Write a commentINCLUDES MILD SPOILERS FOR "I Know What You Did Last Summer" (1997)
This is one of those situations that happens with studios. They learn the wrong lessons. They release a film that's mildly successful and their first instinct is to dilute the impact of the original by greenlighting an initially unplanned sequel. This is not surprising, not in the least, but it is nevertheless mildly disappointing.
The first film ended with Julie (Hewitt) being attacked by the slicker man despite him being lost at sea. He jumps through glass at her, she screams and the movie cuts to credits. Not the worst ending and it is fitting considering what preceded it. Maybe Julie dies, maybe she doesn't. Who actually cares?
The original made decent money so the studio decided to make another. This time, Julie and her friend Karla (Norwood) win a radio contest for a free trip to a tropical island. Not suspicious at all. I say that sarcastically, but just after having written it, I realize that it really isn't suspicious. I don't think any of them would have ever believed that Slicker Man was behind all this.
I understand that plot holes happen all the time. They are especially prevalent in the horror genre, but this makes almost no sense. Why can't Slicker Man just kill Julie and friends stateside? This means that Slicker Man (and perhaps an accomplice?) paid to send Julie as well as three others to the tropics just to kill them. What does something like that cost? Sure, the economy was markedly better in 1998, but does a supposedly dead and now disabled (after losing his hand in the previous installment) guy just have that amount of disposable income? Doesn't it seem inefficient as well as pointlessly expensive?
Admittedly, it's funny to think of: Slicker Man goes into a travel agency and books four tickets for the person that almost killed him the year before and her three friends. Can't you just charter a boat, bring them out to sea and take care of them out there? You gotta have a boat; you're The Slicker Man! Boats were practically supporting characters in the last movie. Surely, you can grab one of those.
And that's just a glimpse into how my brain works. It's like the old cartoons where someone has a sweater with a frayed end, someone else pulls at the string and the whole sweater becomes completely unraveled.
Also, yeah, the hook is cool. Same thing with the slicker. It has a lot of style. But, if your goal is just to kill these people, why not dress as a normal person? You dress normally and maybe you blend in with the crowd so you can get close enough to take care of these people? There's one point in the movie where Ray (Prinze, Jr.) is driving to save Julie and is on the side of the road. Out of the blue, Slicker Man takes care of his friends (Academy Award nominee John Hawkes!) and then Ray turns around and is like, "Oh, no! Slicker Man!"
The slicker getup made more sense in the original because they were in a fishing village. Mobile Slicker Man could have just been Mobile Man. Just dress in jeans and a T-shirt, act mild mannered then use your hook. Done. You don't have to stalk people or anything like that. You just do what you came to do.
Also, and I swear this is the end of the rant, "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer" isn't accurate because by the time the events of this film begin, it's more than just last summer. It's the summer before last, but I get that "I Still Know What You Did The Summer Before Last" doesn't have the same punch as "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer".
Anyway, yeah.
The movie is a series of stalk and slash sequences but there's no real energy or creativity to most of it. The cast seems willing and able to do a lot of the stunts and screaming, but they're just going through the motions. Supporting actors Combs, Cobb and Black add some life to their characters, but it's all for nothing. And for a movie that's supposed to be all about gore and what not, surprisingly a lot of it happens off screen. We see a dead body but not how they got dead. Isn't that why we came to see the movie in the first place?
By the time we get to the end and the final twist happens, you've lost all interest. The actors all look miserable and who wouldn't be? The majority of the movie takes place during a torrential downpour. The entire set probably smelled like wet dog. If the cast isn't having fun, it bleeds into what's being portrayed on screen. It's a palpable sense of malaise that you feel when watching it.
What should have been a fun, dopey movie is just a drag. I guess the one thing I can say is that it makes the original look brilliant by comparison. Maybe that's the actual motivation of the studio. Release a tepid sequel to a passable movie and make people appreciate the original more in the process.
Nah.
The motivation is money. It's always money. Unless you're The Slicker Man, spending your hard earned money to give your victims one last trip before you send them to the grave.
I Still Know What You Did Last Summer (1998)
Directed by: Danny Cannon
Cast: Jennifer Love Hewitt, Freddie Prinze, Jr., Brandy Norwood, Mekhi Phifer, Matthew Settle, Bill Cobbs, Muse Watson, Jeffrey Combs, Jennifer Esposito, John Hawkes, Jack Black
Runtime: 100 minutes
MPAA Rating: R (for intense terror violence and gore, strong language and some drug use)
Rating (out of ****): *1/2
"I Still Know What You Did Last Summer" can be rented or purchased on all the major platforms as well as via physical release.
