This horror sequel, also known as SILENT NIGHT, DEADLY NIGHT PART 4, is another lame affair. It's completely unspectacular. I mean, I watched it only a couple of hours ago and I can hardly remember what happened even now.
The plot is confusing, deliberately so, and never seems to go anywhere. When the woman is in the ritual, absolutely nothing makes sense, and the momentum is completely lost. Parts of the film are ripped from ROSEMARY'S BABY, but to compare the two would be an outrage. BUGS is also extremely low budget, almost on a par with a home movie, which detracts from the appeal a lot. The acting is uniformly bad and unremarkable, with only the reliable Clint Howard on hand playing a repulsive geek who sticks in the mind. Apart from him, the others are dreadful with the female lead just stripping off instead of acting. Maud Adams turns up but it's been a long time since her James Bond heyday. Nowadays she's just an embarrassing old woman.
Which leaves me to conclude that, as is sadly the case with a lot of modern horror films, the special effects are the only worthwhile things. There are some memorably slimy and gruesome bugs on view, with cockroaches of all sizes to give one the creeps, as well as horrible slimy maggots and slimy gunk everywhere. In fact, it's quite sickening, thanks to the reliable Screaming Mad George. As well as these horrors, there's the highlight of a burning corpse scene. There is also one of the most brutal murders ever put on film, where a helpless victim is beaten, broken and repeatedly stabbed in the chest without even being able to defend himself. It's horrible.
I can only be glad that Brian Yuzna has rid himself of this trash and is now making enjoyable films again, like TICKS, THE DENTIST, and PROGENY. Let's just forget these little mishaps and concentrate on the present, not on the past. This film is ten years old already anyway.
The plot is confusing, deliberately so, and never seems to go anywhere. When the woman is in the ritual, absolutely nothing makes sense, and the momentum is completely lost. Parts of the film are ripped from ROSEMARY'S BABY, but to compare the two would be an outrage. BUGS is also extremely low budget, almost on a par with a home movie, which detracts from the appeal a lot. The acting is uniformly bad and unremarkable, with only the reliable Clint Howard on hand playing a repulsive geek who sticks in the mind. Apart from him, the others are dreadful with the female lead just stripping off instead of acting. Maud Adams turns up but it's been a long time since her James Bond heyday. Nowadays she's just an embarrassing old woman.
Which leaves me to conclude that, as is sadly the case with a lot of modern horror films, the special effects are the only worthwhile things. There are some memorably slimy and gruesome bugs on view, with cockroaches of all sizes to give one the creeps, as well as horrible slimy maggots and slimy gunk everywhere. In fact, it's quite sickening, thanks to the reliable Screaming Mad George. As well as these horrors, there's the highlight of a burning corpse scene. There is also one of the most brutal murders ever put on film, where a helpless victim is beaten, broken and repeatedly stabbed in the chest without even being able to defend himself. It's horrible.
I can only be glad that Brian Yuzna has rid himself of this trash and is now making enjoyable films again, like TICKS, THE DENTIST, and PROGENY. Let's just forget these little mishaps and concentrate on the present, not on the past. This film is ten years old already anyway.