User Score
7.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 62 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 45 out of 62
  2. Negative: 10 out of 62

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 16, 2015
    1
    "He will cut your balls off and feed them to you"

    Are you a fan of "Saw" and other related torture movies, this will be your cup of tea. But if you were tired of the whole "Saw" saga after part three, you better skip "The Collection" because you can't call it very original. This sequel to "The Collector" (which I've never seen) begins impressive, has an anticipated open end and is
    "He will cut your balls off and feed them to you"

    Are you a fan of "Saw" and other related torture movies, this will be your cup of tea. But if you were tired of the whole "Saw" saga after part three, you better skip "The Collection" because you can't call it very original. This sequel to "The Collector" (which I've never seen) begins impressive, has an anticipated open end and is terribly boring in the middle, with ridiculously improbable situations. It's never really exciting and ultimately it becomes a cat and mouse game in a big, abandoned hotel, full of deadly and insane booby traps and with rooms that look more surreal as time goes by. To make it somewhat entertaining, I recommend to get a scarf and hat and equip yourself with bells and flags, so that you can encourage the contestants as a real enthusiastic supporter.

    Because of the short running time, there's no wasting of time at the beginning of the film. In a flash, we're informed that the city is attacked by a ruthless serial killer called "The Collector". We meet Elena (Emma Fitzpatrick) being towed along by some friends to an obscure secret nightclub. After a skirmish there with her boyfriend, she discovers a suitcase with Arkin (Josh Stewart) trapped in it. Arkin is a victim of the first film who survived and escaped his imprisonment. Only the nightmare starts back again here and short after you'll get to see the most hallucinatory massacre ever. I did something I rarely do. I re-watched that part twice in a row. Once this bloody part is over, you can say that you've watched the best part and from here on it's just a very long carnage. The creators of the film (especially the writer Patrick Melton, who is also responsible for SAW IV, V, VI and VII) paid more attention to the level of sadism than the story itself. You can easily guess what'll come next. Elena is kidnapped by "The Collector" and Arkin is recruited as a guide for a group of mercenaries to rescue her out of the hands of this sadist.

    Putting this film in the same league as "Saw", is for the latter a little unworthy. The concept of "Saw" was of a very different nature and was put together somewhat subtler. I must admit that "Saw" impressed me. "Jigsaw" kidnapped people because he felt they deserved it, because of the sins they have committed in the past. The choice they had was to save themselves from their situation in a painful way or simply die. "The Collector" had no exact plan in mind in my opinion. He's simply a psychopath who transforms his victims into grotesque artworks and saves it in formaldehyde. Or he uses them as a favorite pastime and tortures them brutally. His identity is not revealed in this film. It remains a sinister stranger who occasionally puts on a mask and starts killing brutally.

    It's totally absurd to talk about character development, because that's missing completely. First you have the seemingly invincible killer who has a built-in GPS system because he always appears at the right time and in the right place in this fairly large hotel. And next we have a bunch of mercenaries who will solve the problem. The fact that the one they are hunting just reshaped a whole gang of disco goers into ready-to-eat barbecue packets, apparently doesn't impress them and they enter unfamiliar terrain seemingly carefree. Their fate is also in hands of one person who knew where this lugubrious building was situated just by using clues he carved into his arm. I would clear off and leave the job to a whole army of soldiers.

    There are also inexplicable moments in this film. The way they free themselves out of the metal cage is nonsense. And especially if you see how that person swings into action afterwards, as if it's hunky dory. Most serial killers in other slasher movies have a motive and a pattern. This "Collector" guy apparently doesn't have a clue about any plan and just goes on doing stuff. He kills, chops and cuts around, slices and assembles bodies, tortures and torments when he has time. He uses all kinds of instruments to achieve his goal (not like Michael Myers who invariably uses a butcher knife) and also he drugs a whole bunch of victims so they can be used as an army of zombies against intruders. And that's not all. He also has a collection of raging dogs and tarantulas. You see, there's enough variation.
    Ultimately, it's just a mediocre film with a great deal of attention for the traps and the bloody effects of them. It's a tough film and the pace is very fast. So fast that you may have missed some slaughtering. Don't worry ! In the end you get a second chance to watch it again during the end credits. The end invites for a successor, but I'm sure I'm going to skip it.

