Majorthebys Charming and brutal

Breakinger A Brilliant Conflict

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Lela The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Monica Tribeca A group of female friends (around 25 years old) are being stalked by a man who seems to be a boy they bullied at 12. People start dying, a detective tries to solve the mystery, and the girls start having differences between them. The main idea, despite simple, is not bad. But the script is actually dull and ridiculous. And the acting, as you can imagine with that casting, is painfully poor. The "monster" of this movie, is a character about which we know nothing. This means there are no fascinating psychic features in his personality neither strange behaviors, an interesting lifestyle, strong and weird motivations, not even curious aesthetic aspects. He is a standard man wearing a ridiculous Cupid mask, without breaks, grime or anything to make it sordid. Among the girls there are no attractive psychic profiles or intimate conflicts either. And, of course, there are some extremely soft erotic moments (no nudity neither sex involved) around Denise Richards' character (her neck is the wildest thing you'll see and that's why this Review's Title), completely gratuitous and disconnected with the plot. The killing scenes are pathetic. Victims behave stupidly like Carmen Electra's character in Scarie Movie. The killer has no sinister behavior. And the act of killing itself is often physically absurd and visually not depicted. To sum up, there is nothing terrifying, sinister or even dark in this movie. It's basically a dumb "horror" flick for kids to watch a Sunday at 9pm with mom and dad at the living room. Of course, shooting, sound design, cinematography, editing, wardrobe and locations are not interesting, sharp or expressive either. By the way, it is absurd that this film got Certificate 16 at the USA. It's one of thousands of examples proving that the MPAA must seriously revise their labeling criteria.

bowmanblue It's fair to say that 1997's 'Scream' reinvented the 'slasher' genre, breathing new life into something that was pretty formulaic and predictable. Then, four years later we have 'Valentine,' – a slasher movie that feels as if it belongs somewhere in the eighties at best. Either that or no one on the entire production staff ever watched Scream or knew about its existence.The beauty of Scream was that it listed all the clichés associated with the horror genre and did its best to subvert them. Valentine, on the other hand, seems to want to adhere to every cliché and be totally predictable.At the start of the movie we see a flashback from yesteryear where a geeky looking boy was (slightly!) bullied at a school prom by a gang of girls and then beaten up by some boys. Skip forward twenty or so years and he's out for revenge on the girls he perceived as his tormentors. Here's the first thing I noticed... I know we're hardly meant to feel empathy towards the (as yet unknown) killer, but these girls didn't really do enough to warrant their grisly executions. Perhaps that's meant to make us hate him more, I don't know. I'd have thought he'd need more of a reason towards his hated. I know there are some brief explanations regarding how he was sent away to an institution after the 'attack' but it's all pretty glossed over.So, the film is basically the adult girls being stalked and eliminated one by one. Naturally, they all hang out with a multitude of unsavoury men, designed to make us wonder which one is really the killer in 'disguise.' Another thing you may notice is the heavy marketing towards Denise Richards. I know nowadays it's a bit fashionable to hate her, but, back at the end of the nineties, she was pretty hot (commercial) property. Unfortunately, she's not really the star. This is a shame because she's actually quite fun and is by far the most memorable character on screen.The death scenes (bar one regarding the hot tub) are nothing special and certainly not imaginative and you'll probably guess who the killer is simply because you will. It's just obvious somehow, despite attempts at misdirection.You're really going to have to enjoy slasher films to really like this. Either that or just want to see Denise Richards in her prime! Otherwise, stick to Scream, its sequels and any vaguely better slasher flick.

Climinator Bought this film on DVD nearly a year ago. Upon watching it the first time I thought it was god-awful. Now I've seen it around five times and, although its no masterpiece, its not as bad as I remember.The film sees Paige Presscott and her friends(where have I heard that surname before?), played by Denise Richards, Jessica Cauffiel, Jessica Capshaw, Marley Shelton and Katherine Heigl being stalked by an ex-student called Jeremy Meltonthey humiliated in their old school days. One by one they get sinister valentine cards and start being murdered by someone in a mask and black coat. Are any of Paige's friends safe with their dates? Could one of their dates be Jeremy now thirteen years older? Many people think that this is a slasher in the 'Scream' mould. I don't think that is the case. I think it was meant to be the sort of film that tries to get the audience to enter Jeremy's disturbed mind. A psychological thriller instead of a horror. However I still find some performances far too hammy even if those characters were meant to be comedic. I also found that the leading ladies were rather difficult to relate to. This is why I'm giving it a 5/10 at best.

elshikh4 1_Group some 20 something terrible actors and actresses, to make an enough number of suspects and victims. 2_Make a mad vague unstoppable serial killer who loves, just loves, to intimidate his victims before ending them. 3_Make a frequent way of threat; phone calls, gifts, postcards, bloody lines on walls…etc. 4_Many killings going on to dispose of that cast, one after the other. 5_Write the most idiot and useless dialog (who cares ? It doesn't matter here !). 6_A big finish where many killings happen and the identity of the killer appears. 7_A zillion sequel, since the real killer will NEVER EVER be killed !This round (Valentine) does look like a spoof sometimes; the first scene at the school party, the date session, or watching a leg while wearing a pantyhose then discovering that it's for a man ! Though, it's pitiful that it wasn't made as spoof. Because despite having a good formation for a script, especially the ending's surprise, some matters made the parody, any parody, sure more watchable in comparison.The movie suffers from a die-hard TV-ish condition. The image is away from being a bit dazzling or even cinematic. No factors said that we're watching anything else the movie of the week. While we're supposed to be in a thrilling horror, there was a state of stagnancy and indolence around; which pushes you to ask who was the real slasher of the movie ?! (Denise Richards), the first name on the poster, is a major turn off. I came to believe that being her is an enough reason to be killed. I loved the moment of killing her since it meant not seeing her again. Her dull presence and awful acting ruined big part of standing the viewing !Then, the vocal cat fight between (Dorothy) and her young stepmother led to nothing, since not the stepmother or the father ended up as murdered or ever appeared again ! How (Dorothy) thought that her boyfriend left the villa near the end ? His clothes were left, being killed in his bathrobe, so he's a nudist ?! And by the way the killer's mask seemed a bit laughable, as if it was modeled after actor (Frederick Koehler)'s baby face !I find it strange why (Scream – 1996) made that horror boom, for the slasher subgenre in specific, at the middle of the 1990s. True (Scream) isn't a great movie in my book, but there must be causes for its box office success, many sequels and likes. Aside from presenting a well formula for a thriller/horror/teen movie for Hollywood to feed on, I think it met a strong sense of being unsecured for the teens of the time, and a case of distrust among the people in totally materialistic world where love is missed; notice how the first victim (played by Katherine Heigl) Leaves a disgusting possible lover to work – more satisfied – among corpses, (Dorothy)'s father cares about his new wife more than his daughter, (Dorothy)'s love isn't trustable; loving her money not her, every girl in the movie suspects her lover, the end is about trusting the wrong lover, and originally the killer is someone had nobody to love or to trust either.(Valentine) as a horror parody ignored some potential irony. And as only a horror it bores; due to not much of scary moments, no artistic dealing and predicting the formula easily. Comparing it to (Scream) proves missing the cinematic heat; namely craft and better talents. So it managed to be a slasher movie's weak copy, following the known-by-heart steps yet poorly. That's why the voluptuous beauty of (Jessica Capshaw) is the whole show here, and nothing else it ! Slasher movies are like porn without sex. Namely cheap and empty. Since the start I don't talk about the bad ones, because the thing is…almost all of them are !