I went to this one with minimal expectations: a sequel to a mediocre horror film with a cult following (that's right, the wondefully cheesy "Urban Legend"). Boy, what a waste of time it turned out to be. The "Final Cut" of the title refers to the setting of the movie: a film school that looks like a bunch of concrete boxes piled on top of each other at odd angles (reminded me of another bad, bad, bad, bad movie "The Dorm That Dripped Blood"). Apparently this university teaches mainly rowing because, whenever the campus was shown, there is a group of canoes and kayaks riding along RIGHT NEXT to the concrete boxes. Also, the setting often suffered climate changes -- in some scenes it was winter and in some it was summer. Do they also teach weather manipulation?

All the action takes place at this rowing/film/weather school. Here's the "plot": all film students are vying for the prestigious "Hitchcock Award," a laurel that guarantees a chance to make a movie in Hollywood. So, of course, ALL the students decide to make excessively cheesy horror films. The one semi-hot student who is also our heroine, Amy Mayfield decides, like all the others, to make a slasher film. Hers will be based on urban legends. After the last movie, this sounds SO original. So she readies her cast and crew, made up of stereotypes ubiquitous in horror films, including the pseudo-villain, who is always be identified by throbbing music. This only gets better -- the pseudo-villain has a twin brother.

Anyway, little Jenny starts to make her movie (which, in the slasher tradition, looks like a real piece of crap, as does everyone else's), and people start to get bumped off -- a LOT of people. The film's first death makes pretty much no sense, and I don't know why it was there, but it was gruesome and cheesy. Jenny's encouraged to keep on filming, despite the deaths, by her professor, played by Hart Bochner (of the underrated "Terror Train" fame) -- hint, hint, he's the only character in the film who is not obviously hinted at as the killer; therefore, he must be......BINGO!

The deaths in this movie are not suspenseful, they're not even particularly gory. (Most occur at night among the various concrete boxes that comprise the university, so there's no real atmosphere or sense of place.) The fat security guard survivor from the first returns in this film and is given NOTHING to do. Her "Coffy" attitude has lost its freshness, and her character, shall we say, is supremely stupid. Despite being involved in a recent bloodbath, she doesn't believe our heroine in the all-important moment of suspicion. Unlike most horror movie survivors who return in sequels, she is not paranoid or even cautious.

We also have JOSEPH Lawrence (formerly Joey; I guess he thinks his new name makes him an actor or something) making an appearance here, to round out the exceptionally awful cast. Lawrence is fingered as the killer SO many times and is given an obvious motive (a truly pathetic one at that).

This movie copies the original on so many levels. We have the eerie building that resembles a church (remember Stanley Hall?) and is marked as a Bad Place by its ominous shadows and lingering shots. How did a gothic building get constructed on a cubist university campus? This is one of the less nagging logic holes found in the movie. The audience is left with no doubt that this will be the setting for the Final Chase Scene between the One(s) Who Survive(s) and the Killer. We also have the completely illogical ending with the ridiculous "climactic" motive explanation by the killer that has become a staple of bad horror films everywhere. Believe it or not, this motive and explanation is THE WORST I HAVE EVER SEEN IN ANY HORROR MOVIE, and I've watched a lot. And, about halfway through the movie, the script seems to forget that people in the "Urban Legend" series are supposed to get slaughtered in ways that resemble -- duh! -- urban legends. When filmmakers forget the meaning of their own title, we know we're in for trouble. With such a large production cost -- for a horror movie, that is ($15 million) -- this rivals 80s low-budget classics "Graduaton Day," "Slaughter High," and all the "Friday the 13th" films for sheer stupidity and unparalleled rotten dialogue.

Scenes to watch for: (1) The scene during the final credits; the only really good one in the movie. (2) The revelation of the killer, a classic of schlock, and oh-so unsuspenseful. (3) The "Vertigo" homage near the end. (4) The supremely lame amusement park "scare" scenes. (5) The "it's only a bird/dream/cat" scenes.

Best lines: (1) "You stole my [bleeping] genre." (2) "Get another D.P." (They say "D.P." about 20 million times in this movie, and every time they do, it sounds like "T.P.") (3) "The blurring of realities, wrong man accused, paranoia...all themes used by Hitchcock." (4) "The big debate is: should mise-en-scene be used in cinema verite?"

Things that make you go "Huh?": (1) The ending -- it doesn't make any sense and is quite confusing, especially after viewing the scene that follows. (2)Any scene where any of the characters play "detective." (3) How did the killer make the substitute movie without the victims' knowledge? (4) The film division is called The Orson Welles Film Centre and gives a prestigious Hitchcock Award for making schlock slasher movies -- where's the connection? (5) The Russian D.P. who always talks when the camera's rolling. Did he pass freshman year? (6) The university -- the set director should be shot! (7) The prop dog, also known as the most fake prop ever. Are these kids trying to get a passing grade?