What Urban Legends: Final Cut Gets Wrong About Horror Sequels

gamerant.com:

There are only so many paths that a horror sequel can go down. Does an original character come back as someone's parent or friend? Are new characters dealing with the same danger that the previous ones did? Has a lot of time passed since the events of the first film? While Urban Legend (1998) is a fun ride of a cheesy horror movie, allowing fans to think more about the scary stories that have been told for decades now, the sequel Urban Legends: Final Cut (2000) is a tougher movie to enjoy.

From a main character who feels dull to the types of urban legends that are included, Urban Legends: Final Cut ultimately falls flat as a sequel.

Child’s Play 3 Was Hated For More Than Just Being A Bad Sequel

The 1998 horror movie Urban Legend looks at classic scary urban legends and definitely succeeds. Sure, it's cheesy, some of the characters aren't all that well-developed, and some moments are a bit hard to believe. But all in all, it's a solid '90s horror film. The same thing can't be said for its sequel, Urban Legends: Final Cut, which was released in 2000. Fans of the original movie can find a lot of things wrong with it.

While there are many horror movie sequels that should happen, Urban Legend: Final Cut feels like an unnecessary addition to the horror genre. The main character Amy Mayfield (Jennifer Morrison) is devoid of personality, which is too bad since she's the person who audiences are following throughout the entire film. But the real issue is the main storyline. Amy is a film student who is considering what her thesis movie should be and she decides that she should focus on people dying in the fashion of urban legends, thanks to a serial killer who is obsessed with these stories. Audiences don't really find out why Amy