User Reviews

I rented this movie in the hopes that I would laugh my way through it. Sadly, there wasn't much to laugh at. Don't get me wrong... this movie wasn't good, but it wasn't as bad as I wanted it to be. So in that sense, it's doubly disappointing. And it was NC-17 for some reason (I assumed it meant gratuitous nudity, but there was none to be found). The thing couldn't even offer decent T & A.

The "scary" scenes have all been done better in other movies, the acting was typical "B" grade stuff, and the plot took more effort than was worth to understand.

Not frightening, not funny, not worth renting.

It really is too damn bad that this movie wasn't released fifteen years sooner; in the early 1980's. If that were the case, it could have been named "My Blood Valentine 2: Lover's Lane" and maybe – just maybe – the film would have enjoyed a modest little cult reputation by now. Instead, "Lover's Lame" came out in 1999, at the end of a decade that is widely considered as a low point in horror, and then still it attempts to rip off the wrong films! The DVD cover showcases the picture of a hook-hand as well as something that strangely resembles the Ghostface mask. So in other words, "Lover's Lane" attempts to cash in on the two most popular contemporary horror films of that era – "I Know What You Did Last Summer" and "Scream" – but actually hasn't got anything to do with either of them. This film is, as said, much more reminiscent to the crazed slasher outings of the eighties, what with its extremely clichéd situations and absurd plot twists. I was prepared to watch something really dull and irritating, but "Lover's Lane" actually is quite entertaining and definitely a worthwhile little homage/throwback to that glorious decade of slasher-goodness. The film begins with the discovery of two young people on Valentine's Day butchered in their car on Lover's Lane. The victims were both married and each had a child, so the event caused quite the scandal in the little town where everybody appears to be related to each other. A local nut case was caught at the scene of the crime and submitted to a mental asylum. Thirteen years later, when the victims' kids have turned into frustrated teenagers and their surviving parents are still grieving; the nut escapes from the asylum. And naturally it's Valentine's Day again and of course he recovers his beloved hook-hand just in time to make it to the kids' sex party on Lover's Lane. Yeah, the plot is quite clichéd and predictable, but that doesn't necessarily mean there isn't any suspense or creativity to detect. The death scenes inside the farm house, for example, are admirably bloodcurdling and the revelation near the end is quite ingenious too. And just like it was the case in the 1980's, this slasher contains a couple of delightful and senseless "WTF" moments, like when a mature woman – a school principal even – knocks out a drunken teenage girl or when the faceless shot shows naked breasts that clearly belong to a different girl than the one who's taking her top off. "Lover's Lane" honestly isn't as awful as its rating and most of the reviews around here make it out to be. If you think it might help, just pretend you stepped into a time machine and traveled back to the year 1981.

I watched this movie cos it was on a double disc that I bought. I was surprised to see Anna Faris in this movie, so I kept watching it. The plot of the movie was rubbish I have to say. The only motive visible is a guy starts murdering people 'cos he can't get laid. There seems to be three killers in this, all outlining the same psycho. At the end you don't know who the f**k is really the killer. The death seens could have been improved, I have to admit, even though some of them did have some memoriable moments. The sex scenes are bad, such as a girl removing her shirt, and we are only able to see from outside of a steamed up window. I have to give this movie 3/10. Not something I'd reccommend, but if your just looking to see some teenage kids being chopped up for no particular reason, watch it all you want.

This is your typical slasher flick. It's always worth a rent just to see how stupid the teen victims will be (ex. never run up the stairs when the front door is just a few feet away).The story relies heavily the classic urban legend about the hook wielding mental patient stalking a couple on Lovers Lane, heck that basically the plot. The gore factor is virtually nil, since many of deaths (which are few) are off-screen deals. On the plus side, the heroine is resourceful (This is first one I've seen that can properly reset a broken leg). Also, all you "Scary Movie" fans should check out Anna Faris (who played the heroine in said movie) in her first slasher appearance. Trust me, it took me a moment figure out it was her. Overall, this movie is perfect for quenching anyone's need for a decent slasher fix.

I cannot believe I wasted 1 and 1/2 hours of my life watching a movie as pointless and pathetic as this one. The acting was bad, the plot was bad and the script, well I'll just say that I could have wrote a better movie myself. Don't waste your time watching this garbage. You may as well look at a wall for 2 hours cause that would be more interesting that this crap.

Hook-handed killer is out to slice a bunch of parking teens.

