IMDb user comments for
Lost Boys: The Tribe (2008) (V) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 12:

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

Index

115 reviews in total

---

29 out of 34 people found the following review useful:
Surfing Vampires: Hang Fang, 30 July 2008

Author: Kristine (kristinedrama14@msn.com) from Chicago, Illinois

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The Lost Boys, as cheesy as it sounds, is seriously one of my favorite movies, without a doubt my favorite vampire film, it's sexy, stylish, and really stands out against a lot of other vampire movies. Now it's been a famous cult classic for 21 years, people are still discovering it to this day, now there had been rumors for so many years about a sequel, that it was going to be Lost Girls, David and his gang would return, that the Frog Brothers go to Washinton, D.C. The list goes on and on, finally after 21 long years, we have a new sequel for the cult classic, Lost Boys: The Tribe. I couldn't resist, I automatically bought it curious and thinking that it might be worth the watch, oh, dear, how I want my twenty dollars back. I was incredibly disappointed, and frankly disturbed with some of the character's behavior as well as a very lame story.

Chris and Nicole have moved to a new town with their aunt, after dealing with their parent's death, they're feeling down. Chris sees Shane, a once famous surfer who disappeared out of the spot light, he invites Chris to a party. Chris and Nicole go to the party, everything seems normal, until Nicole walks with Shane to his room and she drinks his blood out of a flask, she is now becoming a vampire. Chris seeks the help of our old friend, Edgar Frog, 150 pounds, about 5 foot 2, and still acts like Rambo times a thousand with the one liners. They try to help Nicole and destroy the surfing vampires before it's too late for her.

Lost Boys: The Tribe is seriously a major let down considering this movie could have been so much more. Sadly, Sam makes a 2 minute appearance that was a huge let down, as well as Allen doesn't even make the final cut, only in the alternate ending. I wish the director wasn't reading "How to make a film for dummies" while making this movie, because he didn't have an ounce of respect that the first Lost Boys had. It doesn't have the attitude or class to hold a candle up to the first film. This isn't the worst sequels I've seen, over all on it's own, it is kind of worth the look, but after Edgar's 100th one liner, it was turning into an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Fans of the first Lost Boys beware, I just had to learn the hard way... 20 dollars!!! I could've gotten groceries, I gave up a week's worth of food for this.

3/10

---

30 out of 44 people found the following review useful:
Great for Nostalgia, but it doesn't have the lastabilty of the original., 19 July 2008
Author: Emrabt from United Kingdom

Lost Boys: The Tribe is not really a sequel to 1987's The Lost Boys, it's more of a spin off movie. Unfortunately it's been getting a lot of bad reviews, and admittedly it could have been better, but that's not to say it hasn't any good points. The first low point, for me anyway, was the amount of swearing in the opening few minutes, it was just so forced and unneeded. It tried to be a lost boys movie, It TRIED to have the same feel and Overall the movie successfully stays true with the cinematography but it ended up copying many of the events from the first one. It takes a few events from the original mixes them up and writes some lines to glue them together. The "Magic" isn't there. It's missing a plot twist and some well needed lovable characters (maybe it's that lack of younger teens?). You also have Feldman acting his heart out in an attempt to compensate for some of the other actors. The story itself plodded along slowly for the first 40 or 50 minutes picking up as soon as Feldman Entered, in fact I cheered at the T.V when he appeared. This brings me to another complaint, there is way too many over the top sex scenes crammed into this, they are completely unneeded and add nothing what so ever to the plot. Halfway through and it's getting good and building up, suddenly we get an unneeded / misplaced police chase scene, followed by the many character sleeping and a drive to the beach. This is the EXACT POINT when everything seemed to get stupid it lost the all the momentum that it built up. It gained it back a little with a cool weapons talk in Edgar frogs van, but this only lead to an end battle which fell flat on its face. The movie was missing a much needed plot twist.

I'm Pretty surprised with how it turned out, it could have been much worse. The production crew seemed to be too scared to try anything too original, making the movie very bland and average. It was fantastic seeing Edgar back after 20 years. Anyone who has seen the first will realise that 20 years of vampire killing have sent him on the brink of insanity, made even clearer by his obsessions with vampires and the fact he still acts like a kid.

---

21 out of 30 people found the following review useful:
Is it weird I actually liked this movie?, 30 July 2008

Author: nathan-kosnoff from United States

Is it weird I actually liked this movie? Of course it doesn't measure up to the original, but it's still a great fun movie. The people that talk crap on this movie don't take it for what it is- a cheesy B movie horror-comedy. The casting was OK for the vampires, the soundtrack was decent, and the story was tolerable. This did not ruin the original movie for me at all and had some great lines "I f**** hate vampires", "YOUR SISTER IS A SUCKMONKEY". I was glad to see the Frog brother back in action- his hilariously bad lines made me laugh.

