Feast 2: Sloppy Seconds: Review By Bryan Yentz

*Apparently, Movieweb only has Feast 2 as a theatrical film and not a DVD--unless you count the edition that comes with Feast 1. Thus, until that changes, I'll just be posting the base review and not the technicalities or special features.*

Okay,everyone gather around—let’s all sit down and just try to enjoy what has been set before us… A nice bowl of monstrous—yet comic—carnage… A platter decorated with globs of bile, vomit, and all things crude humor… Plates adorned with the latest in anatomically correct monster-parts… And to cap it all off; a huge helping of hyper-active filmmaking. So everyone, if you don’t mind... Please take your seats, and enjoy the Feast.

Oh Feast… When it first arrived on the scene, it took everyone by surprise. Comic gore up the wazoo; vicious, unrelenting monsters—with dicks; and character bios that really made you wonder who was going to bite it (or suck it for that matter—fans of might remember that one), and who was going to survive the night of brutal bloodshed. For the most part, it was a come-out-of-nowhere horror hit, which switched things up just enough for it to garner a cult following. Now here it is, the hotly (well, for me anyhow) anticipated Feast 2: Sloppy Seconds (subtle, eh?). So does it have it? Does it have the same determination as the first? The same drive? The same energy? Well… Well, it definitely has the balls… Figuratively and metaphorically speaking.

Feast 2 takes off right where the first left off. Biker Queen (the twin sister of the other biker gal “Harley Queen” from the first) finds a wounded Bartender (yup, the old guy survived it) and only gives aid to him after she’s discovered that her sister wound up monster bait in Feast 1. Wanting revenge on the people that did it (the three main survivors of the first, which we’ll get a chance to see in Feast 3), Biker Queen heads with her posse to a nearby town, only to find it a ruined shell of its normal populated self. They meet with survivors and reluctantly band together… But not before the hypocritical Bartender beats the crap out of the ever-beautiful Honey Pie (played by Jenny Wade—the survivor from the first that ditched everyone the second she got the chance). This causes Honey Pie to fend for herself against the over-sexed creatures, and thus creates an equally interesting portion of the movie. In a bloody little nutshell, everyone pretty much just has to try and hold off for as long as they can, until some spark of hope allows them to escape… Or meet a quick death.

So how is it? Does it maintain the first film’s grimy, violent, yet oddly compelling soul? Yes and no. Remember the awesome statistics from the first? Well, those are gone. Instead we now have brief but concise background stories that try to offer a little more to the victi—I mean, characters than simply just their name and lifespan. While I still appreciated this new means of character introductions, I kept hoping to see a subtitle pop-up saying: “expected lifespan: pretty damn good.” Even still, this is a sequel and it’s good to see they’re trying something new while also trying to stay true to the original. And speaking of characters, I couldn’t help but strongly dislike some of the new cast. Biker Queen tries way too hard to be “badass” and her sidekicks aren’t even given names (outside of “Tat Girl” that is). “Slasher” is a token-black guy. “Hobo” is pretty much absent the entire film aside from the very beginning and the very end, and even one character is only in the film long enough to be deemed “Puker” (I’m not kidding), then fall over dead. As singular characters, the majority of the cast are dirty, low-lives that serve no other purpose than to permeate the screen with their own vulgarity—and this goes ten-fold when the characters are united as a whole. At various moments in the film, the “protagonists” commit such atrocious acts of violence that they make themselves worse than the creatures they’re fighting. I understand that even with Feast 1, the point was to make the underdogs the center of attention—rather than some badass, muscular, one-liner spoutin’ hero. And I’m perfectly fine with this; I think it’s something that needs to be done far more often—but geez, there’s a limit to which I’m willing to root for someone, and there are definitely a fair amount of scenes where you just wish some of the characters would be torn limb from bloody limb for what they do to one another. It really gives new meaning to the saying, “With friends like these, who needs enemies?”

Despite this crooked use of characterization, the film is still able to hold itself together with frantically beautiful camera work and a higher dependence on music. For the majority of the film, Gulager really took some chances with camera positioning, effects and lighting… And for me, it paid off wonderfully. Several moments of the film honestly held my attention just because of how it was shot. One quite disturbing chase scene involving a baby and the man (coward?) trying to save him has a great, grainy look to it as bullets ricochet off of the cement near him tossing tiny yellow sparks as they make contact with the dark pavement. Even the entire ending, which plays out like an uber-violent crescendo of sorts utilizes possibly every filming aspect Gulager has dealt with since Feast 1. Granted there are moments that appear blatant in their use of green-screen, (as well as some cheesy effects), I thoroughly appreciated the constantly changing film techniques Gulager and his crew applied to the film. Oh, and about the music… There’s actually some memorable original stuff here… And no Vincent Black Shadow (as heard during the character intros in numero uno). From the baby chase, the climax and even a much appreciated scene involving Honey Pie and her guilty conscience; I’m happy to report that effort has been made to enforce a more emotional appeal to the horror extravaganza through the audio. It’s no John Murphy or Clint Mansell—but it works damn fine.

Okay, now I’ll mention the one thing people take away from the Feast films… The violence. And to be perfectly honest, I was more surprised with the first. As balls-to-the-wall as the writers of Saw IV-V were trying to make this, it felt… Well, a little weak. Not that I’m upset, but they were really trying to push the envelope a little more in terms of comically gory desensitization—and I think they fell short. Some scenes try desperately to make you say, “Gross!” or even, “I can’t believe they did that!” but by now, we (as the viewer) expect far worse—which is kind of sad. For the most part, the more gruesome/disturbing/crude bits feel tacked on in order to press buttons. This definitely becomes apparent with the gratuitous autopsy scene, which surpasses the point of “I get it.” And goes right to “Please end this scene now.” Not because it’s so disgusting, but because the idea behind it (as well as its duration) is so juvenile. Don’t get me wrong though—this is a Feast film, so most likely people will still be entertained/shocked/angered by what they see… But once again—THIS IS A FEAST FILM—so you kind of have to go into it all… Well, expectant of the content you’re about to view.

Feast 2 is a mixed bag… Upon the first viewing, I found myself rocking on the fence—unsure of which side I should leap. After another watch though, I found myself appreciative (for the most part) in the direction the film had taken. I enjoyed the pacing, I enjoyed the music, I enjoyed many moments to the film, I enjoyed the look, and I definitely enjoyed seeing Honey Pie again (be patient with the credits people). In this case, the good outweighed the bad. This installment doesn’t reach the entrail-covered bar the first one set, but it has enough going for it to keep the series alive… If but for one more movie. If you go in expecting the same caliber of Feast 1, you’ll probably be disappointed with some of the new aspects to this one (as I was), my recommendation—don’t dwell on what they did wrong; instead, try to appreciate some of the things they did right.