CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.7/10
113 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Tras sufrir lo que creen que han varios intentos de robo, una familia instala cámaras de vigilancia en su hogar y descubre que los eventos son aún más siniestros de lo que aparentan.Tras sufrir lo que creen que han varios intentos de robo, una familia instala cámaras de vigilancia en su hogar y descubre que los eventos son aún más siniestros de lo que aparentan.Tras sufrir lo que creen que han varios intentos de robo, una familia instala cámaras de vigilancia en su hogar y descubre que los eventos son aún más siniestros de lo que aparentan.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 1 premio ganado y 2 nominaciones en total
Opiniones destacadas
I love a good horror story, and the premise behind this is a good one- that the sins of the "Father" may be paid for by the "Son." There are strange occurrences in the household, including the house being trashed during a supposed break in. This prompts the installation of video cameras with recorders to record events in and outside of the house. The daughter stumbles across something on the internet suggesting that there may be a demon in the house. This is seconded by the nanny, who senses an evil presence. Sounds like a kind of scary premise, right? Well, that's about it- the premise is never developed. While We learn that the mother and her sister experienced "Disturbances" when they were growing up- we never learn what was the nature of them, only that they do not talk about them. We never learn if there was an ancestor that made a "Deal with the devil," it is brought up and suggested and the movie fleshed out with that premise just accepted. However, it is never explored in any way- and that really makes the plot WEAK.
I know it will seem a cheap shot but I will make it anyway- on the cast listing on IMDD the camera installer man is listed at the top. He gave perhaps the most solid performance of any of the actors and actresses, so perhaps it was meant that way.
Three stars is my rating- a good premise developed with a weak plot and mediocre acting only goes so far. The sad part is that this could have been so good, and so frightening. My gut tells me, like other reviewers have mentioned, that this was a rush job to capitalize on the first movie, and not an attempt at a good, memorable movie- as it is not.
I know it will seem a cheap shot but I will make it anyway- on the cast listing on IMDD the camera installer man is listed at the top. He gave perhaps the most solid performance of any of the actors and actresses, so perhaps it was meant that way.
Three stars is my rating- a good premise developed with a weak plot and mediocre acting only goes so far. The sad part is that this could have been so good, and so frightening. My gut tells me, like other reviewers have mentioned, that this was a rush job to capitalize on the first movie, and not an attempt at a good, memorable movie- as it is not.
After experiencing what they think are a series of "break-ins", a family sets up security cameras around their home, only to realize that the events unfolding before them are more sinister than they seem.
When Paramount announced that they were going to do a sequel to PA, I was skeptical. Let's be honest, it felt like they were trying to cash in on the surprising success of PA. Then the trailers were released, which weren't really special, and the film wasn't screened to the critics. Either Paramount was trying to keep a tight lid on it or it must be a really, really bad sequel. I mean, the only person in the casting list is Katie Featherston, who plays Katie, which is still pretty vague. Fortunately, PA2 is actually a worthwhile sequel that retains everything that made the original scary.
With a much higher budget, PA2 boasts a bigger cast and has more elaborate scares and security cameras to capture the events. But, as you all know, bigger sometimes isn't better, and, in this case, it's true. What made PA so great was its amazing simplicity. The scares were limited to doors creaking, lights flickering, and footsteps thumping. In this film, I'm not going to even mention what they do. However, saying that, the film does have some very scary scenes, even more so than the simple scares in the original. It's apparent while watching the film that PA2 relies more on jump scares than on maintaining an atmosphere like PA, which may be good or bad news depending on which you prefer more. However, the film still retains the slow buildup of scares in PA as the film reaches to the end, where all hell breaks loose. It's also agonizing to see things move on their own that our characters don't notice. Don't you just hate that feeling of dread?
Most of the cast do a great job because they are more innocent than the victims in the first film, including a baby and a dog. Please, just spare the baby and the dog! I'm also glad to say that the climax is much better than the one in the first film, if you could even call it a climax in that film. However, the sequel does have the same main problem of PA: The ending. It's just as anti-climatic and disappointing coming off from a huge buildup.
If you didn't like the first film, just skip this sequel. It's more of the same in terms of structure and style. However, if you liked the first film, you'll definitely enjoy this. I thought the storyline was rather clever in that it ties in with PA. Overall, even though this isn't as scary as PA, PA2 should be an example of how to make a proper sequel to a great first film which stays true to the original's overall tone. And considering the fact that we are familiar of the set up before, PA2 still has its own share of effective scares. Now that's an accomplishment.
