How did the same person write both Collector and Collection?

:( how dissapointing.. I recently had the pleasure of watching the collector on netflix and its one of the best horror films I've seen in a wile. And to hear so much negative about the sequel just goes to show even IF a new horror movie manages to be something great you can always count on a hurtin sequel to come along and take a big nasty turd on the original.. :(

I think the whole aim was to make a different, more action-oriented film. Like ALIENS.
I don't mean to impose, but I am the Ocean.

That's so true!!!

I absolutely love the first movie, and I was skeptic about the sequel but told myself that it has the same writers, same star and some really great people working on it, so it can't possibly go wrong.
How wrong I was. It got really really wrong :(

It's not totally bad, but it's not even close to being half as good as the original.

The big difference is that in the Collector, he was on the offensive setting traps for people in their homes - he was the sole hunter and Arkin was trying not to be caught.

In this one the traps were defensive to keep his prisoners in and other people out - while he was hunting the intruders and escaped prisoner, they were hunting him so the tension was different.

But I thought they were both good movies and enjoyed them both.... except the spiders... hate spiders!!

*English is not my primary langage.

I totally agree with the OP. Same thing happened with Grave Encounters. 1st one is a very very enjoyable flick and the sequel is awful.

You know, people change, and itsn ot like a write can only write one style of movies. you see writers switch genres completely all the time.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

The Collector was awesome. The Collection on the other hand was silly from the start.

I still enjoyed it only because it continued the story but wouldn't recommend it to others.

Many, I must come from Opposite World. I thought The Collector was complete and utter crap. It was a movie that tried to bank on the edgy nature of the Saw films, but crap writing and wannabe MTV-chic sheen. Hell, the characters in the original were so stupid, you wonder if they graduated from the University of Future Horror Movie Victims, because they do EVERYTHING wrong. The only smart one in the original was Arkin. Now, you can say the characters in The Collection were dumb too. In all fairness, they were, but they weren't mindnumbingly insults to humanity. I think the characters in the first were SOOOOO stupid, it set humanity back a century(LOL). And what was up with those disembodied voices. Arkin would be walking around, or even the Collector would be stalking the halls and you'd hear ghostly screams and demonic growling. Was the Collector possessed, was the house haunted, or was it just a stupid idea to make the movie seem artistically different(but held no valid contribution to the story)?

While The Collection's story is probably the same SyFy Channel original crap you see, well, on SyFy Channel, it got to the point. LOL at how the sequel followed the same guideline as the sequel to The Descent(hired goons force survivor of the first to go BACK down into the hell they lived through, only to get picked off, yadda yadda). That being said, The Collection's story was to the point. The mercs were dicks, but they didn't seem as stupid as the family in the first movie. Arkin was still the smartest one, and we get Elena, who would equal the second smartest(unless we put the Collector into the mix, though I'm talking about the good guys here). Elena was also a likable character. She wasn't devolved(like so many modern horror movies do) to a stupid, sarcastic slut that thinks about nothing more than getting drunk, stoned and effed with no real redeeming qualities other than that. The fact that she had a disability made her more sympathetic in my eyes. Certainly more than the slutty, moody teenage daughter in the first movie, who by horror standards alone, deserved her death, tenfold. There's actually more dimensions to Elena, which is always a plus. The more you show a horror character for being something other than a walking meat puppet waiting to be killed makes the audience feel something more for her when danger looms around the corner. It's a quality in horror that is slowly dying out for the cheap scare and kill. Arkin was already pretty likable from the first movie(the only redeeming character, maybe other than the little girl), so his general likability just went up from there(even though he didn't save Elena initially, dude made some serious sacrifices in there, and Elena deemed him worthy enough to save his butt at the end).

Add on the cool Dario Argento-inspired lighting(which, face it, we are past the overly color-tinted blue/yellow/sepia-toned movies of the 00s, and with HD, you REALLY want to see what it could do with crisp, crystal clear colors), it was just a more pleasurable experience. Yeah, the dialog was campy sometimes. Probably the weakest part with the acting of some of the supporting cast being second, but overall, I thought it was far more superior to the original. If the sequel in the trilogy follows THIS movie rather than the original, I won't hesitate to be there in line, day one!