Valentine (2001)

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.

Someone is killing young women who have a connection to one another - they all knew and/or bullied a boy in junior high school. We first see a Valentine's Day dance held in the high school in 1988. Jeremy Melton is a loner, some might even say a geek. He asks five girls his age for a dance. Most of them turn him down rudely EXCEPT for Dorothy. They get caught making out by some bullies and those bullies humiliate him in front of the whole school. Fast forward thirteen years - the girls are all grown up and are (for the most part) successful women. Pretty soon they, and others, start getting picked off by a mysterious serial killer who stalks them wearing a cupid mask. Could that boy they bullied and make fun of be the killer all grown up, or is the culprit someone new? Perhaps one of the girls' boyfriends?I really enjoyed 'Valentine' when I first saw it years ago. Is it a pretty sophisticated horror film. It's got a beautiful cast, gorgeous location shot, clearly a decent sized budget.. and it's actually scary! There is something unsettling about the killers' mask. It's a cupid mask, but from afar it sort of resembles Michael Myers' mask from the Halloween films. It was really creepy and some of the stalking scenes were just as creepy. The killer goes after his victims in a college campus, a small apartment, a mansion - all the location spots work in this movie. Lots of tense moments when he appears. There isn't a ton of blood, so the gore-hounds might be disappointed. I thought it was a decent amount. It didn't add or take away from the story.Some very good acting in this as well, especially by Marley Shelton, Jessica Capshaw and Denise Richards. I loved Jessica Cauffiel in this as the quirky Lily, but her role was sort of small and she was underused much like Katherine Heigl. I thought "Valentine" (for the year it was made in) was a cut above most slasher/horror flicks. It isn't just some silly average horror movie, it's got class and a certain kind of edge that separates it from others made around this time. The ending, without giving anything away, is also pretty terrifying in my opinion... Good movie all around. I recommend it!8/10

Friday the 13th Meets Halloween! Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. In this Case its true. For me at least. But, I see a lot of reviews of this movie that bash it and dog it. The fact that it came out right on the line of when gore movies became popular is probably why people didn't like it. The movie wasn't filled with in your face gore the gore was more like a Friday the 13th. The Killer was very Michael Myersish, which is what I loved about it. The kills as i said where very Friday the 13th. while we are trying to figure out who the killer is the whole movie, That was very Prom Night. Now for my review. The Movie was Very vibrant with colors and at the same time was cold and dark and would send chills up your spin when you would see The Cherub in the shadows. The opening sequence was great I felt like he wasn't in a hurry to kill his victim but was very patient reminded me so much of The Shape from Halloween. The movie builds up suspense like most 80's horror but it also has the campy charm as well. So sad that we will never see a sequel How ever I intend on making a fan film sequel.

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 !