Well maybe some did. And I guess the first one was succesful enough for them to get a higher budget for this one. Which lead to getting Debbie Rochon to be the star name (as opposed to John Dugan from the first one). Minute wise she might be in this a bit longer than John was, but I could be wrong. Time loses its meaning when watching something as horrible as this.
And this is not meant as a compliment necessarily. Though through the bigger budget I'd argue it is slightly "better" than the first one. Still as much rape, blood, guts and mayhem as the other one. Story wise this continues the story of the first one. "Acting" wise it may in some cases be able to better the first one, but it was almost impossible to go lower ... then again, you never know until you know now do you? Anyway, not recommendable at all imho
And this is not meant as a compliment necessarily. Though through the bigger budget I'd argue it is slightly "better" than the first one. Still as much rape, blood, guts and mayhem as the other one. Story wise this continues the story of the first one. "Acting" wise it may in some cases be able to better the first one, but it was almost impossible to go lower ... then again, you never know until you know now do you? Anyway, not recommendable at all imho