The Collection

I feel the rating is accurate with a 6 out of 10. Could be a 5 but it's a pretty good film, reminds me of Saw more than 'The Collector' did. Very gory and a little outrageous with the violence actually. It's not as realistic as the first one (even though neither are) simply based off of the first killing scene. No serial killer could get away with such crimes in reality especially one who studies bugs for a living and doesn't at least have military training to make him the badass he's portrayed as being. But I'm not going to be such a pessimist, it wasn't bad. It was a relatively short film so it's straight to the point. If you're a fan of violence and gore this is your film.

The Collection (2012) ** (out of 4) Arkin (Josh Stewart), the survivor from THE COLLECTOR, is forced into the warehouse of the killer by a group of professional hunters so that they can rescue a girl (Emma Fitzpatrick) who has been kidnapped. The group soon find themselves in a deadly game that has them entertaining one rigged room after another. THE COLLECTION is a sequel to the 2009 film that I'm not sure anyone was really asking for. I thought THE COLLECTOR was an entertaining, if flawed, movie that managed to have a few good things going for it. THE COLLECTION is certainly very flawed and has a bit of "been there, done that" but at the same time it's still a little better than most of the horror films from this year. As usual, director Marcus Dunstan offers viewers plenty of violence and gore. If you're wanting a gore feast then this here will certainly keep you happy as bodies are ripped to shreds in a variety of ways including a rather clever way to start the picture. I'm not going to give away what happens in the club but it was pretty wild and certainly memorable. I also think that the two lead characters are pretty good and they at least make you like them and want to see them work their way through this deadly maze. Both Stewart and Fitzpatrick offer up fine performances and help keep the film moving. The biggest problem with the film is that there's zero tension. This here is really too bad because had there been some sort of tension or drama then the film would have worked so much better. Since we're on this cat and mouse ride, the lack of any tension just makes everything feel rather routine and the deja vu from the first film is certainly here. Still, gore fans should enjoy the picture and it's cruel ways to destroy the human body.

I have to say that I have seen a lot of horror movies and this by far trumps them all. Although many seem to think it is a copy or is trying to go for the Saw movies in terms of style and setting, The Collection is in a whole different category by itself. From start to finish I left the theater satisfied as I might ever be after seeing that movie. It is mysterious and well directed. I say mysterious, because you think you know what is going to happen, but really you have no idea what you are in for. Without a doubt, The Collection is far more greater than its prequel The Collector. However, The Collector in terms of its intensity throughout its movie is far more greater then The Collection. The Collection proves itself to be true and worthy in the genre of horror for sure. With all these B-movie, low-cut, ridiculous movies these days in the horror genre, The Collection makes the first Halloween look bad. Josh Stewart who reprises his role as Arkin, does a phenomenal job. He fits the role as Arkin so well and I don't think anyone could have played his role any better. Throughout the movie he gives off the feeling that he is done and wants nothing more to do with the collector, but in all truth, you leave with the question is he really done? Emma Fitzpatrick, who plays the role of Elena,also does a phenomenal job as well. I was very proud that none of the female characters had the same characteristics, personalities, and attributes like you see in other horror movies. Though that might sound sexist, I am not trying to go down that road. I am merely trying to say that in horror movies the women always run screaming making it easier for the killer to catch them, they always beg and beg as if the serial killer won't kill them, and other feminine character traits and things the writers always have the characters do. Elena is not afraid to fight and gives her character a bad-ass reputation. Overall, you will leave this movie satisfied and wanting more. I give this movie a 10, because Marcus Dunstan did his own thing and directed this movie tremendously. The setting was mere perfect in the sense that it isn't always in the woods,on a farm, the middle of nowhere, and other repeating settings. Its screenplay was written with perfection and and perfected by the actors and actrices themselves. The movie itself is real, it makes you feel real as if you are one of the victims of The Collector. The movie is also very realistic. The blood and gore though it is not real, seems to be after you watch it. The guts were realistic and not fake in any way. The whole movie is just one genuine piece that cannot be made ever again in terms of someone else trying to remake it. The movie just makes all these horror movies look bad, and I cannot stress that enough. The Collection is far more better then the first movie The Collector, and carries The Collector on its back if you want to make a case for it. Rarely do you see a sequel better then the first movie, but in this case you do. You cannot go wrong with this movie and if you do, well you must not be seeing the movie for what it really is. The plot, the setting, the characters, the outcome is simply put a work of art and will have you wanting more as I mentioned before. Arkin wants revenge, and you will be able to feel that, when you watch it, you will feel Arkin's pain, his want for revenge, his story, his life, but mostly you will feel as if you are Arkin, because you are.