Keep in mind this movie is no 28 Days Later, no Schindlers List, no Dark Knight, no Godfather... it's just a fun movie to throw on, make some popcorn, and enjoy.

---

36 out of 60 people found the following review useful:
A surprisingly enjoyable sequel to the 80s vamp classic., 27 July 2008

Author: BA_Harrison from Hampshire, England

Hands up who thought that The Lost Boys: The Tribe was gonna blow big-time.

Yeah, me too.... but the good news is that, although nowhere near on a par with the 80s original, The Tribe is still an enjoyable ride that remains true to the spirit of its predecessor: it's tongue is firmly in cheek, the vampires are cool (and once again make being undead look like a viable option), the characters are likable, and, best of all, Corey Feldman returns as comic-book-loving vampire hunter Edgar Frog.

The film opens with a group of young surfers breaking into the grounds of an exclusive beach-front property for a spot of late night wave action, only to be confronted by the landowner, a rather miffed vampire (played by FX legend Tom Savini). However, rather than ending up as vamp fodder, the surfers reveal that they too are bloodsuckers, and proceed to tear off the rich vamp's head and use it for a spot of football practice. Now I don't know about you, but any film that begins with Tom Savini having his noggin bloodily removed and kicked into his pool gets my full attention (and admiration)!

After this gory introduction, it's into the story proper, which sees a pair of orphaned teenage siblings, ex-surfer Chris (Tad Hilgenbrink) and his hottie sister Nicole (Autumn Reeser), experiencing vampire trouble after going to to stay with their aunt in Santa Carla (which, as we all know, is a haven for the pale of skin and pointy of tooth): Nicole is seduced by head vamp Shane (Angus Sutherland, Kiefer's half-brother) and becomes a half-vampire, and it is up to her older brother to save her from eternal youth and all-night partying (I said this film made vampirism seem appealing, didn't I!).

As you can probably tell, the plot ain't exactly groundbreaking, being not much more than a reworking of the original film, but this matters not: there is still plenty of fun to be had, with some nice in-jokes (the fat shirtless Sax player was priceless!), sexy shenanigans with one hell of a horny undead babe who takes a shine to Chris, and the inevitable showdown at the end, which sees Edgar breaking out his full arsenal of vampire-slaying weapons for the occasion.

It would be easy to dismiss this STV effort as a cheap cash-in on a cult favourite (it is definitely a shame that a sequel to such a great 80s classic didn't get a bigger budget and a major release); however, if you approach The Tribe with an open mind and without prejudice, then there's a good chance you'll find much to like about it. I did, and I look forward to further installments (although I don't want to wait 20 years between films: after all, I'm still mortal!).

6.5 out of 10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb.

---

14 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
It was OK..... should have brought back Haim and Newlander., 8 August 2008

Author: Gareth from United Kingdom

I had read allot of negative comments before I watched the film and my expectations were very low, but I found the film OK. It defiantly wasn't a bad film.

Pros The cinematography was good The head vampire was pretty cool.

I loved watching Edgar Frog again and Feldman did a great job at playing the character again.

Cons The vampires looked like pigs, what was that about???? They didn't look nothing like the original vampires. They totally over done the makeup. Also the vampires acted to geeky and weren't bad ass enough. They needed to be more Gothic.

No Allan Frog Not enough Corey Haim. I felt cheated that he wasn't in it much, I was hoping for a longer cameo appearance than that.

The film needed a bigger cooler ending, with traps and things being set up.

The story was too similar to the first one.

Overall the film was OK. If they make a third one make Haim, Newlander and Feldman the stars. That's the film Lost Boys fans want to watch.

---

24 out of 40 people found the following review useful:
It Doesn't Suck...lol, 17 July 2008

Author: ronniesmoons from United States

I saw an very early screening of this movie last night and have to say that I was moderately impressed. This movie is not shot as a sequel to the first one at all. Even though there are appearances from a couple of the actors from the first movie, this one chose to be distinctive and separate from the first with new characters and stories. I tried not to compare the two movies and went into watching this one with an open mind. I have to say though that I did enjoy the story and acting of the first Lost Boys more. With that said, if you really look at the little hints in this movie you can see the references to the first one. They even poke fun at the original Lost Boys in a few of the scenes. This new one had a much more intense gore factor. The Vampire scenes were better outfitted and along with the accomplishments of todays special effects, it was a refreshing cinematic experience. I have to say though, I was a bit disappointed with the flat acting, between the villains and the heroes, not one gave the impression of really building their character. I believe that through time and more experience, some of these actors will move on to bigger and better things and hope to see the more known actors again in other films. I appreciated the "family heirloom" type feel of this movie, being that Angus Sutherland brother of Keifer Sutherland played his part in this. Corey Feldman looked great in this movie and stayed true to character. Overall, This movie had personality and honored the first Lost Boys in its own unique and smart way.

---

9 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
How can people give this movie a GOOD review?, 21 August 2008

Author: mrnrfan182 from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Before you read this please be advised that Spoilers are most definitely present so read no further if you'd like to keep anything a surprise.