Unimaginative and completely lack-luster teen slasher is even less than one would expect it to be! One would expect it to be a clichéd film, but at least in an entertaining way. This film just mindlessly throws scenes at you and expects them to entertain. It only becomes tiresome. After BETTER teen thrillers like Scream (1996), I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997), Urban Ledgend (1998), and Cherry Falls (1999) one would think this movie would try a new angle but it only rehashes more of the same and with disappointingly less effect. It's not a complete BOMB, thanks to a few solid cast members, but it's certainly the lesser of the 90's slasher flicks.

* 1/2 out of ****

the first time i saw this movie i actually rented it, at full new release price, and hated it. I thought it was idiotic and just plain bad. I feel it may have been due to the fact that I had paid four bucks to rent it. A couple months later I found it on sale at a blockbuster for 1.99 and even though I didn't like the movie I bought it anyway and I have since watched it numerous times and now it is one of my top 'guilty pleasures'. the ending still doesn't make complete sense but all the goofy dialogue and the twists and turns have made this movie a classic b-movie,the average person hates it but it appeals strongly to a certain population. this movie contains Anna Ferris from Scary Movie fame and is dressed in a cheerleader outfit that she wears on dates and around town (even though if you watch closely, no one else in the school is wearing the uniform, she must be the schools only cheerleader.), and it feature Sarah Lancaster from the new Saved by the Bell as bitchy vamp who likes to wear short skirts (her nude scene is a body-double, it says so in the credits.). This little movie needs to be viewed more than once to appreciate it.

This is a really awful slasher movie that I have watched, and I can see why nobody talks about it. The story isn't a bad idea with it based on an urban legend and does have an alright opening, but the movie falls apart after it. It is really badly made with it being pretty predictable and feels like it's rushing itself. Most of the killing scenes happened off-screen, and there's a lack of suspense to be found in this movie. The scenes with the characters are pretty boring, and nothing interesting happened during it. It also contains cheap and fake out scares throughout. Even the revealed in some stuff isn't that impressive or interesting to learn about. The side plot with two of the parents goes nowhere interesting, and it just them looking for their kids. Even the climax is badly done on it, and it feels like it is dragging itself way too long and is not that enjoyable. And the ending sucks.

To put it very simply, Lovers Lane delivers. Sure, the plot has been done to death and the hook thing might just remind you of another recent horror movie, but something about this film sticks with you. It is very safe to say that I have seen MANY horror films-my favorite being the 80's slasher films. This film has all the aspects of one of those films and I really enjoyed it. It centers around a couple that was murdered on Valentine's Day 'several years before" at Lovers Lane by a killer bearing a hook for a hand. Flash forward to the present day and the children of the two murder victims, along with some friends, decide to go hang out at the same Lovers Lane on Valentine's Day. Needless to say, the killer returns to hook the unsuspecting teens. The acting is adequate and the low-budget feel to the film actually plays in its favor. The scene in the old farmhouse is almost flawless and actually had me on edge. My only complaint in the film was that the writer tried to do just too much with the ending! Surprise endings have become a trademark for modern day slasher films, but this was ridiculous! Overall, a great slasher movie. It seems viewers these days have been spoiled with such big-budget films such as Scream, that they are just expecting too much from horror films. These aren't meant to be Academy Award winning films and the low rating for this film really surprises me. It's not a bad little film for being direct-to-video and it certainly stays true to its roots in such films as Halloween and Friday the 13th. I highly recommend this film to fans of the 80's slasher era. At least the filmmakers here are trying to revive that ere-it is certainly better that having no slasher movies at all.

I expected "Lovers Lane" to be pure crap,but I was pleasantly surprised.Of course the plot is pretty stupid and unoriginal and the characters are our usual annoying slasher fodder,but I found here some things to like.Some scenes are actually suspenseful and the film is never dull.Unlike politically correct Hollywood's slasher movies this one contains some nudity,foul-mouthed language and good gore.Worth checking out,if you like slasher movies!

Dumb, slow, cheap, copy of "I know what you did last summer". The lines are so predictable, the plot doesn't connect to the film's end. I got so bored after the first hour and it took a lot of strenght not to press "stop" on the remote. Not even worth renting it. Save your money for a real horror movie.

Of course, we've heard the story before, a killer on the loose trying to kill the teens in the town. Some survive, some don't. The killer here has come back after 13 years, to kill the children of the victims he killed 13 years before. Original ha? The actors in the movie are not so good, but they're better than some. Anna Faris stars here and she's quite good. (You might know her from Scary Movie 1 & 2 and let me just say she looks much better with brown/black hair.) Riley Smith is okay too. The movie reminded me just a little of Cherry Falls. (Cherry Falls, is a great movie, so that's not a bad thing.) Lovers Lane, (It's called, I'm Still Waiting For You, here in the UK) is definitely a good movie, especially one for a straight to DVD/Video - TV Movie and I give it a 7/10.

