Customer Reviews


27 Reviews
5 star:
 (5)
4 star:
 (4)
3 star:
 (7)
2 star:
 (5)
1 star:
 (6)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 
Only search this product's reviews

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


5.0 out of 5 stars soleil moon frye's pale posterior
this movie was not very enjoyable mainly due to the fact that soleil mooon frye (of punky brewster) did not take off any of her clothes. punky brewster also didn't have many lines and cherie didn't even get a cameo. Just a simple chance to shake her booty train would have been nice.

there was a dog in it that kind of looked like brandon though.

okay. bye.

Published on Nov 28 2000 by jesseriley

versus
3.0 out of 5 stars NOT AS BAD AS IT COULD HAVE BEEN?
I saw the original PUMPKINHEAD years ago, but with the advance of arcus senilis, I can't remember too much about it, other than I thought it was good. Hence, PUMPKINHEAD 2 isn't as bad for me as other reviewers since the first wasn't fresh in my mind. With that said, though, I admit the acting was pretty bad, particularly with Linnea Quigley, Steve Kanaly (Dallas),...
Published on May 12 2004 by Michael Butts


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

4.0 out of 5 stars GOOD STUFF!, Jun 5 2004
By 
Laurie Strode (Haddonfield, IL) - See all my reviews
This is not a bad movie at all. Pretty good story to it. Got some descent scares and good acting. I thought it was put together well and is worth checking out.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3.0 out of 5 stars NOT AS BAD AS IT COULD HAVE BEEN?, May 12 2004
By 
Michael Butts (Berkeley Springs, WV USA) - See all my reviews
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   
I saw the original PUMPKINHEAD years ago, but with the advance of arcus senilis, I can't remember too much about it, other than I thought it was good. Hence, PUMPKINHEAD 2 isn't as bad for me as other reviewers since the first wasn't fresh in my mind. With that said, though, I admit the acting was pretty bad, particularly with Linnea Quigley, Steve Kanaly (Dallas), Roger Clinton (the hairy mayor?), and J. Trevor Howard (the villainous Danny). You can telegraph every death, but the effects are allright, if you keep your expectations at a lower level. The monster itself looked good sometimes, and bad at others. However, I've seen worse (for instance, TAIL STING..Now THERE'S A HORRORBLE MOVIE!!). Anyway, rent it sometime, but don't spend money on it.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1.0 out of 5 stars 1 Star and that's a stretch., Jan 12 2004
By 
"king_brahma" (Castroville, Texas United States) - See all my reviews
Okay let me set a few things straight to clear some confusion. 1: Pumpkinhead in this film has no connection to the first film. (which by far was superior to this weak attempt of a sequel.) This is not Ed Harley nor his son come back from the dead as some seem to think in other reviews. And in some ways it is an expansion on the legend. Hence my 1 star rating. The first film was dark and rich in the flavor of the demon being a relentless killer. This should really be dubbed a prequel. It supposedly is the creature Ed Harley digs up but if one crunches those numbers it doesn't exactly add up. Now on to the things that really disappointed me about this film.

I was blown away by Pumpkinhead. Being a long time fan of Mr. Winston's works behind and in front of the camera. Stan Winston's Pumpkinhead was a work of genius that should have been revisted yes but, not by someone of far less caliber of the original creator. Pumpkinhead of the first film seemed so lifelike and down right nasty in manner and appearence was do to Stan's amazing animatronic demon. PH2 is badly noticeble as a man in rubber suit job.

The story was great (the background story not the ill handled plot) it added more to the legend when the research into the myth went on. The story of the myth itself was great but the story placed around it as the outer shell and ultimately lacking movie. It was made to obviously splash gore and sex into the film. The first left these elements out and stuck close to some of the old school formulas of horror. PH2 goes clearly for the 90's and mid 80's belief which still holds true to todays horror films I might add that sex and gore are the big draws to horror. Which in this reviewers mind can actually be a draw back to horror films. One scene with yes, that was the scream queen in this drivel of a sequel humping with a victim in a scene so badly thrown in just for the sake of having such a scene in this film.

This follow up is a huge let down in many ways. It isn't even so bad it's good. I've seen movies so badly thrown together that they are worth watching to pick on but this one isn't such a film. The only redeeming quality is the deeper exploration of the Pumpkinhead lore.

I advise watching Stan Winston's Pumpkinhead. This badly thrown together expansion is worth a watch for the moments we get a further peek into the demon's legend. As other viewers of this film put it: Pumpkinhead as mortal is a let down. The bad effects are a let down. The by far most heinous crime of this film would be the badly slapped together plot and acting and even directing of this movie. The only reason I will add this film to my collection is the fact that in all I am a Pumpkinhead fan and would ike to own it for the fact that it is related to the more superb first film. I am distrubed that a great horror film was mocked by this sequel. Most who saw the two and had expected more of the second film because of the first know how I felt upon seeing this picture. I wish sometimes that I never discovered that Pumpkinhead was followed up. Laters- Ace

