IMDb user comments for
Valentine (2001) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 36:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

357 comments in total

---

47 out of 65 people found the following comment useful :-
Not just a silly slasher film, 7 March 2005

Author: Brandt Sponseller from New York City

A group of model-caliber San Francisco women who have been friends since elementary school are suddenly being threatened and attacked by someone sending them bizarre Valentine's Day cards. Who is the killer and why is the killer after them?

My rating will often change on subsequent viewings of a film--sometimes slightly up, sometimes slightly down. However, I can't remember another film where my rating has changed as drastically as it has for Valentine. The first time I watched it, upon its theatrical release, I thought it was pretty awful--I gave it a 4 out of 10, the equivalent of an "F" letter grade. Watching it for a second time last night, I can't remember what the heck I didn't like about it. I can only assume that maybe I was really in the wrong mood to watch it, or maybe I just didn't get it. In any event, I loved it this time, giving it a 9 out of 10, or an "A".

It might sound ridiculous saying I didn't get a film like this, but there is something to get. Valentine is almost a comedy/horror. Director Jamie Blanks, who was also responsible for 1998's Urban Legend, takes the stereotypical teen horror formula that became so popular in the late 1990s in the wake of Scream (1996) and pushes most of the elements up a notch, making Valentine intentionally cheesy/campy almost to the point of absurdity (where absurdism is a positive stylistic term). On top of that, he gives us a film imbued with humorous commentary on romantic relationships. The humor is unusual in that it has the same exaggeratedly campy tone as the teen horror aspects. Most of the situations in the film, and the modus operandi of the villain, humorous or not, are tied in to the Valentine's Day theme.

Many viewers will likely subtract points from the film for its various cliché-rooted but implausible scenarios and plot developments. However, in light of the above, the film is intentionally clichéd, implausible and ludicrous. It's as if Blanks is attempting (and mostly succeeding) to transcend the typical teen slasher by mocking/spoofing the conventions of the genre while also satirizing eros. That's the attraction to the irony of basing a horror film on Valentine's Day. It's an incongruity that is cleverly woven throughout the film, and that is itself at the heart of the slasher genre, making it prime fodder for Valentine's extravagant lampooning. Scream had a similar aim with its horror material, but the twist there was that the film was "self-aware". Valentine's Day is intentionally not self-aware; the viewer has to rely on contextual clues for satire. Lest some think I'm "reading too much" into the film, it's worthwhile to note that Blanks said in interviews that he "didn't want to just do another slasher film after Urban Legend" and producer Dylan Sellers said he wanted to do something "more adult".

Other viewers may dislike the fact that Valentine's Day differs so much from its putative source material, the novel of the same name by Tom Savage. The novel's characters, setting and plot are very different from the film. Sellers has said, "While it was a fine book, I didn't think it was the right story for a film". So instead the novel, which is much dryer and more serious in tone, was used as a launching pad, a motif to create variations on for a horror/thriller story centered on Valentine's Day. While those facts won't help purists familiar with the book like the film, it's helpful to understand why the film has its divergent plot and attitude. It's probably better to look at the film as an independent entity with a similar theme.

Blanks' direction is impeccable visually. Valentine's Day has a lush look throughout, with complex, deep colors, interesting sets, and good staging. Blanks is admirable for keeping his villain and attack scenes not too dark, with clearly conveyed action. He also directs his actors with aplomb, catalyzing often slyly humorous performances. David Boreanaz, as Adam Carr, is involved in many of the funniest moments.

While Valentine's Day is no masterpiece, it's a very good horror/thriller film that seems strongly prone to misconceptions. If you watch it expecting something more tongue-in-cheek you may find yourself appreciating it a lot more.

---

13 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-
The St. Valentine's Day Massacre for beauty-queens., 16 December 2005

Author: Coventry from the Draconian Swamp of Unholy Souls

I think I'll have to categorize this film under "guilty pleasures", since the rest of the world really despised it (and probably righteously so...) whereas I found it mildly enjoyable! Sure it's banal modern day horror junk that hangs together by clichés and stupid plot holes, but at least it's never boring and it's actually quite funny in a cheesy kind of way. Five hot twenty-something babes, seemly with a lot of free time on their hands, all receive shocking Valentine cards signed with the initials "J.M". Could this be the morbid revenge of a nerdy kid that the popular girls collectively humiliated during a school dance more than 12 years ago? The joke really becomes alarming when Shelly is found brutally murdered...and she's only number one. The poorly written script is (unintentionally?) hilarious! Even though it are mainly just girls that get slaughtered, this movie is very man-unfriendly! Every male character that gets introduced is either a sexual pervert or a socially dysfunctional loser...most are even both! Heck, even the police inspector turns out to be an obscene freak! There's absolutely no tension and you can predict every next twist hours in advance. The beauty-queen killings are reasonably inventive but almost entirely bloodless, so gore-hounds beware. The ending (as in: the actual revelation of the killer's identity) is totally absurd and makes the movie even worse that Jamie Blanks' previous turkey "Urban Legend". In fact, "Valentine" was released 20 years too late! With a plot and gore opportunities like this, it could have been a minor 80's slasher-classic like "Happy Birthday To Me" or – oh yes – "My Bloody Valentine". Nobody cares about such slashers anymore nowadays. The politically correct American horror standards don't allow nudity or brutal gore and that's why every new slasher attempt looks lame.

---

16 out of 26 people found the following comment useful :-
Not very good, but better than expected, 3 March 2002

Author: jhaggardjr from Chicago, Illinois

"Valentine" is another horror movie to add to the stalk and slash movie list (think "Halloween", "Friday the 13th", "Scream", and "I Know What You Did Last Summer"). It certainly isn't as good as those movies that I have listed about, but it's better than most of the ripoffs that came out after the first "Friday the 13th" film. One of those films was the 1981 Canadian made "My Bloody Valentine", which I hated alot. "Valentine" is a better film than that one, but it's not saying much. The plot: a nerdy young boy is teased and pranked by a couple of his classmates at the beginning of the film. Then the film moves years later when those classmates are all grown up, then they're picked off one-by-one. The killer is presumed to be the young boy now all grown up looking for revenge. But is it him? Or could it be somebody else? "Valentine" has an attractive cast which includes Denise Richards, David Boreanaz, Marley Shelton, Jessica Capshaw, and Katherine Heigl. They do what they can with the material they've got, but a lackluster script doesn't really do them any justice. There are some scary moments throughout, however.

** (out of four)

---

6 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
The best Teen Slasher movie ever !!! And here is why:, 11 September 2008

Author: Cihan (Sean) Vercan (Victorydawn) from London, Ontario

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I'm not a follower of a certain movie genre. I classify movies only as industrial or non-industrial. Valentine is the second industrial movie of the director Jamie Blanks, after his Urban Legends. Unlike Urban Legends the screenplay and the story line is very weak. Yet again unlike Urban Legends the basic elements of the movie is so dashing and iconic, and that is what makes Valentine the best.

As the first basic and iconic element, the growing hatred of the serial killer is so down-to-earth. Since his secondary school years, he has grown up with his wounds he had accumulated in his soul against his classmate girlfriends, who have made fun of him. When you concentrate enough on this first element while watching the movie, you will come to see this point of view of Humanism: "Noone is entirely good or evil. In fact, somebody known as evil can be secretly kind hearted." Just because the story line and the direction is very weak, we are not as satisfied as we deserved.

The second iconic element is, of course, the magnificent togetherness of the late 90s' super starlets: My favourite is Jessica Cauffiel who is killed within the coolest way to be killed. An arrow shot from a bow broaches her tummy and stays stuck in, while she was playing hide-and-seek with her blind date, never able to met with. Katherine Heigl is the first starlet getting killed in a biology laboratory while trying to hide under human body models lying on the surgical operation tables. Denise Richards is killed third, while she just found a Valentines' Day gift for her at a whirlpool bath. Jessica Capshaw is killed last in a confidential and unseen way, then she is calumniated to be as the serial killer. Marley Shelton is the unluckiest one with a vicissitude of fortune that she is going to be killed within the most confidential way that we will never know, 'cause the movie is coming to an end before she is getting killed. Finally, Benita Ha is the luckiest one since she was not a classmate of the serial killer, David Boreanaz.

The third and the last iconic element is the soundtrack from the blind date labyrinth scene, the Valentines' Day celebration at Dorothy's house scenes and ultimately the killing themes. Everybody has loved the soundtrack as far as I know. Hard Rock never suits better within a serial killer-mystery movie.

---

4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
Wonderful horror flick..., 11 February 2001

Author: jimmyplm from Chapel Hill, NC

I just saw "Valentine" and I have to say that it was the best slasher movie that I've seen in years. Unlike the recent trend of 90's horror flicks, this movie is more concerned with being eerie than it is with being self-mocking. For those out there that hated "Scream," there is not one reference to "the horror rules" in this movie (even though the old slasher movie rules do apply here).

This is the perfect blend of 80's and 90's horror. You get the style, cinematography, and good acting of 90's films and the stalking-slasher madness of an 80's flick. I guess the year 2001 is going to finally give horror fans the kind of movies they were longing for. This is definitely a move in the right direction.

Denise Richards stands out here as a fun character. You can tell she liked her role, and that makes her stand out. I loved her in this movie.

---

4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
Its NOT that bad a movie, 7 February 2001

Author: funkervogt (Kev6692001@yahoo.com) from Burlington, on, canada

This movie, despite the low rating is NOT that bad. It is better then most of the teen movies that come out these days. (I liked it more then scream and I know what you did.....). I mean, its nothing ground breaking its just good scares and fun. Don't go into this movie expecting anything special...just some typical scares and it will make you jump at times. There are also a few good death scenes. Get your friends and go see this for a good time.....I give it 6/10

---

5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Some People Have It All Wrong!, 12 January 2003

Author: ajbo from Newport Beach, Orange County, CA

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

First off, let me start by saying, this movie isn't Award Winning Material, but it is a good slasher flick. Second let me say, i can't even believe they got that good of a cast to appear in this! The cast is young and incredibly talented. I dont understand how some people feel that the actors suck at acting. Those who did suck, gave it there all and passed. And for those of you who are talking about Denise, well i just wanna say that at least she's gotten somewhere! Her acting is fine, and she's doing good for herself. Now onto what everyone (Or almost everyone) has been talking about which they are wrong.

SpOiLeRs (Dont read if you havent seen it)

Ok, first for those of you saying "Dorothy is the Killer, the nose bleeds occured later in life!" Your wrong! The Killer is Adam Carr/Jeremy Melton. Ok, heres why i KNOW i am right. First off, the editors of this film cut a lot of scenes out of this movie. Not that the MPAA wanted them to, but because they felt they had to to leave a mystery behind. One of the scenes cut was that of Adam Carr attacking Dorothy upstairs in her bedroom, Adam knocks her out and, takes off the Cherub costume and slips Dorothy into it. Thus leaving Dorothy in the Killers costume, framing her. Now when Kate is walking up the stairs, ready to fire. The "Killer" comes flying at her. Dorothy did NOT run at Kate. Since Dorothy had been knocked out, she was pushed by Adam. So when they both fall to the ground, it dazes Kate and begins to shake up Dorothy, suddenly Dorothy rises up from the ground, not even a second later she is hit with at least five shots to the chest. By Adam. This giving Dorothy: No time to talk, No time to gesture Kate, and No time to take the mask off. So Adam framed Dorothy, just like Dorothy framed him at the dance in 6th grade! It's all simple after a while. I admit not getting it the first time around, but when i watched it again. I got it. Now at the end when Adam's nose begins to bleed, this points to Adam being Jeremy. Adam saved Kate, because in 6th grade Kate was nice to Adam/Jeremy.

Now talks of a sequel have been floating around. I would like to see a sequel come out of this movie, but like other movies that dont do well, the sequel will probably go Direct-To-Video. But i'll still buy it anyway. HOPEFULLY we will be seeing a sequel sometime in the future DTV or Not, i want a sequel!

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Excellent slasher., 21 June 2001

Author: Michael Bregman (mickey@mickey.net) from Gan-Yavne, Israel

It's a colorful slasher movie. That's about it.

It has the mystery element that SCREAM made so popular in slasher movies, but I never care for such things. Figuring out who's the bad guy is not that interesting considering the clues are all misleading anyway.

The death scenes were inventive and gorey, bringing back memories of 80's horror movies like Friday the 13th.

Another nice thing about this movie is that it's hard to pinpoint the surviving girl, unlike in SCREAM and IKWYDLS where it was obvious.

People who don't like slasher movies won't like this movie. As simple as that. I truly enjoyed it and I plan to watch it again while waiting for more of the same.

--MB

---

10 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-
Marilyn Manson is on the soundtrack. What more do you want?, 8 August 2002
Author: Jack the Ripper1888 from Chicagooooooo

The best thing about the film is the soundtrack: Marilyn Manson, Rob Zombie and a bunch more. But, the film itself wasn't that bad. The killings are original and much better than Wes Craven's SCREAM. The cast is not very well known except for Marley Shelton (one of the many stars of THE BACHELOR) and the amazingly hott Denise Richards (you must see WILD THINGS)!

VALENTINE scores some points for being able to pull of some scary moments, which many horror movies are not able to do. It does not have the steadily mounting terror that THE EXORCIST held, nor does it contain interesting characters (most of them are original and stupid people who learned nothing from Jamie Kennedy's "Rules to Survive a Horror Movie" in SCREAM). If you want a horror movie that isn't genre defying nor terrifying, see VALENTINE. It is somewhat scary and entertaining which is most important. VALENTINE gets 3/5.

---

2 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
The Best Slasher I Have Seen In A While!, 12 October 2001

Author: cupid_killer13 from PA

When this movie came out back in February I wanted to see it but I made the mistake of seeing Hannibal. Don't get me wrong I really liked Hannibal but I thought Valentine was better. Hannibal is the only reason that this movie only made $20 million. This could have gone up to $35 million. Since everyone knows the plot I won't even bother with it. The acting is very good for a horror movie. Marley Shelton (KATE), Jessica Capshaw (DOROTHY), Denise Richards (PAIGE) Jessica Cauffiel (LILY), and Katherine Heigl (SHELLY) are all great as the five main girls. David Boreanaz (ADAM) is a little wooden at times but he is good. Hedy Buress (RUTHIE) is the funniest character and I would have loved for her to have more screen time. Daniel Cosgrove (CAMPBELL) is also very good and I would have liked to see more of him also. The deaths are also great. We get arrows, axes, hot tubs, and some good old knife action. The only bad thing about the death's is that gore got cut out. Hopefully Warner Bros. will release an uncut DVD. Yeah it does get predictable and I guessed who the killer was very quickly mostly because it was ruined for me on the internet but I guessed it without reading any reviews or seeing the movie. VALENTINE get a 10/10 from me.

---

---

Page 1 of 36:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Parents Guide	Official site	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history