Jon Steven Ward's "Lovers Lane" is what I expected. Like "Urban Legend", it tried to cash in on the newfound interest in slashers spawned by "Scream".

However, it wasn't a total washout. One cool point was that I recognized some of the filming locations. More importantly, it featured Anna Faris in her debut. Over the next two decades, Faris would become famous for "Scary Movie", "Brokeback Mountain", "Mom", and her podcast "Unqualified".

So, if you're in the mood for some nice, brainless fun - or seeing Anna Faris before anyone outside the Seattle area had heard of her, then this should be the movie for you.

'Lovers Lane' is a basic late 90's meta slasher that came out in the wake of 'Scream'. I remember seeing this on the video shelves back in the day and I did see it back then and thought that it was okay, nothing special but okay. The most noteworthy thing about this flick is that it stars a pre-fame Anna Faris, which is perhaps the most memorable thing about it.

The plot opens with a prologue set during Valentine's day where a young couple are murdered by a man with a hook for a hand, he is immediately caught and flash forward to 13 years later where a group of teens are planning a party together, but the killer has escaped from the asylum and someone starts picking off the teens one by one, is it the same killer or is another killer on the loose.

Watching this again many years later and can see why this flew under the radar as this flick despite having an interesting concept of using the urban legend of the killer with a hook for a hand, but the way the story was executed here was really boring with many confusing plot holes towards the end. There are some positives aspects that I could give to this movie such as the interesting set designs, such as the farmhouse which does generate a small amount of suspense and the creepy lover's lane itself which has a cool foggy atmosphere. Plus the characters were pretty decent with the main group of teens being quite likeable and delivering decent performances, but none of them really stand out as being memorable.

Overall 'Lover's Lane' had the potential of being a great slasher flick given the interesting source material, but everything is squandered and we're left with something very forgettable.

In Lovers Lane, a seemingly-couple, Harriet Anderson (Erin J. Dean) and Ward Lamson (Brian Allemand) has been found dead. Despite they find the killer, Ray Hennessey (Ed Bailey) which they call as THE HOOK, but the sorrow has been coated their husband and wife and their child as well.

A few years ago, Harriet's daughter, Mandy (also played by Erin J. Dean) is in her high school age, but the memory remains a misery both for her and her father, the town sheriff, Tom Anderson (Matt Riedy). As a geeky girl, she's a cousin of bitchy popular girl, Chloe Grefe (Sarah Lancaster), daughter of her step uncle, Jack Grefe (Richard Sanders), the town psychiatrist. Chloe is dating the school prince charming, Michael Lamson (Riley Smith), son of the school's principle, Penny Lamson (Suzanne Bouchard). Their friend consist consist of Michael's best friend Brad (Ben Indra), sex-frenzy couple Tim (Collin F. Peacock) and Kathy (Megan Hunt), the new cheerleader in town Janelle (Anna Faris) and Doug (Billy O'Sullivan), an overweight boy in a spoiling way.

Now, the valentine's day is coming. The relationship of Chloe and Michael seem can't get any longer and things are getting worse as she plan a valentine's party of her own by giving Michael some lesson by flirting Brad aggressively. And if it not enough, she's ready to make a whole lot of fun by make a surprise through all her friend and that's including Mandy.

Meanwhile, Ray Hennessey a.k.a. The Hook is escape from the asylum. Dr. Grefe, whose responsible for him is fell so upset about it. He concerning about the safety the town's teen, especially his daughter and his brother's daughter. But everything goes madly berserk, as the killer strike over the town and start the bloody mayhem. Now, the question is, are this has something to do with what happened 12 years ago? Well, it seem its Mandy's burden now to solve the mystery or dead becomes her.

Being so cheesy and taking inspired by many other slasher movies, Lovers Lane still managed as fine entertainer, at least to fill your bore times with a lot of laugh. If truth to be told, Lovers Lane is the most underrated after many direct-to-video-posh-Scream slasher movie, but it still shine because of the cliché it has.

A slightly direct-to-video slasher. This underrated flick is somewhat has many similarity with Cherry Falls, which is objecting teen with their obsession of love and (off course) sex. As a movie, despite Cherry Falls are better, they are in the same league, where's there is no explicit gores (most of the kills are off-screen), no intense fright, non atmospherically, the pace is slow, alas fails miserably as a great slasher package, but at least still fun to watch.