How can any of you give this movie anything but a one star rating? It's TERRIBLE. I'm a huge fan of the Lost Boys. I grew up with the movie and it reigns as one of my favorite films of all time. This existence of this film though puts a small blemish on the story and if Corey weren't a part of it I'd be able to write it off completely. Unfortunately his presence, and the horrible cameo by Mr. Haim, actually ties this movie DIRECTLY to my beloved original and that, so far as I'm concern, is a shame.

Problem number one. Apparently Shane was a surfer once too, you know, because Chris had is posters on the wall right? So Chris idolized this guy and then he just suddenly disappears. Well that would suggest he was human once right? Sooooooo...that means Shane was changed over and would NOT be the head Vampire, much like how David was changed and he was NOT the head vampire in the original. Therefore killing Shane would do nothing because according to this movie's lore you'd have to kill the one that changed Shane and hope that he/she was the actual HEAD vampire.

Problem number two. The vampires have NO charisma. NONE. They're annoying, they're shallow, they're simply not fun. And the whole bit about them running around slicing each other up and having a grand old time taking advantage of their immortality...it's all done quite poorly and serves as an irrelevant addition to the plot. Apparently having no fear means it's fun to run around and gut each other. I saw them as complete imbeciles.

Problem three. What the hell was up with the police chase? Is that Chris's initiation? "hey come with us we'll knock on the police headquarters and do some donuts in the parking lot." LAME.

Problem four. The movie exists. It's really too bad that both Corey's have sunken so low as to be a part of this crap. It doesn't take a genius to put together a plot that would actually work in this situation but instead what we have here is a wannabe surfer/skate video about annoying young teenage vampires who can't act. The only salvation in this film is just how well Corey reprises his role as Edgar but outside of his scenes, the movie is pure junk.

---

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
You call this Lost Boys?, 8 November 2008

Author: movieman89-2 from United Kingdom

I don't know what they were thinking. The story of this film is exactly the same as the first film, new people move into town with vampires, one of them joins the clan and is becoming a vampire. The acting was awful and there were hardly any vampire moments.

It was cool that Corey Feldman returns but does'nt show up much and his brother is not in it.

The script was stupid, basically the whole film is stupid. Has no vampire originality.

Hope Keifer Sutherland didn't watch it, because If I was him, I would ask, What is this, is this a joke.

---

19 out of 32 people found the following review useful:
Shoud've Been Better, 18 July 2008

Author: C-Ant from United Kingdom

This is a film I had to see, I mean, 'Lost Boys' is a classic! And the fact that a sequel has been made! Well, like I said, I had to see it.

To follow up a film like 'lost boys' it's gonna have to be something special. When I first heard about it I thought 'It'll be just some B movie fan film', but then I found out both Corey Feldman and Corey Haim are in it, plus the other actor that played the other Frog brother (can't remember his name) in the original film. On that basis I believed this could do justice as a sequel to the cult classic.

How wrong could I be! First up, Corey Haim and 'the other Frog brother' are both credited at the end of the film, but I don't recall seeing either of them in the film, in fact Edgar Frog (Feldman) mentions that his brother has died! And second, they tried to capture the humour of the original film and simply failed.

This film is more of a homage then a sequel, it follows the original story with only minor adjustments, eg. this time it's a brother and sister rather then 2 brothers, and this time it's the girl that gets seduced rather than the fella.

Another point - you would have thought that after 20 years since the first film the effects would be spectacular, but they're not, they could've been lifted from the original, which shows they're budget must have been tight.

Overall this film is very average, should've been a lot better, but then I've seen worse. I rate this a 5, it's watchable and no were near as poor as 'prom night' or 'doomsday'

---

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Fire the writer, 30 August 2008

Author: agf8623 from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I love Lost Boys and I was hesitant to watch Lost Boys 2 after I'd read the reviews on IMDb, but I rented it anyways...

The cinematography was well done for a low budget film. The music was okay. The script was terrible.

This is a good movie to rent if you love Ed Wood films. The story is extremely weak, there is no climax, no clever twists. It is a shadow that slightly follows the original Lost Boys. Worse, the writer focused not on the story, but on sex and horror to make it interesting. I don't mind sex, horror, etc, but it needs to fit into the story. In this movie, the story is an afterthought.

After I finished watching the movie, I couldn't stop but wonder... who the heck signed off on this script? A movie costs a lot of money to make and I'm surprised that anyone threw money at this script. It's in insult to US, the folks who ultimately pay for fools to write movies for us.

It does not surprise me that Lost Boys 2 sold better than expected. All of the Lost Boys fans will watch it, regardless, due to curiosity. If the folks who funded this movie think for an instant we will watch another poorly constructed movie with the Lost Boys title on it, think again. Fire the writer.

---

---

Page 1 of 12:

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

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
External reviews	Parents Guide	Official site
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user reviews
Your vote history