When Paramount announced that they were going to do a sequel to PA, I was skeptical. Let's be honest, it felt like they were trying to cash in on the surprising success of PA. Then the trailers were released, which weren't really special, and the film wasn't screened to the critics. Either Paramount was trying to keep a tight lid on it or it must be a really, really bad sequel. I mean, the only person in the casting list is Katie Featherston, who plays Katie, which is still pretty vague. Fortunately, PA2 is actually a worthwhile sequel that retains everything that made the original scary.
With a much higher budget, PA2 boasts a bigger cast and has more elaborate scares and security cameras to capture the events. But, as you all know, bigger sometimes isn't better, and, in this case, it's true. What made PA so great was its amazing simplicity. The scares were limited to doors creaking, lights flickering, and footsteps thumping. In this film, I'm not going to even mention what they do. However, saying that, the film does have some very scary scenes, even more so than the simple scares in the original. It's apparent while watching the film that PA2 relies more on jump scares than on maintaining an atmosphere like PA, which may be good or bad news depending on which you prefer more. However, the film still retains the slow buildup of scares in PA as the film reaches to the end, where all hell breaks loose. It's also agonizing to see things move on their own that our characters don't notice. Don't you just hate that feeling of dread?
Most of the cast do a great job because they are more innocent than the victims in the first film, including a baby and a dog. Please, just spare the baby and the dog! I'm also glad to say that the climax is much better than the one in the first film, if you could even call it a climax in that film. However, the sequel does have the same main problem of PA: The ending. It's just as anti-climatic and disappointing coming off from a huge buildup.
If you didn't like the first film, just skip this sequel. It's more of the same in terms of structure and style. However, if you liked the first film, you'll definitely enjoy this. I thought the storyline was rather clever in that it ties in with PA. Overall, even though this isn't as scary as PA, PA2 should be an example of how to make a proper sequel to a great first film which stays true to the original's overall tone. And considering the fact that we are familiar of the set up before, PA2 still has its own share of effective scares. Now that's an accomplishment.
8fmc3
If you liked the original Paranormal Activity, you'll like this one. Myself, I was not really that impressed with the original, and I liked this one quite a bit better. The mood and creepiness was pretty intense at times.
It is NOT just a remake of the original movie, as some would have you think. Yes, it uses that format, and follows it pretty closely, but does it better and takes it a few steps farther. Just because it uses the same format doesn't mean it is the same movie. That is like saying all 'Cop' movies or all 'Buddy Pictures' are the same, just because they also follow the same format.
If you saw the first movie, you will recognize everything that is happening here, but that doesn't decrease the sense of dread and hair-raising-on-the-back-of-your-neck scariness. Instead, I think it will increase your enjoyment as you watch things develop. Talk about things that go 'bump in the night!' And sometimes in the daytime, too! I thought this movie was more intense than the original, and it helps to put the original into a context, and makes more sense out of it all.
Is it a perfect movie? No, but show me a perfect movie. They all could be better in SOME way, and this is no exception, but I think it is a pretty darn good movie, and worth the time.
Oh, I should also tell you kind of "Where I'm coming from." I LOVE a good horror movie. I LIKE to be scared. But I hate slasher, torture, vicious movies or movies that get too overt about hurting people. Give us something we can feel, something we are afraid of, but don't make us sick. I think Paranormal Activity 2 is just my kind of horror movie.
It is NOT just a remake of the original movie, as some would have you think. Yes, it uses that format, and follows it pretty closely, but does it better and takes it a few steps farther. Just because it uses the same format doesn't mean it is the same movie. That is like saying all 'Cop' movies or all 'Buddy Pictures' are the same, just because they also follow the same format.
If you saw the first movie, you will recognize everything that is happening here, but that doesn't decrease the sense of dread and hair-raising-on-the-back-of-your-neck scariness. Instead, I think it will increase your enjoyment as you watch things develop. Talk about things that go 'bump in the night!' And sometimes in the daytime, too! I thought this movie was more intense than the original, and it helps to put the original into a context, and makes more sense out of it all.
Is it a perfect movie? No, but show me a perfect movie. They all could be better in SOME way, and this is no exception, but I think it is a pretty darn good movie, and worth the time.
Oh, I should also tell you kind of "Where I'm coming from." I LOVE a good horror movie. I LIKE to be scared. But I hate slasher, torture, vicious movies or movies that get too overt about hurting people. Give us something we can feel, something we are afraid of, but don't make us sick. I think Paranormal Activity 2 is just my kind of horror movie.
As a longtime horror aficionado, and huge fan of the first film, I was looking forward to seeing this. I just did. I wish I hadn't. This is not a patch on the original. Its not even a true sequel, as the credits state it is "inspired by the motion picture, Paranormal Activity"!
