Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Ginger Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Edwin The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Zbigniew_Krycsiwiki Amusing enough throwback to late 1970s early 1980s slasher movies, with lots of good looking (albeit young) girls, scantily clad and large breasted, who end up hiking through the wilderness and eventually hold up in a remote cabin during a snowstorm after their van runs out of gas. They begin the usual drinking and f**king in this luxurious and fully stocked cabin, before being sliced and diced by an unseen killer. The ever present clichés notwithstanding, this is actually kind of a funny little Z-movie, a hybrid of slasher flicks and soft core porno, with the requisite nude/ shower scenes featuring mostly porno chicks in their first and only horror flick and a couple of gory killings thrown in so that this can actually be called a "horror" movie. It can't always rise above the microscopic budget: with its home video quality look and feel to it despite some occasionally inspired camera work, and the bouncy girl on the footbridge was clearly only about 8 feet off the ground, while trying to appear to be 200 feet in the air. The final resolution about the killer's identity is far from surprising or convincing, and is probably the biggest letdown. The biggest mystery about this movie: why are the opening credits shown in front of two Christmas tree angels and a flashlight?It's certainly no classic, but it's slightly better than some people here have said, and the deleted scene on the DVD, which was taken from an unfinished project, along with Julie Corgil's bouncy 33Ds, make this worth the rental price alone.

l_cronkrite I've seen a couple of films before, but nothing that compares to this. It really stands out in a class of it's own. The camera work is unique in style, and the colour grading work is second to all. Sorry, I mean none. I particularly though the lighting on the chocolate sauce-breasts-bath-threesome scene was very innovative. Using normal bathroom lights was a stroke of genius. This fine example of modern cinema knocks French art-house, Venezualan documentary and Hollywood blockbuster all neatly into a cocked hat. You will not find a subtler blend of slasher B movie, soft core porn in any other movie. My favourite bit by far was when a frightened student asks a policeman "Are we safe?", to which he responds with a grim silent shake of the head. Well reassured Mr policeman, well done! Brilliant. I'll watch this over and over again, and probably recommend it to friends. I would think this is on most film studies degrees syllabus. If not - why not!

drhackenstine I must have read too many Leanord Maltin movie review books, because whenever I see a fiasco like this, I just wanna pick it apart and give a bad review. Yet I love the B-movies and find them the only movies I watch. I just cannot sit through a big-budget film lately. If I sound critical of this, I'm sorry. This is a stupid movie. Fans of the '80's slashers might enjoy it for a while, because the killer, so we are supposed to believe is the killer from the original Slumber Party Massacre film. You really cannot find a slasher film made today where some angry psycho comes rumbling out of the woods to hack up the teen cast, as in Madman, The Burning, all the Jason movies, etc., etc., etc.It's always one of the lead characters with some grudge against his/her friends. The grudge here is laughable. I'm not going to get into that. I did enjoy the first hour and 10 minutes of this. Even though it was haphazard in every department, I felt myself entertained. It was shot on video, low-budget and crude, but it felt like a good trash crap flick. Then the conclusion started up, and I felt cheated. I don't consider this a Slumber Party Massacre sequel, and I didn't coming into this weird film. Hard to Die, Sorority House Massacre 2. They recycled Slumber Party Massacre footage. Why can't Cheerleader Massacre? Ugghh... If this was intended to be a sequel to the Slumber Party Massacre series, there would have been a 4 in the title. The makers just wanted to see if they could get a new series started up. That's why the title was changed at the last minute. Anyway, I did find myself watching the film intently for the first hour, but when the killer was revealed, I was let down. Not bad for a B-movie. Not good for a sequel to any of the 3 films I mentioned above. Has some horrendous lines. The male characters love to say "sweet". Buzz flubbs his lines. One character says "I knew this would be a bad day when we ate those stale donuts". Another says "Nobody has lived here for a while", when the cast walks into a furnished house,with electricity and food in the fridge. Hmmm. Two stars.

Archer2525Jonathan Thanks to the cover this movie looks good, thanks to the direct it is actually complete rubbish. Slasher fans should stay the hell away from this one, There's no Plot, no talent and I am sorry to say that i've actually seen it. Thank God i rented it online and it only cost me about 50 pence, because if i'd spent any more i might have to go and slash my own wrists, from the sheer depression. I think the Director thought that a few Bimbos on the cover and the word Cheerleader might make a movie, by which rationale i could sell a turd in a box if I only cellotape a picture of Britney Spears on the front. Even for an amateur movie this stinks and forget soft porn, aside from a very short appearance from April Flowers there is nothing worth watching here. Wynorski...get a job.