    More reviews at http://opinion-as-a-moviefreak.blogspot.be
    Expand
  2. Nov 13, 2014
    1
    "The Collection" 10 Scale Rating: 1.5 (Terrible) ...

    The Good: A few deaths were somewhat creative. The bad guy is creepy looking enough. The Bad: Comical gore and slasher horror. Blood sprays like a faucet, heads explode like melons, and body parts are torn with reckless abandon and in the most cartoon-like way possible. The characters are less developed that you'd expect, even for
    "The Collection" 10 Scale Rating: 1.5 (Terrible) ...

    The Good: A few deaths were somewhat creative. The bad guy is creepy looking enough.

    The Bad: Comical gore and slasher horror. Blood sprays like a faucet, heads explode like melons, and body parts are torn with reckless abandon and in the most cartoon-like way possible. The characters are less developed that you'd expect, even for this genre as the majority of them barely say hello before being decapitated, maimed, or sliced up. A horrible excuse for a horror film.
    Expand
  3. Sep 10, 2014
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A foolish movie, does not make any sense. Waste of money n time . uusafhjaksafhklafkasjahfjhsfasfsasafssfsafsfsfsfsfsfsffsfsfsddfsadjfdsadfdjsahfjdksahdfsjah Expand
  4. Sep 28, 2013
    0
    Everything good about the first film is thrown out the window during this one. It has a poor plot, It wasn't scary, and it was no where near as entertaining as the first film. Such a disappointment considering how good the first film was, I was hoping that it'd turn into another horror franchise but sadly that is not the case.
  5. Mar 23, 2013
    0
    Once again, another piece of crap spit out. I dont know how these guys get the funding to put out such garbage. The only cool scene is at the rave/dance when they all got mutilated (which also makes zero sense for the rest of the film). Nobody knows what a good horror/thriller is anymore, its all retarded scenarios. Dont waste your time on this trash.
  6. Dec 9, 2012
    0
    You know that wonderful spine tingling, edge of your seat feeling you had when watching The Ring, that's not going to happen here. In fact quite the opposite. I fidgeted through the movie. I know studios have a certain quota of films they feel like they have to make, but really? The story is just out there and dumb. If you want blood and guts go to a slaughterhouse, at least that is real.You know that wonderful spine tingling, edge of your seat feeling you had when watching The Ring, that's not going to happen here. In fact quite the opposite. I fidgeted through the movie. I know studios have a certain quota of films they feel like they have to make, but really? The story is just out there and dumb. If you want blood and guts go to a slaughterhouse, at least that is real. If you want to be scared, watch the evening news. If you want to get your date in the mood, try alcohol. This movie does seem to hit any of the marks. If you are young and want to watch a "messed up" movie, put A Clockwork Orange in your Netflix queue. Otherwise, paying for this movie only further enables the studio's to make more mindless garbage. Expand
Metascore
36

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 15 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 15
  2. Negative: 4 out of 15
  1. Reviewed by: Marjorie Baumgarten
    Dec 5, 2012
    20
    An exercise in pure sadism, The Collection moves at a clip that leaps over plot holes in its race to elicit fright.
  2. Reviewed by: Nick Pinkerton
    Dec 4, 2012
    50
    The Collection doesn't have much to recommend it beyond a first-reel bloodbath rivaling "Blade" and "Death Ship."
  3. Reviewed by: Bilge Ebiri
    Dec 3, 2012
    40
    The movie's a smorgasbord of horror, and, ironically, that takes the teeth out of it. We're not really in this villain's world, because we don't know what his world is, or what he is, or what he's trying to even do. It's like a nightmare designed by someone who's heard a lot about nightmares but has never actually had one.