|
Kate Mara is a
surefire saving grace for “Bloody Mary” as she turns a potentially
annoying and whiny heroine into a sympathetic and highly entertaining
central character. She has an innocence and genuine charisma to her that
makes this film rise above a typical horror sequel, and I cared about
her journey. All the clues and hints to the potential unveiling of
Mary’s next targets always worked for me, and Mara really had me right
there with her, wondering what surprises were next. And there’s also
Tina Lifford was fun as Grace, the afroed survivor of the opening
scene’s attacks which rendered her a recluse and a rather dated relic of
her time. Lifford is a lot of fun as Grace, and she’s really a very good
accomplice to Mara’s character until the end. Equally, the climax brings
everything together well with Marinaro playing a real prick rather
competently. I never really expected him to take such an active role in
spite of the twist I saw coming, and the final twenty minutes make for
some damn good horror entertainment. In spite of feeling too much like a
“Final Destination” take off, I did like the integrations of the urban
legends in some of the kills, the most gruesome of which were the
spiders laying eggs in one of the character’s faces. It’s a great little
urban legend that turns into a disgusting sequence.
The producers for “Bloody Mary” pretty much took the exact formula from
“Prom Night” and injected it into this rather lame sequel to two rather
abysmal films. They had nowhere else to go with the corny slasher flicks
that came before it, so instead they bring us a supernatural spin that
takes a vicious female and makes her the antagonist to haunt our brain
dead teenagers. Hell, the opening even sets down circa the sixties.
Basically in the same ilk as “Tamara,” Mary Banner is a bit of a reject
that is taken to the prom by a popular high school jock. On the way out,
Mary is drugged and led away only to discover she’s being snared in a
plot of rape. Attempting to escape, she’s chased into the school and a
vicious accident leaves her dead. Covering up the murder, the players
involved in Mary’s death soon suffer the wrath of Bloody Mary. Quite
obviously only named “Bloody Mary,” the writing team of Michael
Dougherty and Dan Harris create a pretty vicious little horror flick
that is never as good as it can be.
|
For all the gore and extreme
violence, “Bloody Mary” is a typical direct to video that is
included in the “Urban Legends” franchise only by shoe
horned passive references to the previous films. Like “Candyman,”
three of our heroines accidentally summon Bloody Mary who
may or may not be the reincarnation of the Mary who suffered
a fate with a glass shard in the opening. I was never too
clear on that aspect. |
|
 |
Meanwhile, it prides itself on basing all
the deaths and basic concept on urban legends, but it really feels like
nothing but a “Final Destination” rip-off.
You have to appreciate
that the writers made every death dependant on urban legends like being
cooked in a tanning bed, and spiders laying eggs on people’s faces, but
Bloody Mary the demon plays much of her carnage on the whole accidental
death based on human stupidity hook that was pretty much covered in all
three “Final Destination” films, thus it all sadly feels so weak and
lifted. “Bloody Mary” is not the worst movie on video store shelves as
many people have claimed, but it’s just not effective enough to ever be
anything more than a simple horror movie about urban legends. It just
feels like it’s trying to be more than one thing, so it tries to be a
revenge movie, a ghost movie, and an urban legend horror film all at
once. And really gets in way over its head, in the process.
It’s an
individual horror film with the “Urban Legends” tag slapped on it, as
seems to be the case for many studios to cut corners these days, but
“Bloody Mary” is just a good enough horror film in spite of all of its
flaws, saved by the strong performances of Tina Lifford and cutie
patootie Kate Mara. I’d definitely see it again if I ever came across
it.
|