It's slow, terribly-clichéd and -- as a long-time horror fan of all kinds of horror films, especially the psychological ones -- not very scary. The film takes forever to get into, has very few scares, is highly unrealistic (thus ruining the whole "found footage" feel) and nosedives into tired Hollywood scare tactics towards the end, with screeching sound design and people diving at the camera.
Very, very disappointing.
It's slow, terribly-clichéd and -- as a long-time horror fan of all kinds of horror films, especially the psychological ones -- not very scary. The film takes forever to get into, has very few scares, is highly unrealistic (thus ruining the whole "found footage" feel) and nosedives into tired Hollywood scare tactics towards the end, with screeching sound design and people diving at the camera.
Very, very disappointing.
Six months before Katie and Micah are terrorised by a demonic force in their own home (as documented in Paranormal Activity), Katie's sister Kristi (Sprague Grayden) and her family suffer from a series of similar terrifying supernatural occurrences that appear to be focused around toddler Hunter.
Having recently watched the first Paranormal Activity, I was keen to discover what new tricks the film-makers had devised to ensure that the prequel remained fresh and unpredictable. In short: they hadn't! With the exception of some preposterous exposition in an effort to link the plot of Paranormal Activity 2 with events in the original, the format of this film is virtually identical to the first, only a lot more monotonous.
Once again, the action consists of spliced together video footage, primarily from the series of security cameras installed in Kristi's luxurious home after an apparent break in, but also from the hand-held camera belonging to her teenage stepdaughter Ali (Molly Ephraim). As the supernatural events escalate, Ali desperately tries to convince her sceptical father Daniel (Brian Boland) that something is terribly wrong in their home (apart from the fact that the parents let an Alsation sleep in the baby's room and haven't installed stair gates!).
For much of the time Paranormal Activity 2 feels like the cinematic equivalent of a Where's Wally book, only instead of wasting time searching for a bespectacled man in a stripy outfit, the idea is to try and spot almost imperceptible movement in an otherwise seemingly static environment, the most likely result of which will be eye-strain rather than abject terror.
After much unspectacular supernatural malarkey, the malevolent demon finally musters up the energy to make more than a baby's mobile rotate slowly or a saucepan fall off a hook and delivers some genuinely effective scares (accompanied by very loud noises to wake up those who might have dozed off), but when all is said and done, this second movie is far too similar to its predecessor to be considered a worthwhile follow-up.
4.5 out of 10, rounded up to 5 for IMDb.
Having recently watched the first Paranormal Activity, I was keen to discover what new tricks the film-makers had devised to ensure that the prequel remained fresh and unpredictable. In short: they hadn't! With the exception of some preposterous exposition in an effort to link the plot of Paranormal Activity 2 with events in the original, the format of this film is virtually identical to the first, only a lot more monotonous.
Once again, the action consists of spliced together video footage, primarily from the series of security cameras installed in Kristi's luxurious home after an apparent break in, but also from the hand-held camera belonging to her teenage stepdaughter Ali (Molly Ephraim). As the supernatural events escalate, Ali desperately tries to convince her sceptical father Daniel (Brian Boland) that something is terribly wrong in their home (apart from the fact that the parents let an Alsation sleep in the baby's room and haven't installed stair gates!).
For much of the time Paranormal Activity 2 feels like the cinematic equivalent of a Where's Wally book, only instead of wasting time searching for a bespectacled man in a stripy outfit, the idea is to try and spot almost imperceptible movement in an otherwise seemingly static environment, the most likely result of which will be eye-strain rather than abject terror.
After much unspectacular supernatural malarkey, the malevolent demon finally musters up the energy to make more than a baby's mobile rotate slowly or a saucepan fall off a hook and delivers some genuinely effective scares (accompanied by very loud noises to wake up those who might have dozed off), but when all is said and done, this second movie is far too similar to its predecessor to be considered a worthwhile follow-up.
4.5 out of 10, rounded up to 5 for IMDb.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaUpon release, this broke the record for the biggest midnight gross of an R-rated movie with $6.3 million, and the biggest opening for a horror movie of all time, earning a total of $41,500,000 in its opening weekend.
- ErroresDuring the first 17 nights or so, you can see two things that never change/move. A white cup in the kitchen in front of the fruit plate and the pillow arrangement on the sofa. Clearly a lot of different night scenes were shot in the same night.
- Citas
[last lines]
Kristi Rey: Daniel, is that you? Katie?
- Créditos curiososSound effects from the film play over the end credits.
- Versiones alternativasAn Unrated Director's Cut on Blu-ray/DVD Combo with six extra minutes.
- ConexionesEdited into Paranormal Activity: The Chronology (2012)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idiomas
- También se conoce como
- Paranormal Activity 2
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 3,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 84,752,907
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 40,678,424
- 24 oct 2010
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 177,512,032
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 1h 31min(91 min)
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta