Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Merolliv I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

Tobias Burrows It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Kayden This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

capkronos In 1988, David DeCoteau directed SORORITY BABES IN THE SLIMEBALL BOWL-O- RAMA, a cheesy horror-comedy about sorority girls and nerds facing off against an evil wish-granting imp in a bowling alley. Though not what most would consider a genre classic, it went on to a minor cult following thanks primarily to its memorable title plus the fact it was a reasonably fun B-movie with enthusiastic actors, lots of nudity, lots of bad jokes, a cheesy-looking monster and pretty solid production values. Though it was not exactly clamoring for a sequel, DeCoteau himself made NIGHTMARE SISTERS (1988), another college horror-comedy heavy on the T&A and featuring the same three female stars, as a companion piece. He should have just stopped right there. Unfortunately, he did not and decided to throw a little money at Kansas City filmmaker Todd Sheets so he could make this unofficial "sequel." While the budget of "Slimeball" was a modest but sufficient 90 thousand dollars (enough to afford professional film equipment), I'd be surprised if the budget of this one exceeded 90 dollars (enough to purchase blank VHS tapes to feed into the camcorder it was shot with).Our leads are a hideous group of college girl eyesores with fried hair, dumpy bodies and the ugliest clothes the 80s had to offer who decide to open their own sorority house after being rejected from "The Felta Deltas." They paint, clean, dance, play Twister and pinball and talk about throwing a housewarming party for the opening of their new house. Suddenly, something strange and unusual happens... and I'm not talking about the incident during a séance where a crystal ball spits out smoke that knocks all of the girls unconscious. I'm talking about the fact the director completely forgets about the plot he just set up. Without warning, the girls all suddenly become sorority PLEDGES still trying to get into that snobby house with no mention of the sorority house they'd just opened. None of this makes a lick of sense and all seems like it was made up as they go along, probably because it WAS.After the smoke clears, so to speak, one of the girls becomes "sexy" and starts acting weird. As part of an initiation rite, five of the girls are forced to go spend the night in a reputedly haunted building where possessed girl pulls out her eyeballs and then puts them back in and then kills a couple of guys who happen to be there admiring their "garbonzas." Characters walk around the building in scenes that never seem to end and are so poorly lit you can't tell what's even going on. The possessed girl then chases the survivors back into town to a bar and the elderly couple who accidentally sold them the crystal ball show up to perform a lame exorcism. The old guy also informs them that the crystal had previously been used by a witch who "conjured up an exorcism" with it. Say whaaa? There's no blood, no gore, no nudity, no special effects and no entertainment value to speak of to any of this except to laugh at how cheap and amateurish the whole thing is. Most disappointingly, there's not even a damn "Dance-A-Thon" like the title promises!The best part of this movie happens when the whole thing is over and the hilariously obnoxious end credits roll. There's a special "No Thanks" to "the K.C. Film Commission," "the close-minded folks here in K.C." and "anyone who thinks we make porno films." And then a "Big Rot in Hell" section for "Jack Valenti and the Nazi lovers at the M.P.A.A., all fat, lying abusive ministers who accuse us of being porno makers." That is followed by what is pretty much an insult to anyone who just wasted their time viewing this worthless tape ("Turn the damned thing off... don't you have any better things to do?") The copyright say 1994, but this thing was clearly filmed sometime before that. Everything about it screams the 80s.A few more notes: The "technical specs" for this movie currently claim it was filmed on 35mm (they wish!). It also doesn't run 75 minutes, but just 69 and that's including the VERY slow-moving end credits.

dkellough Abominable--and not in a good way.Bad lighting, bad sound, bad editing, bad acting, bad locations, bad set dressing, bad props (including a homemade Twister game), bad dancing, bad hair, and an unappealing cast are just the beginning. The plot is a poorly realized blend of ideas from other, better horror films and lots of chasing.Too boring to even be fun as a bad movie.

aaronzombie In name only sequel to David DeCoteau's "Sorority Babes in the Slimeball Bowl-O-Rama," is pretty entertaining, but isn't quite as fun as the first. Also, if you thought the first was low budget, this one looks like a $5 budget movie that was shot with a camcorder. That doesn't mean it isn't fun to watch though.!!!POSSIBLE SPOILER OR 2!!!After releasing an evil spirit from a crystal ball, a group of sorority sisters are told they must spend the night in an abandoned college if they want to become a real sorority. One of them gets possessed by the spirit they released and one by one they die. Only 2 antique dealers can save them.Entertaining, o.k. acting, a cool music score, and the college setting is pretty spooky, but the polt is awful, and the very beginning of the film has absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the film. **1/2 out of *****.