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2.0 out of 5 stars If this movie was a bucket.. it would be a leaky one., Oct 19 2003
A deformed boy some how transforms into an 8 ft. demon. Of course there is a backwoods witch involved, also a revenge plot in which 6 teens in the mid 1950's torture the deformed lad. And yes you've guessed it, it wants revenge. We meet this 8 ft. demon about 30 minutes into the movie when the horror almost begins, but never really does. I never expect the acting in B-horror to be award worthy, but if the actors can't act scared, It's hard for the viewer to be scared. One more complaint is Pumpkinhead seemed to be very limited in movements in this 2nd film. He moved like a kid playing with an action figture of Pumkinhead from the first film. With all this being said just watch the first one, it's better and provides genuine chills that this sequel lacks. A good horror film is one that you might want to watch again in your lifetime. This film gives you your cake, but the problem is eating it too.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2.0 out of 5 stars Yawn!, Oct 14 2003
By 
Brett Boles ""Just rock a little all the ... (East Bend, NC United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
My advise to all the directers out there is to not make a sequel unless its as good as the 1st!
I will say that this is probably worth at least one watch!
Ok gore!
Bottom Line: Not as good as the original!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1.0 out of 5 stars Badbadbad!, July 18 2003
By 
This movie is so bad! The only good thing about it was Kane Hodder was in it (Jason Voorhees). The "acting"lol is terrible and the "plot" LWOL is so inncoherent, it looks as though some cut cliping out of random newspapers and put them together! It terrible. This flick killed the Pumpkinhead franchise. That could have been a long and profittable franchise. Whoever directed this, please don't waste someone else's money or your "talent"lol on another movie again, please!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4.0 out of 5 stars Good, but it diden't fit well with the first one, Feb 25 2003
By 
Jonathan Tapley (Newburgh, Maine United States) - See all my reviews
Theres know dout that PH2 is a good movie, but it docen't go well with the first. Both movies have the same monster and the same idea, but they are different. Plues there is a very sick killing seen and I diden't really like that, but the killers got what they deserved. I recomend this movie to anyone who likes to see revenge in its best. Both PH and PH2 are a great choses.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4.0 out of 5 stars Pumpkinhead 2 blood wings, Nov 19 2001
I think that pimpkinhead 2 blood wings is not as good but it has some good parts in there if yoiu know what i mean ;)

The boold and gore is much better then the first one but the first one is much more real and i think ph2 is not as good as good as the first one

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4.0 out of 5 stars Great Sequal!!!!!!, Nov 3 2001
Not to long ago after watching my most favorite horror of all time(PUMPKINHEAD)I heard that there was a seqaul.So I had orderd it from amazon.com(where I had gotten PUMPKINHEAD1)and I must say that it was a great seqaul to the best horror movie of all time PUMPKINHEAD.The plot was great and interesting and it really brings you into the movie.This seqaul though could have been alot better and possibly maby could have been better than the first if they had conciderd the following...First you can tell that they didint put to much effort and work into this one as they did the first.I think that they could have made the pumpkinhead look alot more real like he did on the first but this time they had hired a different suit desighner and you can tell that the one they hired is not as talented as the first desighner.They tried to follow the original desighn as best they could but kinda went off track and made the pumpkinhead kinda rubber lookin.Its not that bad but it still looks kinda fake.The acting could have been inproved especialy by the teens and the black female doctor.They also wanted the pumpkinhead to move alot faster so that when he was chasing somone down he wouldent be taking his time like on part 1 but in the procces of making him move alot faster it also made him move more like a human which also lets it look more fake telling you that theres a person inside wearing a costume.But I think that they was just trying to be realistic because on the first he was chasing them down slowly not caring if he got them or not but just killing them for some one else who wants revenge so on part one pumpkinhead is more of a slave but on here you can tell that he really wants to get the job done and not take his time.In this movie a deformed boy named Tommy is killed in the 50s and then the present teens summon him and he then turnes into pumpkinhead and goes after his killers.So in this one for pumpkinhead it is more of a personal revenge thing instead of him killing for somone else.In here the pumpkinhead actually has a personality unlike the one on the first who does not even have a soul.You can see the anger in tommys eyes every time before he kills his victems making the movie alot more interesting than part one.Pumpkinhead2 is also alot more gory than part one and the pumpkinhead deals with his victims alot more brutal in this one.I love this movie and its a great seqaul but still does not compare to the greatest,scariest,most thrilling and realistic movie of all time PUMPKINHEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2.0 out of 5 stars Didint realy under stand it, Oct 1 2001
Ok...What can I say.very different from the first.Alot harder to understand and somewhat of a childish and not well planned plot Id say.Instead of the father of a child asking haggis to summon the pumpkin head for revenge to kill the ones responcible for his sons death,the son himself becomes pumpkin head!!Then starts slaughtering the teens one by one.I hate the pumpkin head.He stinks ,hes not imortal,hes sympathetic and that right there breaks one of the rules on the demons part.First of all he is supposed to be heartless killing demon who only does the bidding for somone whos lost a loved one to some careless peoples.This is not the real pumpkin head.I was so mad to see that he didint kill the girl at the end and just for trying to save her..kill her father as well!!Just to make it even dumber,after he spears there lives he runns like a little coward from a few hunters who catch up to him and completely rip him apart!!Now that realy ticked me off!!seeing a legendary imortal creature from hell be destroyed by a few hunters with rifels!!It wasint scary AND NOT THAT VIOLENT EATHER.The only part i realy liked about it was when he threw the guy on the ground,found a big long spike and drove it right through his chest.So thats my review,If you want my advice,rent it,dont buy it,but you have definetly got to get the first!!!It is awesome!!!!!Ok,bye now.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Pumpkinhead 2: Blood Wings
Pumpkinhead 2: Blood Wings by Jeff Burr (DVD - 2005)
CDN$ 10.18 CDN$ 9.49
In Stock
Add to cart Add to wishlist