Okay fine it's true I watched the Mangler franchise a bit wonky, I saw the first which I think was a watchable effort followed by the third which was a total mess and now finally all these years later have gotten to part 2.Now going in my hopes were fairly high, it stars Lance Henriksen so it couldn't possibly be that bad, right?Well The Mangler 2 follows on from the first movie in no shape or form, it's an original tale about a virus that takes over a heavily automated school and starts killing folks off.Devoid of originality, oddly dull, with awful death scenes and instantly forgettable characters The Mangler 2 tops part 3 but just barely.Not entirely sure what they were going for but I can confidently say that it doesn't work, not even slightly.Watch The Mangler (1995) and pretend it doesn't have sequels.The Good:Decent soundtrackThe Chef stole the whole filmLance HenriksenThe Bad:Weak connection to the original filmReally quite boringThings I Learnt From This Movie:I'm left wondering whose idea it was for one of the girls to just wear her bra for near the entire film

Have you ever heard about those services that edit out all the "questionable parts" of a movie so that "moral, unpstanding" people can "enjoy" them? Have I used enough "Quotation marks" already in this "review"? I bring this up because this "horor" movie reminds me of one of those edited masterpieces after the editors have finished it off, except this movie was that bland and uneventful to begin with. I knew I was in trouble when the kids were joking about porn titles and they used the most hackneyed, unoriginal and tame parodies of porn titles I'd ever heard. Come on guys, you can't even think up an interesting or funny porn title parody? They used old ones that have been around for years. And they committed the cardinal sin of B-movies: It wasn't stupid, it was BORING! And Oh Lance Henriksen! You used to make movies like "Man's Best Friend" and "Near Dark". Didn't anyone ever teach you to invest?

Mangler 2 contains a great metaphor for itself. Midway through the movie, tensions run high, accusations fly, two female characters nearly get into a scuffle, and then we cut to fingernails dragging across a chalkboard … and they keep dragging, inflicting that irritating screech upon the poor helpless viewer.Gone is the possessed laundry machine from the first film, replaced by an even more ridiculous unrelated premise: a private school receives a new state of the art security system which, in traditional horror fashion, goes haywire and starts killing everyone. Yes, a new security system that automates everything from the doors to the refrigerators to, presumably, the motion detector auto-flushing toilets. This of course means those darn "'puters" factor heavily into the narrative, which means the script requires the characters to interact with the computers, which translates to scenes of actors standing around monitors, reading information off the screen, and telling the audience what they're typing as they're typing it.Note to filmmakers: while computers may provide fun and exciting direct interactions such as video games and other applications, there's few things as boring as watching someone else interact with them.The protagonist, Jo, is a rich girl outcast who hates even her own little clique of stereotype horror staples, leading her smiley bodyguard to muse aloud, "it's kind of sad that I'm your best friend." Then again, said clique threatens to blame her for a website vandalism prank, prompting Jo to unleash the Mangler 2.0 virus upon them. Tight knit group, non? Now, I'm all for a bitter anti-social protagonist (especially one who goes all out and embraces her dark side). It's certainly more interesting than the typical PG13 heroine plaguing horror movies these days … but if you're going to venture into those waters, go all in and make it a dark movie. Not long after Jo has stormed off at the brink of tears, she's sitting around the pool, chatting with those same "friends" who would rather make her their scapegoat so they can go to prom.Yet, I might—might—forgive all of the above. That is until time comes for the first kill and we see Mr. Bob Fix-it working on a lawnmower, but he has the wrong wrench size. So he walks out of the room, across the hall, into another room to fetch another wrench. Personally, I'd have the toolbox next to me, but never mind. He hears some funny sounds coming from down the hall, goes to investigate, and … it's just the French chef in the john. So, false scare over with, Bob goes back to his lawnmower and, again, wrong wrench size. Back out of the corridor, into the other room, into the toolbox, and he comes back with another wrench. As he returns to the lawnmower, we see a pair of garden sheers following him. And what's supporting these garden sheers? Why, a snake-like cluster of wires and cables. Goodbye suspension of disbelief, and goodbye any chance of overlooking premise/character shortcomings.I hesitate to mention this, but clearly director Michael Hamilton Wright intended to pay tribute to the much superior garden sheer scene in William Peter Blatty's Exorcist III (itself, a much superior film, incidentally.) And so goes the long parade of ideas either ill-conceived (synchronized escape from the evil security cameras? the "snowflake" analogies? the "hip" slang and "Scream" explanations the Mangler 2.0 virus has picked up?) or ill-executed (a murder in the dark, illuminated only by the brief inadequate flash of a still shot camera? the murder by hanging that shows only bikini bottoms?) It all leads up to the underwhelming climax featuring an uninspired nod to Hellbound: Hellraiser 2 (reminding us, yet again, there are better time investments within the very same genre.) It's funny how when a competent director quotes another movie within his own, the attentive viewer will pick up on it and smile appreciatively. In the case of Mangler 2, it feels like Michael Hamilton Wright is physically molesting the memory of better movies.

Ladies and Gentlemen, The times of great film are thought to have gone the way of the Tasmanian Devil and the Ne-Ne--lost to the ages. If you find yourself a believer in this school of thought, I submit to you "The Mangler 2--Graduation Day." Our times are defined by a select few films, viewed by folks generations from now who see the characters and scenes of these films to portray the thoughts and emotions of those living in its time period. Truly, "The Mangler 2" is one such film. With its true-to-life dialogue, allowing the viewer to not only empathize with the character but to BECOME the character, this movie takes us by the collar and pummels our emotions brutally, stomping on our conceptions of modern security systems and slicing away piece by piece our false sense of safety in our schools. From the first intense seconds of this film, the viewer follows along the turbulent life of a young girl who struggles with her father as well as herself and what society expects of her. She soon meets up with several friends, all of whom are perhaps the most well-developed, complex characters to grace the big screen since those of "Taxi Driver" or "Citizen Kane." These young men and women struggle against a foe far greater than they can comprehend, and several succumb to its evil plots, meeting only the most horrible (yet thought-provoking) deaths imaginable to the human mind. Without spoiling the ending of this cinematic classic, I will suffice it to say that the climax is gripping, a true testament to fine camera-work, acting, writing, and music. The viewer is left on the edge of his seat until, finally, the movie comes to a breath-taking close, leaving us to ask "what's next?" Not only do I give this movie 10 stars, I give it a standing ovation and offer it my first born. Dare I ask when "The Mangler 3" will come squealing from the womb of its writers, squinting into the bright lights of fame?