Urban Legends 3: Bloody Mary

Urban Legends 3: Bloody Mary_720p(480P)

source: Urban Legends 3: Bloody Mary

Moviecut—Urban Legends 3: Bloody Mary

After seeing this movie, I came to ask myself why this movie was called Bloody Mary. Besides them showing how she died and her getting revenge on the people that hurt her, by killing their kids, nothing else has to do with the story of Bloody Mary. The majority of the movie is people being killed one right after the other. They needed to go into more depth about Mary. Also instead of them saying Bloody Mary in a well lighted room, they should have done it in the bathroom with the lights turned off and facing the mirror, the way it's suppose to go. I have heard many versions of the story, but I'm pretty sure she was suppose to be pregnant.... OK so at the end we find out that Billy was the kids stepfather, wow big surprise, who killed Mary by accident. So he goes and tries to kill the brother and sister. We see the brother die, but at the end the sister doesn't even look sad. I have heard that they cut out the part when they run into each other at the hospital. Why would they do that? It kind of makes the ending look stupid. Anyways it's kind of cool the way that the people die but nothing's a mystery. You know what's going to happen before it happens. If you're extremely bored and there's nothing else to watch I suggest this to waste some time before a show comes on.

source: Urban Legends 3: Bloody Mary

Now this is interesting. This is interesting, indeed. Perhaps the theories on cinema desensitizing the masses are true. Case in point, I would have physically assaulted and crippled most of the characters in this film, myself. Were I a main character watching everyone else die, it wouldn't phase me. Hell, I'd call out Bloody Mary a few times and ask her if she wanted help. (Note – that sounds like sarcasm. It's not.) Mary was a high school student accidentally killed by the football team players who dropped some pills in her drink. Fast forward 30 years later, a new set of girls (one of which is the film's heroine) get pills dropped in their drinks and disappear by this generations jocks (who are also self-absorbed, delusional, morons who thrive on the microcosm of high school popularity). But now Mary's back, and she's taking revenge. So, in other words, the evil killer ghost is doing mankind a favor and also poses no threat to the heroine (in fact, you could say she's taking revenge for herself and the heroine.) So I'm sitting here watching a horror movie where I can honestly, and without sarcasm, ask, "Why do they want to *stop* Mary?" Mary's victims – I hated them. Every one of them. I hated them to the point that I was verbally criticizing the film that the deaths weren't gruesome, painful, and horrible enough to give a satisfying finale to these pricks. Needless to say, this makes suspense impossible. To go back to Hitchcock's bomb-under-the table analogy, I was throwing rocks at the thing hoping to make it go off early. Screw suspense, just kill 'em. Now, be careful, because the criticism isn't so much that I hated the characters. It's the fact the movie continues on as a normal horror movie and treats the suspense as if I cared about them. If I actually liked the characters, sure, I would have flown with it as the films stands. More so: I think it would have been very interesting if the film acknowledged that the victims were complete unsympathetic losers and found an alternate means of getting suspense by introducing an additional layer of conflict – one that actually threatens Samantha (and no, the "surprise" ending that doesn't surprise us doesn't count.) Actually, let me address the ending of the movie a little bit further because it is quite hilarious: it's supposed to be a surprise ending, and yet it's part of a typical cinematic formula. If you haven't figured out the ending by the film's midpoint, you haven't seen enough movies. Here's a hint: "Luke, I am your father." Then again, if the movie had the brains to go into more provocative concepts it wouldn't have a lot of the lame dialogue it has (especially in the beginning of the film.) Since we're in the post-Scream era of horror, enter the false layer of sophistication by having the characters mention the Clive Barker film, Candyman. So the film has convinced me the kids have seen one movie? Zip-a-dee-doo-dah-day! I was hoping it could convince me they had a life too. Complaints aside, Mary Lambert can be a great director, and this is apparent in fleeting glimpses in Urban Legend: Bloody Mary. The visual style is always interesting, and I adored some of the roaming camera moves through the empty corridors of the school – very stylish, very atmospheric, if only the script had the same level of sophistication as this simple (really simple) yet effective technique. At her best, Mary Lambert can deliver some truly haunting and disturbing imagery as seen in Pet Semetary (particularly, the final confrontation of the film stands out in my mind). As stated earlier, though, I hated all the characters, and no amount of directorial massaging can ever elicit any kind of emotional reaction of that caliber without some investment. I want to see Mary Lambert tell another good story, and unfortunately, Urban Legend: Bloody Mary was not it.

