MovieChat Forums > Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween (2018) Discussion > This looks like a glorified direct to dv...

This looks like a glorified direct to dvd movie!

posted 6 years ago by Olivergbyrne (685)
6 replies | jump to latest

Judging from the trailer alone. The budget cut is clearly felt as well. Any one seen it? Your opinion?

Yup. I don’t wanna trash it just for the sake of it, but it seriously does look that way. Ever since that first trailer dropped, I felt it was more of the same but with much less effort put into it (that’s true for a lot of sequels but this one surprisingly looked like it had a smaller budget).

Could be entertaining enough, yet it’s hard to feel any excitement over it. Would have preferred a sequel with the original cast.

[–] Olivergbyrne (685) 5 years ago

Yeah, extremely underwhelming . Reminded me when I was little and they made all those cheap "Gasper" sequels with very little budget and how it really disappointed me.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8289) 5 years ago

A "glorified direct-to-DVD movie" is a good description for it. Glorified only in that it feels slightly more expensive than the typical direct-to-video film.

I just finished it and it was fairly disappointing. There were a few fun scenes and some cool visuals, but ultimately it just doesn't feel nearly as fun or as well-made as the first film, and the first film isn't exactly a masterpiece.

The first film is perhaps a 7.5. This one is a 6 if I'm being generous; more like a 5.5 if I'm not.

[–] thenewnexus (1905) 5 years ago

I feel thats a bit insulting two of the chucky movies were direct to video and awesome,a good low budget movie is possible. It feels like a syfy channel movie quailty

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8289) 5 years ago

I've seen good movies go direct-to-video, but more often than not direct-to-video films are of limited quality -- both in terms of their entertainment value and also in terms of their production values.

I watch a lot of DTV action movies, for instance, and while I do get some enjoyment from them, often times they're just not that good and you can usually tell that they didn't have a large budget.

When you watch a cheap film, you can usually tell it's cheap, and to me Goosebumps 2 feels cheap.

[–] Reaperscout (582) 5 years ago

I actually enjoyed the movie. Mainly because of the Halloween setting. The movie screams Halloween (well it should since Halloween is in the title). But it's a movie I'd watch every Halloween and put on my list of must-watch Halloween movies when the Halloween season comes around. The movie isn't perfect though. There are some problems. I would've liked to see the original cast from the first movie return besides Jack Black, who wasn't in the movie that much and shouldn't have been in it at all with what they do with him in the movie compared to the first Goosebumps movie. Kind of dumb he finally shows up to help out two seconds or so after the main characters save the day. The CGI could've been better too. Also, I'm someone who likes longer movies, and I didn't like that the movie was like 80-ish minutes without end credits. I don't want a 2.5 hour long movie though, but it would've been nice to have it 1 hour 45 minutes without end credits at the minimum. They could've had a little bit more fun and stretched out stuff. But overall, I still enjoyed the movie. It's a fun movie. Nothing that would win Oscars, but I'm not expecting it to do something like that. I actually got what I wanted out of the movie and that's another "fun" movie to add to the list of movies I watch every Halloween season. Even the first Goosebumps movie is one I would watch every Halloween season. I don't need all the movies I watch around Halloween to be complete horror and R-rated. I like "fun" Halloween movies too like Hocus Pocus. So that's what I got out of Goosebumps 2 and even the first one.