asrexproductions There are only four reasons to dislike this movie: 1) you presuppose that any B movie, particularly one made for the Sci-Fi Channel (or "Syfy," as it's now known) couldn't possibly be good, 2) you're closed minded, 3) you have some sort of mental deficiency, as evidenced by the fact that you like Uwe Boll, 4) you're a freaking idiot. Because anybody who knows anything about action and / or zombie movies couldn't possibly dislike this film.HOUSE OF THE DEAD 2: DEAD AIM is B movie master Mike Hurst's unrelated sequel to Uwe Boll's godawful video game adaptation. There "house" in question is a bunch of frat / sorority "houses" (ha ha), and there are a lot of undead, requiring a crack team including gorgeous and talented Emmanuelle Vaugier (sp?) to go in and stop them. And like all good action movies, it's that simple. It sets up during the opening credits. It totally understands what it is and the genre, hence Sid Haig himself and a dry and appropriate sense of humor - not Michael Bay styled out of place crap. The production design is fantastic. The action is actually exciting. It is the movie that the previous film should have been, had Uwe Boll not directed it. And I absolutely love it.I won't go much further into it than that, because honestly, I haven't seen it in a minute. I just wanted to weigh in on the gang of idiots who somehow think that this is a bad movie. Either we watched different films, or the world is really full of lemmings. My experience favors the latter, so I felt I had to speak up.If you're a true action movie fan, do yourself a favor and watch this movie. It's really well made, really fun, and really worth your time. If you find a way to dislike it, ask yourself if your dislike is based on the movie or your idiot friend. And then watch it again.-AS http://www.rottentomatoes.com/user/id/900752177/

Paul Magne Haakonsen Alright, well I will start off by saying this movie is a much needed movie to save the reputation of the "House of the Dead" games after the first movie that came out so savagely torn it apart. This second installment is so much better than the first one, that after having seen this one, you wish you never laid eyes on the first one, or at least don't want to openly admit to having seen the first one.The storyline in "House of the Dead 2" is simple and easy to follow, and has much more depth and meat (no pun intended) than the first movie. And already here, this movie is on a better course than the first one. Of course, it is not brain-warping material, but still, the storyline and plot were well enough thought out and entertaining.The characters in the movie were also given a bit more depth and time to develop than the ones in the first movie, again a notch upward. And it is always cool to see Sid Haig in a movie.Moving on to the effects and the zombies. Nothing really bad or lacking here. I was adequately entertained with what I saw and found it to be alright.For a zombie movie, this is a good contribution. Of course, it is not top of the line, but still, for a semi-low budget production, they pulled it off quite nicely. If you haven't already seen "House of the Dead 2", then buy the DVD and sink your teeth into it right away, it should be seen. Oh, and forget that you ever saw part one when you sit down to watch this one.

madden-wayne I used to work in a video store. I saw this title in the horror section and took it home as a free rental one night.This movie was truly awful, there is no redeeming quality about it, because it actually takes a well respected sub genre of film and just goes about destroying it. If the first film wasn't low budget enough then this film truly takes the biscuit, being housed (mostly) indoors and at night...therefore avoiding the scenic cost setting of the first film In the first 5 minutes of this film a college lecturer comically runs over an attractive student. Rather than be mortified, the lecturer half heartedly apologises and the girl mentions that despite being thrown across the cars bonnet (he sped up as he approached her) that there is nothing to worry about...after which he attacks her with a crowbar and kills her! If this isn't strange enough, he wants to perform an experiment upon her, bringing her back from the dead....and so feels the need to remove her clothing to do so.Soft core female nudity (and pubic hair) is rampant throughout the film and is, to be honest,the only real thing to hold the average male viewers interest...like the swimming scene in the first film...but even having said that this film goes from bad to worse with its bad character acting, crappy dialogue and absurd plot turns....why introduce a pivotal character who has survived 29 days from zombie attack only to kill them within 10 minutes....its just a very very bad film

nath_j_h Lets face it, with these sort of low budget horror flicks you can't expect a lot from them. one thing you can almost be certain of with low budgeters, is that the films will be littered with can't - act teens or failures, but don't get me wrong some low budgets turn out OK like Wolf Creek for example where a tiny $1,000,000 was spent, the more expensive horrors these days can be as much as $50,000,000 and more.In House Of The Dead 2's case, it didn't turn out OK. The acting was poor, the plot was simple and fairly silly, it was quite boring to watch and how many careless people can die from some brainless zombies?? The film was almost childish. I wish i could give some credit to the film but i am finding it hard to, the gore wasn't even that good! waste of my time ! - 3/10