🔗 Share this article

Coming as the re-activated Stephen King machine was continuing to produce adaptations, quality be damned, the first installment felt like a lazy fanboy tribute. With its 1970s small town setting, high school cast, telepathic children and twisted community predator, it was close to pastiche and, similar to the poorest King’s stories, it was also clumsily packed.

Funnily enough the inspiration originated from inside the family home, as it was inspired by a compact narrative from King’s son Joe Hill, expanded into a film that was a unexpected blockbuster. It was the story of the Grabber, a brutal murderer of adolescents who would enjoy extending the process of killing. While sexual abuse was never mentioned, there was something inescapably queer-coded about the villain and the era-specific anxieties he was clearly supposed to refer to, emphasized by Ethan Hawke playing him with a distinctly flamboyant manner. But the film was too vague to ever properly acknowledge this and even aside from that tension, it was too busily plotted and overly enamored with its exhaustingly grubby nastiness to work as only an undiscerning sleepover nightmare fuel.

Second Installment's Release Amidst Production Company Challenges

The follow-up debuts as once-dominant genre specialists Blumhouse are in critical demand for a hit. Lately they've encountered difficulties to make any film profitable, from their werewolf film to The Woman in the Yard to their action film to the complete commercial failure of the AI sequel, and so much depends on whether the continuation can prove whether a brief narrative can become a movie that can spawn a franchise. There’s just one slight problem …

Ghostly Evolution

The initial movie finished with our surviving character Finn (the young actor) eliminating the villain, helped and guided by the apparitions of earlier casualties. This has compelled director Scott Derrickson and his writing partner Cargill to advance the story and its villain in a different direction, turning a flesh and blood villain into a paranormal entity, a direction that guides them by way of Freddy's domain with an ability to cross back into the real world facilitated by dreams. But in contrast to the dream killer, the villain is noticeably uncreative and entirely devoid of humour. The mask remains appropriately unsettling but the film struggles to make him as frightening as he momentarily appeared in the initial film, limited by convoluted and often confusing rules.

Mountain Retreat Location

Finn and his frustratingly crude sister Gwen (the actress) confront him anew while snowed in at a high-altitude faith-based facility for kids, the sequel also nodding regarding the hockey mask killer the Friday the 13th antagonist. The sister is directed there by an apparition of her deceased parent and potentially their deceased villain's initial casualties while Finn, still trying to handle his fury and newfound ability to fight back, is following so he can protect her. The screenplay is excessively awkward in its forced establishment, awkwardly requiring to maroon the main characters at a location that will additionally provide to backstories for both hero and villain, supplying particulars we weren't particularly interested in or want to know about. In what also feels like a more deliberate action to push the movie towards the same church-attending crowds that transformed the Conjuring movies into major blockbusters, Derrickson adds a religious element, with morality now more strongly connected with the creator and the afterlife while villainy signifies Satan and damnation, belief the supreme tool against this type of antagonist.

Overcomplicated Story

What all of this does is continued over-burden a story that was formerly close to toppling over, including superfluous difficulties to what should be a basic scary film. Frequently I discovered overly occupied with inquiries about the methods and reasons of what could or couldn’t happen to experience genuine engagement. It’s a low-lift effort for the performer, whose face we never really see but he maintains real screen magnetism that’s generally absent in other areas in the acting team. The location is at times impressively atmospheric but the bulk of the continuously non-terrifying sequences are marred by a rough cinematic quality to distinguish dreaming from waking, an poor directorial selection that feels too self-aware and created to imitate the frightening randomness of living through a genuine night terror.

Weak Continuation Rationale

At just under 2 hours, the follow-up, comparable to earlier failures, is a excessively extended and hugely unconvincing case for the creation of a new franchise. When it calls again, I recommend not answering.

• The sequel is out in Australian cinemas on 16 October and in the US and UK on October 17