Please don't spend money on this.

Perfectly adorable

Boring, over-political, tech fuzed mess

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

The first Ginger Snaps sequel—Unleashed—didn't feature much of Ginger (the lovely Katherine Isabelle) but made up for her absence somewhat by being wonderfully weird, with an off-beat atmosphere, bizarre characters, surprising hallucinatory scenes, and an unusual industrial soundtrack.Isabelle fans will be happy to hear that Ginger plays a much bigger part in Ginger Snaps Back: The Beginning; unfortunately, the film itself is far less entertaining—a dark, somber, and ultimately rather boring tale set in the wild west, where two sisters, Ginger and Brigitte (Isabelle and Emily Perkins), survivors of a ship wreck, stumble across a woodland fort inhabited by a group of men under regular siege by werewolves.The majority of the film revolves around the distrust and mounting tension between characters, and Ginger's gradual transformation after she is bitten by a wolf-boy, the afflicted son of one of the fort's occupants. This is told in a dreary, lifeless fashion by director Grant Harvey—who is clearly more interested in presenting artistic images than in telling a riveting story.While the use of the same characters in a different time period and setting is undeniably unique, it is inadequately explained, which proves frustrating, and although the film does deliver some decent werewolf action in the final act, it's not nearly enough to compensate for the drab nonsense that has gone before, which is complete with trite mystical Native American mumbo jumbo for good measure. On the plus side, Perkins, who has spent the last two films being sullen, is finally allowed to show us how attractive she can be.

I have seen all Ginger Snaps films and aparrently this one is by far the worst.The ending of the second one reaches a point where I want to know "WHAT HAPPENS TO BRIDGETTE!!!" but instead what I get is some movie set a few hundred years before the first one even happened.As far as acting goes - Emily Perkins and Katherine Issabelle are very good - very underrated Canadian actresses, but the rest of the cast do decent jobs at best. (the worst performance being the person who played the old Indian woman - I am not even going to look her up).As far as Werewolf design goes this is very good, it is very believable - that is however as far as things go here.Watch #1 - Watch #2 then make up your own third entry - it will be better than this.

Always seems strange and so amazing to me that cheap sequels which got shot back-to-back can be so totally different in style and tone, as well as quality. This movie got shot along with its other sequel "Ginger Snaps: Unleashed", which also wasn't a great movie but it at least was still one that took on the same approach as the first original movie, while this movie seems to be an entirely different one on its own, which just happen to feature the same two main characters of the other two movies.Yes, so I understand this movie is meant as a prequel to the first two movies but that doesn't really explain why it features the same two main characters, even though the movie is being set almost 200 years before the events of the first movie. Seemed to me that somebody had seen "Ravenous" and decided that their next Ginger Snaps movie should be just like it. Big difference however is that "Ravenous" is a great and also original movie, that works well, while "Ginger Snaps Back: The Beginning" just isn't.The first two movies were still being somewhat 'clever' and original with its metaphors and approach to its themes, while this movie seems to be written as a straight-forward werewolf. And not even a very good or exciting one. The movie has a few too many slow moments and its story just really doesn't seem to head anywhere. After a while I wasn't even following anymore what it was all about since it got told in such a boring and uninteresting way. I just couldn't understand any of the character's motivations and it didn't helped very much that the dialog in this movie was incredibly bad and annoying, which also made the acting seem bad.I also just hated it how all of the characters were handling the whole situation. It was incredibly annoying how people in the fort were being dark and mysterious about the whole situation and talking without saying anything, while you as the viewer already know what is going on and quite frankly there is no real reason for the refugees to not just be straight-forward with the truth toward the Fitzgerald-sisters. It would had saved everybody so much trouble.The Fitzgerald-sisters always had been some strong female characters, while in this movie they are mostly just being girls. All they seem to do is looking big eyed, with their mouths open and breathing heavily, being scared all the time of everything and everyone. So suddenly they aren't the compelling strong female leads anymore, which I think, should be the most disappointing aspect for the fans of this movie-series.The movie is good looking, nevertheless and also has some nice make-up effects in it, though they get used far too little. It's because there is hardly anything ever happening in the movie and when it does, it's too dark or you have already started to loose interest in things, so it can't safe this movie from mediocrity.Not really worth watching in my opinion.5/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

The original "Ginger Snaps" was a fun, affecting coming-of-age tale disguised as a werewolf movie that introduced us to Ginger (Katharine Isabelle) and Brigitte (Emily Perkins), two of the most endearing horror heroines in recent memory. "Ginger Snaps Back"--a prequel of sorts--takes a decidedly different route from its predecessor, transposing the Fitzgerald sisters from the present day to a 19th Century Civil War base, where it turns out The Curse is alive and well. I have to give the filmmakers credit--as opposed to slavishly sequelizing the first film for a quick buck, writers Christina Ray and Stephen Massicotte and director Grant Harvey have revamped the original "Ginger Snaps" mythos into a mostly successful period piece. "Back" is beautifully photographed, with excellent sets and costumes; the inhabitants of the base (including a general hiding a deformed son) are clichéd, yet ultimately well-drawn; and the undercurrent of themes--from serious Indian spiritualism to the importance of family to the dangers of fundamentalism (among others) are subtly incorporated. While the film's anachronistic feel threw me for a loop, the well-intentioned performances (sans any self-referential irony) kept me watching...above all, Isabelle and Perkins display the same sisterly devotion that gave the first "Ginger Snaps" its humor and heart--there is an undeniable power to their on-screen interaction that sustains "Back" for its duration.