snow storm seen in the film was completely unexpected. 2. A picture of Professor Solomon's parents is seen on his desk. The picture is actually of John Ottman's parents.

• Sylvester K

  
  It's stupid..... Simple as that

• Adam M

  
  Good sequel to the mid-nineties horror hit. After an amusing and misleading start, we learn that film students will be making their final exam piece and the winner will recieve the Hitchcock Award which should get them a start in Hollywood. But obviously someones not happy about that… More
  Good sequel to the mid-nineties horror hit. After an amusing and misleading start, we learn that film students will be making their final exam piece and the winner will recieve the Hitchcock Award which should get them a start in Hollywood. But obviously someones not happy about that as muders start occuring that are, again, the same as old Urban Legends which tie in with the film one of the students is making. I thought this was going to be crap for some reason but found it to be a fun little horror thats pretty gory at times with the kind of twists, turns and black comedy that Wes Craven would be proud of.

• Lauren D

  
  Yeah so I don't remember this either as I was young when I saw it. I'm pretty sure there was a tunnel... thing or like a 'thing of love' ride and someone gets owned in there, but like I said I don't remember. I thought it was stupid back then and I probably… More
  Yeah so I don't remember this either as I was young when I saw it. I'm pretty sure there was a tunnel... thing or like a 'thing of love' ride and someone gets owned in there, but like I said I don't remember. I thought it was stupid back then and I probably still would.

• Jim W

  
  A corny and disappointing follow up to Urban Legend.

• Laurence C

  
  Not scary, not funny, not worth your time. Urban Legends : Final Cut is surprisingly undone by the creaky slasher mechanics. When attention is paid to its protagonist (the reasonably 'do-the-job' Jennifer Morrison), the film does actually sound decent-- but then it swings… More
  Not scary, not funny, not worth your time. Urban Legends : Final Cut is surprisingly undone by the creaky slasher mechanics. When attention is paid to its protagonist (the reasonably 'do-the-job' Jennifer Morrison), the film does actually sound decent-- but then it swings back to the boring one-by-one kills, which can be seen coming from a mile away. At least the final scene is a darkly ironic wink... thank fuck.

• paganchild1979 p

  
  I enjoy Urban Legends and I seen nothing wrong with this one.

Read all 18 featured audience ratings