Bad Karma (2002)

Sadly Over-hyped

A waste of 90 minutes of my life

Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

This movie is completely uninteresting. The story is transparent right from the start, the gore effects are poor, the flashbacks are unconvincing (those shiny clean 1888 London streets look exactly like the studio sets they are). Patsy Kensit fails to impress as a psycho killer; the other actors are forgettable. There is simply nothing good to be said about "Bad Karma". It represents the kind of by-the-numbers filmmaking that makes you feel depressed about the current state of low-budget horror films in general. (*)

This movie seems to depend on blood, guts and gore. After the initial scene in which so much of the woman is seen without clothes, there is very little nudity and plenty of blood, guts and gore. The story seems to have written to support showing it.One thing that everyone seems to be missing is that so many people are killed. We are supposed to feel for some and not care about others. However that is one of many things that make it difficult for me to enjoy them.There are a few times in this movie when the police could have been and should have been called yet they were not. This was probably also done by the writer because it was an easy way to maintain the drama. Producers will continue to make movies with plots like that until more people complain.

There is several reasons as to why this is so bad and silly but when you have a veteran director like John Hough there is just no excuse. Hough has directed such films as "Twins of Evil", "Dirty Mary,Crazy Larry" and "Legend of Hell House". All good efforts, so what happened here? My guess is that the script was so bad no director could have saved it and the studio took hold of it and maybe added scenes. The beginning scene makes me believe this. A beautiful blond girl is undressing in a garage restroom, kidnapped, then tortured to believe the whole Jack the Ripper story. The girl looks nothing like Patsy Kensit but its suppose to be her before plastic surgery! Obviously the scene was put in just to get a nude woman in the film. This film is suppose to be in the Providence, Rhode Island area but obviously its not. Some of the actors have a difficult time hiding their accents and where do you find an old castle in this country? Of course its England. The music sounds just like something from a "Friday the 13th" movie and it should. Harry Manfredini did a lot of those films and he did this one also. Not much happened to Patsy Kensit after appearing with Mel Gibson in the second "Lethal Weapon" film. She really shows nothing here except her name. Its sad to watch. The film is so routine that you have to wonder why anyone would bother? Its badly acted and the story is horribly told. It seemed to me that no one had any real reason to try and do something exceptional with the material. A tired effort by all.

This film starts very well for a B movie with a beautiful blondie nude scene. After she strips in the bathroom of a gas station she's kidnapped and tortured by a maniac. Then the movie jumps in time and shows Patsy Kensit playing the same character as the unknown blondie in the beginning (they explain that she made a plastic surgery, but most probably she didn't want to show her body off). She's a psycho woman in a mental institution who manages to escape with some nice kill shots. In the first 15 minutes we get nudity and some gory death scenes. After that the film becomes predictable and finally boring, very boring. The plot about Jack the ripper reincarnation is ridiculous. I suggest you watch the movie until the psycho girl escapes and then turn off the TV.