Candyman 2: el terror

They had to do it. They had to make a sequel to one of the greatest horror movies of the 90s. But it's always sad to see how much difference in quality there has to be. I have to say, as far as sequels of slasher movies go, this ain't that bad. It has good production values. But of course the great acting performances of the original are gone except for Tony Todd's, who is almost equally as good as he was in the original. But also gone are the great editing and photography, the gritty realistic feel of the original, the eerie and moody score of Philip Glass. Candyman just continues ripping people up with motives that are standard in slasher movies. The bees are involved more in the gory scenes, but are still underused.

Not half as good as the first movie. I haven't seen the third nor am i interested in doing so.

Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh is actually a good sequel to the successful original. This one goes more in-depth than the original as we find out how Candyman came about and we see how he was killed. The plot is somewhat similar to the original. Candyman has moved from the slums of Chicago to the streets of New Orleans, during Mardi Gras. A schoolteacher named Annie Tarrant, whose father was murdered "Candyman-style" a few years earlier, does not believe in Candyman and says his name 5 times into a mirror to prove to her students he doesn't exist. Wrong move Annie. Soon after she does this a series of brutal murders occur while Candyman seduces her to "Be with him". Lots of bees and blood in this good sequel!

If ever there was an underrated horror classic of the 90's that is unfairly looked over or even often looked down upon, it's the beautiful and haunting film "Candyman", inspired by the stories of famed author Clive Barker. The 1992 original is one of the few true classics to emerge from the genre in its decade of release, boasting moody visuals, clever writing, fantastic characters and a unique point-of-view with its leaning towards being a sort-of dark "urban" fable. It cleverly used African American culture, commentary on racism and social unease to its benefit, crafting a thoughtful and heinous story revolving around the urban legend of a devious figure that emerges should you call his name into a mirror five times. A figure with a hook for a hand that was birthed from the dreadful murder of the son of a slave... a man who had fallen in love with a white woman and was hunted down and tortured to death as a twisted form of retribution from the racist townsfolk that surrounded him.

It was in many ways a perfect horror film. It was filled to the brim with tragedy and heartbreak. Demented scares and horrific visuals. But also well-developed and well-rounded characters and strong visual storytelling. Even to this day, there are people who are too frightened to say the name "Candyman" into a mirror because of the fears that the film has left with them.

It should come with no surprise then, that a sequel was soon commissioned and delivered just three short years later. "Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh" is very much a highly entertaining and enjoyable sequel, building the lead villain into much more of a classic "boogeyman" figure and piling on the scares (and bodies) to new heights. With some good direction and the continued grand performance of the devilish Tony Todd as our antagonistic vengeful spirit, the film has a lot going for it. However, as is all too often the case with sequels, bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. And despite the fun that is certainly to be had with the concept and execution, it does unfortunately come at the cost of a developed story and thought-out characters. The original "Candyman" was horror as art. "Farewell to the Flesh" is horror as junk-food. Just satisfying enough to be worth a go now and then... but not as fulfilling or as high-quality as you'd probably prefer.

Set in New Orleans just before the city explodes with Mardi Gras fever, we follow schoolteacher Annie Tarrant (Kelly Rowan), a young woman whose life has been shattered by the myth of the "Candyman"- her father murdered in the fashion of the mythical killer and her brother accused of murdering academic Philip Purcell (Michael Culkin in a fun-but-short-lived reprisal of his character from the original), who had written a book based on the myth and the events of the first film. Trying to prove to herself that the urban legend of the Candyman cannot possibly be true, Annie inadvertently summons him forth, setting off a chain of events that will not only reveal his dreadful origins in shocking detail, but threaten to tear Annie's life apart, piece by piece.

The thing that really throws me for a loop with this particular follow-up is just how often it seems to both hit and miss the mark in each and every scene. Director Bill Condon is certainly adept when it comes to moody, stylish visuals, and he seems to be having a grand bit of fun behind the camera. And he often does help elevate sequences beyond the shaky writing, giving us plenty of scares and jumps that will keep the audience entertained throughout the proceedings. But it never quite amounts to much outside of being general movie "fluff." It's not substantial, it's just shallow entertainment. This is mostly because of the script courtesy Rand Ravich and Mark Kruger, which is so focused on bringing us blood by the bucketful that all sense of story and character is often lost in the rush to get to the next horror set-piece. And while I am perfectly fine with horror as entertainment and "fluff" (it'd be hypocritical for me to say otherwise, as I do like mindless entertainment quite a bit), the issue is that this is a sequel to a highly artistic and deliberate original. It feels like too much of a step backward.

Still, I can't say its not a fun ride to take. Those stylish visuals and constant attempts at scares make it a breezy watch. Tony Todd once again delivers the goods with his continued chilling presence and phenomenal performance as a tragic villain with a dark history. There's a lot of interesting things to explore with its setting in New Orleans during Mardi Gras. And it even occasionally does some really cool things with the concept. At its core, there's just enough going on here to make it well worth checking out. It may be a bit of a shallow retread of the much better original. But you'll have a blast watching it, and you won't regret giving it a shot.

I'm giving "Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh" a slightly above average 6 out of 10.

Personally, I loved the movie Candyman 2. I thought it was very well put together although most don't agree with me but that's OK. I mean, compared to the other two Candyman movies, this one definitely tops them off. The first one was hardcore blood and guts. It was DISGUSTING!! The third movie was so bad that I couldn't watch past 30 minutes of it. The second, I thought, had the best storyline of all of them. It was all around really good! Definitely my favorite movie of all times. The first movie wasn't too bad but that was, like i said, hardcore gore. I was pretty grossed out by the end and I'm really into slasher flicks, that should tell you something. I urge everyone to give this movie a chance. It had a great story (even though it was basically the same as the first movie, I think this one was way better as in location), great actors, great everything! The end was the best, very suspenseful. I thought it was all around great!

I think the original Candyman is a very good horror film and builds upon the mythos of such urban legends as "Bloody Mary" and so on and so forth. It didn't feature the best acting in the world but it was suitable and the atmosphere was very scary.

The sequel, "Candyman II: Farewell to the Flesh," is as most horror sequels typically are -- inferior and less scary. It's like "Halloween II," "Friday the 13th Part II" and "Psycho II": not as good as the original! Yet for what it is, "Candyman II" is quite entertaining, and still manages to remain rather atmospheric. The film takes place in New Orleans around the Mardi Gras and it's got some good scary segments. Some aren't so scary but are fun to watch. We know what's going to happen but it's still entertaining.

No this isn't expertly made but it isn't mind-numbingly bad as some of the genre are. Basically it's loads of blood but it also retains its creepy cinematography and the direction is better than expected.

Overall this kept me entertained, which is all I expected in the first place.