MovieChat Forums > Chain Letter (2010) Discussion > Hack writing+awful everything else=Chain...

Hack writing+awful everything else=Chain Letter (Spoilers)


This was dumb. The only bright spot were the kills but those are so far and few between that it's not worth wading through the crap to get there. My main issue with the movie? The anti-technology angle. This movie wouldn't have been good in any decade but the whole storyline is at least 10+ years too late.

The chain letter premise is awful and is so wrought with holes and ridiculousness that it's truly laughable how bad this gets. I mean, it's a chain letter and actual chains are used as mortal weapons/torture devices.

Here is a list of stupid things I noticed about this crap:

-Token black guy. I mean really.

-First death based on the fact that blind people can drive. I say blind because two people coming out of their house in the morning don't notice a chain attached to the back of their car nor that their garage door was ajar.

-One of the jock's names was Johnny. Brilliant.

-The lady from the 'Saw' series plays a detective in this and shows us all why she isn't in more films...she can't act.

-What are Brad Dourif and Keith David even doing in this?

-The editing reminded me of a 1998 Lifetime television thriller

I don't know. I don't even have the energy to comment further but if you saw this, you'd know. I hope the director and writers go back to assisting the true filmmakers of the world (aka bringing them coffee)

reply

1). This could, just possibly, be the worst movie ever made! No, wait ... there is still "Joe vs. the Volcano" out there somewhere!
2). Disfigured, hulking bad guy ... gets pissed if someone "deletes" his "chain"-letters (which are sent over mass-market technology)!
3). There is an "anti"-technology group that wants everyone to ... just "unplug" (Tony Plana line from "Half Past Dead"). BUT ... they have absolutely NOTHING to do with ANYTHING in this movie (except, MAYBE, to let Dourif get his jollies off of rubbing Reed's arm, after one of his classes)?!?
4). Keith David plays (maybe) THE worst "detective" to ever try and solve a crime (but, hey ... it's a paycheck, right? ... and, far be-it from me to begrudge anyone a living)!
5). Nikki Reed (and, her dead best-friends brother), after seeing what this "dis-figured, hulking bad-guy" is capable of, proceed to "break his "chains", in effect "calling him out"!
6). Nikki Reed (and, her dead best-friends brother), DIE ... BOTH, rather gruesomely!
7). The police department (kind of) forces Keith David to work with a "profiler" ... who does no profiling at all (unless you call saying "this same type of "chain-link", I think, was used before, in connection with some murders" ... in essence, "profiling" the CHAIN-LINK, not the killer!
8). This movie starts with Nikki Reed's death, and ends with Nikki Reed's death ... and, in between, EVERYONE else (who is anyone) dies also (even our great detective)!
9). Dis-fugured, hulking bad-guy gets away with no one having any clue (whatsoever) to his identity (not even the poor saps who watched this movie ... LoL !!!

P.S. Really, I am totally stunned at the number of people who actually "liked" this movie? Yes, there was some grisly and gruesome murders, with one "kind-of" being unique, but ... that, in no way whatsoever, makes up for all the plot-holes and unexplained characters!
Though they VERY WEAKLY alluded to a VERY strained connection here or there ... in the end, this movie told us nothing about no one! That is, except maybe, that Brad Dourif hasn't seen a comb or hairbrush in YEARS ... and, that Keith David needed a paycheck!

reply

9). Dis-fugured, hulking bad-guy gets away with no one having any clue (whatsoever) to his identity (not even the poor saps who watched this movie ... LoL !!!


Umm, we actually know who the killer was. Sure, they didn't come right out and spell it out for the audience, but the clues were there.

At the beginning, they talk about a Special Ops soldier who infiltrated a terrorist camp and was captured & tortured because the terrorists tracked his government-issued cell phone. (Granted, they didn't say he was burned but torture could definitely lead to the disfigurement we saw.)

Then later, the rancher calls the detective to tell him he remembers where he's seen that symbol on a chain link before--an old friend whose son went off to the war.

(I'll admit, it's stretching but I thought it was pretty obvious that was the killer.)

Now I'll admit, this wasn't a great movie by any means--but it was a lot of fun and even had me a little freaked out. It was even fun laughing at the stuff that didn't make any sense (most you've already mentioned, but the winner for me was how Rachael told her brother that she always forwarded chain letters because "it really freaked her out" if she didn't, but then she turns around and immediately deletes the chain letter at her friend's funeral?)

reply