One thing to bother is the taking more popular slasher as it blatant copy is so annoying, when it seem lack of originality. The director is so inspiring, when the script actually is witty enough. He should learn more how to make a slasher as he must learn about the genre more than he should know. This is insulting.

Most of the actors are portraying they character respectfully, especially for B-Movie standard. Lovers Lane also featuring the pre-Scary Movie, Anna Faris with his blonde hair. Her appearance unquestionably fun.

Well, as little twist, Lovers Lane is still worth watching, but just don't expect it as a winner, because little is a literally concept for this movie. As my final bashed, Lovers Lane may fail as a slasher, but succeed as laughable movie.

2/10

A complete waste of time (not to mention celluloid, videotape, the cast and crew's time and effort...). No cliche left unturned, every expected move made, not a redeeming quality in sight. Not even enjoyable in a "campy" way. STAY AS FAR AWAY AS POSSIBLE FROM THIS ONE! And what the hell was up with that woman's wig anyway?!

"Lovers Lane" focuses on a group of high school students who, on Valentine's Day weekend, find themselves preyed upon by a hook-handed killer who has escaped from a psychiatric hospital, where he was incarcerated for committing murders at a remote lovers' lane years prior.

This low-budget effort was independently produced and filmed in Seattle, and is probably best known for being the film debut of then-unknown local actress Anna Faris, who gained widespread fame for her lead role in the "Scary Movie" parody films shortly after. Something of a relic of the video store era, "Lovers Lane" is actually a fairly competently-made film that rises head and shoulders above its direct-to-video peers of the time (take, for instance, the abysmal albeit unforgettable "Bloody Murder", which was released the same year).

Despite the fact that it heavily pulls ideas from the big-budget studio slashers it was competing with (such as "Urban Legend" and "I Know What You Did Last Summer", among others), what makes "Lovers Lane" stand out is that it boasts a visual and narrative style that is much more reminiscent of early '80s slasher films. Rather than totally retreading the groundwork of its peers, the film instead takes the approach of '80s efforts like "The Initiation", "Death Screams", and "My Bloody Valentine".

A small-town charm permeates the first half of the film, with homegrown locations such as retro diners, gas stations, and bowling alleys (the filmmakers clearly seem to have had an affinity for 1950s Americana), while the second half is set at night and takes place in a pitch-black forest and a ramshackle farmhouse, where the teenage bloodletting and slasher shenanigans kick into high gear. The film is slickly shot and while it doesn't exactly offer anything fresh, the hodgepodge of elements here make it very watchable. The cast is capable given the material they have to handle, and Faris's offbeat screen presence that helped make her a famous comic actress shows strongly here, even when she was at her most inexperienced.

The film winds down with a twist ending that is also very much rooted in the '80s slasher tradition, which, while perhaps not totally satisfying, is in sync with the tone the film has laid out from the beginning. All in all, "Lovers Lane" is a unique curio in the sense that, despite being birthed amidst the slicker trends of late '90s slashers, feels much more like a rough-hewn splatter flick from the '80s. It surely is not original, but it is a noble ode to the earlier independent films that shaped the genre. Bonus points for the pointless (albeit well-filmed) recurring shots of bowling pins clattering across the lanes. How's that for a double entendre? 7/10.

Lover's Lane was your typical by-the-book 90's horror film....predictable from start to finish. Based on an old urban legend, the only redeeming quality of this film was the decent acting. But the acting couldn't save the 10th grade-level script or the "surprise twist" ending that made no sense. Look for Richard Sanders who played Les Nessman in "WKRP in Cincinnati".

Idiots could write it off as just a low budget slasher but there is so much going on in this movie under the surface that it takes someone with an IQ over 100 to "get it". Yeah, production values could be better, (some of the sound is inaudible and visuals dark), but the acting is good, it moves pretty fast and there's enough tits and action to keep you going. I hope it comes out on DVD. Enough said.

Ok, at the beginning of the movie when I first saw Riley Smith in it, I was in total awe! He was soo totally hott! The movie wasn't the best of the slasher movies, but It wasn't nearly the worst! The end was confusing to me. They had like kept killing the killers and there were always more. Hmm.. Well the movie in my point of view was very good. If I were to grade it I would definetly give it a A-! And thats only cause the end wasnt that good.! Love ya Riley!

Slashers aren't usually considered high art, but at least a few of them can be entertaining. Lovers Lane isn't one of those movies. It does seem to have some sort of budget and it's competently made, but the story is super boring and none of the kills are memorable. It's nice to see Anna Faris in an early role before Scary Movie, but even she's wasted in this.