One year after couple Jesse (Joey Mendicino) and Nicole (Julie Mond) disappeared, Jesse's brother, Tom (Richard Tillman), asks his friends (Jessie Ward, Graham Norris) to join him on a search for his brother. On the way, they stumble upon the same isolated Rest Stop that Jesse and Nicole were brutalized. Unfortunately for Tom and his friends, the yellow-truck-driving madman still haunts the roadside looking for victims. . . and they're next on his route.
While not a fan of the below-average first (simply Rest Stop), I decided to give Rest Stop: Don't Look Back a fair chance. In the first film, an average idea (a couple gets stranded at an isolated rest stop and a crazed killer stalks them down) is ruined by an impossible twist (and you thought Haute Tension's was unbelievable), subpar performances by actors we've seen do better, and a script so contrived my head was pounding in annoyance. So, the sequel came out with a LOT of ground to make up if it wanted to be even worth a passing glance. One major thing holds back the sequel before even it even begins: there's not a lot you can do at a rest stop. The first didn't do too much, but I think it took advantage of the few things possible at a bathroom. Therefore, as Rest Stop: Don't Look Back progressed, it felt kind of like Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning in comparison to the remake. . . the same subject matter with just a couple twists in the plot and different characters. That's not a very good thing. A subpar first doesn't warrant a sequel to begin with, but if a sequel MUST be made, do something special with it! Surprise your audience, give us something new, give us a reason to say, "I'm glad I picked that up." Do NOT, under any circumstance, feed us the same trite garbage you gave us in the first. This is all where this sequel failed. Well, there. . . and with the horrendous script, the stiff and unrealistic acting, horrible story progression and pacing, and dizzying camera-work. I won't completely put it off as terrible, however, as there was some good gore and violence, much more than what I remember from the first. Unfortunately, we missed some of the best violence (eye gouging and the like) due to scene cutaways, but I attribute that to a low budget. The gore wasn't enough to save the film, however, and it ends up being just as lame, predictable (and somehow ridiculous), and forgettable as the original.
Final verdict: 3.75/10.
While not a fan of the below-average first (simply Rest Stop), I decided to give Rest Stop: Don't Look Back a fair chance. In the first film, an average idea (a couple gets stranded at an isolated rest stop and a crazed killer stalks them down) is ruined by an impossible twist (and you thought Haute Tension's was unbelievable), subpar performances by actors we've seen do better, and a script so contrived my head was pounding in annoyance. So, the sequel came out with a LOT of ground to make up if it wanted to be even worth a passing glance. One major thing holds back the sequel before even it even begins: there's not a lot you can do at a rest stop. The first didn't do too much, but I think it took advantage of the few things possible at a bathroom. Therefore, as Rest Stop: Don't Look Back progressed, it felt kind of like Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning in comparison to the remake. . . the same subject matter with just a couple twists in the plot and different characters. That's not a very good thing. A subpar first doesn't warrant a sequel to begin with, but if a sequel MUST be made, do something special with it! Surprise your audience, give us something new, give us a reason to say, "I'm glad I picked that up." Do NOT, under any circumstance, feed us the same trite garbage you gave us in the first. This is all where this sequel failed. Well, there. . . and with the horrendous script, the stiff and unrealistic acting, horrible story progression and pacing, and dizzying camera-work. I won't completely put it off as terrible, however, as there was some good gore and violence, much more than what I remember from the first. Unfortunately, we missed some of the best violence (eye gouging and the like) due to scene cutaways, but I attribute that to a low budget. The gore wasn't enough to save the film, however, and it ends up being just as lame, predictable (and somehow ridiculous), and forgettable as the original.
Final verdict: 3.75/10.