I feel the rating is accurate with a 6 out of 10. Could be a 5 but it's a pretty good film, reminds me of Saw more than 'The Collector' did. Very gory and a little outrageous with the violence actually. It's not as realistic as the first one (even though neither are) simply based off of the first killing scene. No serial killer could get away with such crimes in reality especially one who studies bugs for a living and doesn't at least have military training to make him the badass he's portrayed as being. But I'm not going to be such a pessimist, it wasn't bad. It was a relatively short film so it's straight to the point. If you're a fan of violence and gore this is your film.

You can see by my summary that I don't think highly of this film. I also didn't think highly of the "Saw" movies. I watched this with few expectations of anything unique, new or original, and my expectations were met on every level. Permit me to coin a term: Goresturbation. That's what the Saw movies were, and that's what this is. It's not even scary. It's just a collection (pardon the pun) of bloody scenes, always bloody, all the time for no real reason, and especially to NO GOOD EFFECT. If you like this movie after watching it, I question YOUR sanity. There is but one quality in this movie, and all 7 of the Saw movies, and the Feast movies: Gore. It's really not enough to make a movie, and yet die-hard fans flock to it and give it great reviews because lots of people get splattered. I guess I just expect more out of a movie, but unfortunately some other people seem to have severely lower expectations. This film spits in the face of common sense, logic, good acting, worthwhile plot development, character development and almost every other facet of worthwhile movie making. The special effects were bad also. But the part that really gets to me the most is how insulting it is. The writers assume that you'll just eat up whatever they hand you. They assume that they can get away with anything as long as there's gore. It's so amazingly inane that having the creators literally come to my home and spit in my soup could only be worse. And that means something coming from me! I LOVE bad movies, and I make allowance for anything if there's some real originality and creativity behind it, or at least attempted in it somewhere. But this had none of that. It's been done before. Seen before. 7 times in fact. This movie should be named "Saw: Regurgitated." It's crap. Event the music sucked. The only part of this film that I found even remotely redeeming was the very small tribute to Dario Argento. Now I'll try to find something good to say about it. Um.. the killer is the Batman of psychopaths. He has the benefit of crap-tons of money, an endless supply of time, a work force of hundreds of people designing his dungeons, the ingenuity of hundreds of mechanics, inventors, trappers, hunters and designers. And he's supremely intelligent and can hypnotize and reprogram people's minds for fun. He's also psychic and can predict people's movements and actions. At least.. That's what he needs to be in order to make this film's bad guy even remotely plausible on the smallest level. Exactly the same as the Saw movies. Oh gosh darn! I'm getting confused. Was this movie different from the Saw movies at all? I could go on about the actual plot inconsistencies, but I think I've wasted enough of your time. Thank you for reading. Trust me and waste less of your time and do not watch this movie. The end.

Really a good horror film needs to accomplish a few key tasks to be considered a success. One, it needs to draw the viewer in. Two, it needs to keep the viewer engaged (tense & on the edge of their seat). Three, it needs to make you at least to some degree care about the victims. Finally, it should be memorable with memorable & interesting characters & plot twists. I feel this film truly has all of the above down to a science. In The Collection, the psychopath killer is interesting & the contraptions he uses to trap, mutilated and/or kill his captives are certainly engaging. Viewers will find themselves engrossed in a epically gory thrill ride that's as stylishly fun as it is a dark escape. Not a moment of filler here, every scene has it's place here and none are wasteful. This film is riveting, thrilling and thought provoking. What would you do if you and a friend or even a stranger were caught in a life or death situation? Would you be a hero trying to save the other person or a coward and just try & save yourself?