Flyerplesys Perfectly adorable

SanEat A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

trashgang If you haven't seen the terrible first part from 2012, don't worry. In the beginning you will see a summary so you can enter the hayride. The positive fact is that the horror is better than in part 1. The killings are done on-camera and we do have red stuff here and there but as in the first part it's a long ride throughout all the talking going on.I saw this immediately after the 2012 version and I had the stop button in my hand but people who knew me do know I sit throughout every flick I see. It's not the worst flick I came across but it wasn't a nice flick. Still, it do deliver a few bloody shots. Only for the geeks of low budget slashers.Gore 0/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 1,5/5 Story 2/5 Comedy 0/5

Hellmant 'HAYRIDE 2': Two and a Half Stars (Out of Five)B-horror flick sequel, to the 2012 indie slasher flick 'HAYRIDE'. Both films were written and directed by Terron R. Parsons; and tell the story of a legendary serial killer, named Pitchfork. Most of the original cast actually survived the first film, and returned for this installment; including Jeremy Ivy, Jeremy Sande, Sherri Eakin, Corlandos Scott and Wayne Dean (as Pitchfork). The film is pretty bad; but if you like slasher flicks, you might get a kick out of it. It turns out the escaped killer from the original movie, Pitchfork (Dean), isn't really dead; and he's back to wreak more havoc, in southern Alabama. The Summers brothers, Steven (Ivy) and Corey (Sande), once again have to do battle with the madman. Steven also must, once again, protect his girlfriend, Amanda (Eakin); who's targeted by Pitchfork. Detective Loomis (Scott) is also back, to chase the notorious monster; as he also learns more about his past.The film is about as cheesy as they get; poorly acted and filled with horrible dialogue. It is entertaining though, if you like this type of movie. I never saw the first film, and I don't really think I need to; after seeing this one. I'm sure if you've seen one 'Pitchfork' movie, you've probably seen them all.Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: https://youtu.be/BpWXjqkP56w

distancedself I'm a horror movie fan, all genres, this was bad. The gore is the only redeemable aspect of this film. The acting is god awful. It seemed like the actors were doing separate monologues and were unaware of the other person's performance. The worst part was the awkward pow-wow between the nurse and the main character that just seemed to last f.o.r.e.v.e.r. Way too long to just say "if you ever need someone to talk to..." It's so bad I'm in complete shock. How do any of these people have jobs? The filter they used on the film is absolutely wretched. One of the guys at the hospital looked like he had orange skin! The camera angles didn't make sense either. It seemed like they were trying to mimic artsy style horror films with odd close ups (at certain times) and failed badly. I do not want to know what Hayride (1) is like. I'm sure it does not deserve a sequel. Please save your money, time and brain cells. Do not watch.

Josh_Hommeboy This film is incredibly slow and directionless. The folklore about a mystical, seemingly invincible farmer-serial killer is hardly developed at all, and the way people throughout the film go through trauma only to reconvene and have a slow conversation about childhood and fairy-tales is bizarre. Even fans of horror films will find this movie a waste of time. How did this thing get funded anyway?I guess one could try to make a drinking game out some of the annoying aspects of the film (drink every time someone dies, or every time cops stand around doing nothing), but even then alcohol is not likely to make any of this funny or entertaining.And why would we expect the bumbling hick protagonists to prevail over this invincible farmer? And why did I feel the need to waste more time by writing a really bad movie review about this really bad movie? Dilemmas...