When I first head that a Third "Urban Legend" movie was in the works I was like "YEAH" but then I found out its going DTV (Direct to Video) and I was kinda bummed,but when I saw this movie,I was like WOW,I mean it had the best scares out of the three (although nothing beats the decapitation scene in Urban Legends:Final Cut) Like the scene where Mary comes out of the closet and just stares at the main character,I about crap my pants! But any good movie could be ruined with a bad ending (See Cabin Fever and War of the Worlds) but not with Urban Legends:Bloody Mary, no, you get a twist ending like out of "The Twlight Zone" which was Awesome (I won't spoil the ending here) So when it comes down to it,this little Direct to Video sequel had a lot to offer,Killer death scenes (remember this:Spiders) Twist ending (Cant even tell you to remember something without giving it away), and believe it or not a awesome Urban Legend to play with,they could have easily made this "Urban Legends:Pop Rocks" but no they went for the score at 4th and 10 and then got the touchdown! I would HIGHLY Recormend seeing this sequel, I stand by what I said up above, Best of the Three!

this movie is terrible. i loved the first 2 urban legends, i don't even understand how this movie got added to the urban legend series. the killings in this one are supernatural, and only loosely follow real urban legends. The acting is awful. the script makes no sense. Gaping plot holes glare at you everywhere. the make up and special effects are terrible (i laughed at every dead body out loud). The pace of the film and the camera angles make no sense. The only slightly decent part of this film is the makeup done on Mary Banner herself when she's attacking people. Do yourselves a favor, NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER rent this movie. i don't care for what reason, even if you are bored stuck at home for 8 hours alone and this is the only movie you have, DO NOT WATCH IT. i feel like i got used by watching this. i want 2 hours back.

Mary Lambert, who brought us "Pet Sematary" and "Pet Sematary II" brings us this unrelated sequel into the "Urban Legend" series. The movie starts out on prom night, years ago. A prank-gone-wrong takes place in the attic of a high school involving a girl named Mary. The guys responsible for the prank assume her dead, and lock her body in a trunk. Cut to present day. A group of teenage girls are spending the night, having a slumber party, telling urban legends to pass the time, all leading up to the infamous "Bloody Mary" legend. On their third and final bloody Mary chant, the girls end up getting kidnapped by some jocks who are performing a revenge prank mainly on a girl named Samantha. They all return safely, a little shaken and confused after the bizarre event. But our main character, Samantha, begins having visions after the prank, mainly of Bloody Mary - and people start to die off. Is it all a joke, or is Bloody Mary back to take revenge? It's up to Samantha to uncover Mary's origins and stop the vengeful spirit. When I heard about this sequel, I was thinking "Okay, okay - this might be decent". And for the most part, it was. I saw the DVD at a local retail store and decided to buy it because I was curious. This film has nothing to do with the other two films at all, this one is much more supernatural rather than a slasher mystery. The acting was decent, not perfect but it passed. I enjoyed Lambert's "Pet Sematary" and I (unlike most people) enjoyed the sequel as well. The script for this film is predictable, the audience pretty much knows what actions the characters will take before they actually do it. The camera-work/cinematography was alright for a straight-to-video release, and the special effects were just okay, they unfortunately come off as a little bit corny in some of the sequences (especially the sequence that took place between Mary and the teenage boy at the motel). But hey, I wasn't expecting this movie to be perfect. The spider scene was actually pretty creepy looking, if not a little cheesy too. The deaths were quite creative and original, I'll give it that. To sum things up, "Urban Legends: Bloody Mary" is a mediocre but semi-fun horror sequel. It's not great, it's really not bad. It's just somewhere right in the middle. I suppose it could've been worse. If you enjoy supernatural revenge movies (along the lines of "Pet Sematary"), or if you like Lambert's previous work, you may want to check this out. It's flawed and predictable, but overall entertaining. There's no need to see the other two films though, because this one has nothing to do with them. 5/10.

I liked the original Urban Legends, with the exception of the revelation at the end, which failed to impress. I have tried twice to get through the sequel (The Final Cut) and failed both times. Upon reading the description of the third, I decided to give it a shot. I liked it. Compared to even some big budget theatrical releases it was a decent horror movie. There were elements of Asian horror in it, and being a huge Asian horror fan I appreciated that. I didn't feel it held very close to the original Bloody Mary legend, however (the one that my big cousin told me while on vacation at the beach one night...and made me keep from getting up to go to the bathroom all night for fearing of passing a mirror). That said, the legend was portrayed creatively...a decent story. It's worth watching...but it's best to go in not expecting to be impressed.