Fenómeno siniestro 2

I thoroughly enjoyed the first Grave Encounters. I think it's one of the best of the found footage movies I've ever seen. Granted, none of the actors were in danger of an Oscar nomination, but the characters were believable and got you involved in the story, the clichés were kept to a minimum, and most importantly, the atmosphere and the scares worked, and they held up to repeated viewings. Grave Encounters 2 should be renamed Grave Disappointment, imho. I spent the first twenty minutes having to double-check to make sure I had the right movie, and once the story actually got started, it seemed to me the movie couldn't make up its mind as to what it was trying to be. Parts of it felt like a spoof of the original, and parts felt like a shot-for-shot remake. There were blatant rip-offs of REC and Evil Dead 2, among others. The lead couldn't seem to make up his mind whether he was channeling Lance Preston's character from the first movie, or the kid from Terminator 2. The other characters were wooden or clichés, with a scream queen who made you want to scream every time she was in a scene. The one original element to the story line was another rip-off, this time of 1408. And the ending was absolutely pathetic, and unfortunately, strongly hinted at yet another travesty of a sequel.

I came to this film with very mixed feelings . GRAVE ENCOUNTERS wasn't only the best lost footage horror film I'd probably ever seen but also the best full length horror film I'd seen over the last few years and caused me to jump out of my seat several times . Any anticipation I had in looking forward to the sequel was tamed in the knowledge that the original directors The Vicious Brothers had been replaced by John Poliquin and on top of that lost footage film isn't a sub-genre that has much scope so decided to watch it with expectations rather low

Just as well because even in sequel terms CLOSE ENCOUNTERS 2 is a massive let down . What I found strange is the meta-fictional quality the way the film starts in which the original film is now a DVD movie unleashed upon the public . In other words it has now become a film within a film which isn't really what the original film was about . Is it post modernist in this approach ? Maybe but for a few seconds I honestly thought I wasn't watching GRAVE ENCOUNTERS 2 but rather a montage of youtube reviews of the original film which is bizarre to say the least . No doubt this was the makers intention but I don't really think this worked

The post modernism - or should that be post post modernism - continues well in to the first half of the film as we're introduced to a bunch of a film students who want to go and film at the location of the first movie and before we get there we have to endure lots of footage of the students own attempt to make horror movies . Again it doesn't come of very well and isn't nearly as clever as it thinks it is as characters knowlingly refer to other lost footage movies . It lacks the wit Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson could have brought to it and it tries a little too hard to to appear spontaneous and amateur , though that said it's a difficult thing to get right so I shouldn't judge too harshly . When we do get to the second half it's just more of the same with night vision , people splitting up , loud noises and jump scares . I don't know if it was because I saw GRAVE ENCOUNTERS recently but the scares and unearthly horrors seen here weren't as effective as they were in the original probably down me knowing what was coming next . It also probably illustrates that once you've seen one of these movies you've seen them all . In that case maybe I should be charitable and say this sequel isn't so much bad , just very predictable while the original is something of a standout

Not going to bore you, so let me be frank.

I really enjoyed it. Watch this film with no expectations in regards to the first and you will to. The problem is people expect way to much from these fairly low budget films. This film does its job, make you feel uneasy and some good scares. It makes me laugh when critics on here are like 'It was so boring, not scary at all, a waste of time' lol I bet you at some point in the movie they were like "s*&t!" lol.

Just stop trying so hard to hate and enjoy. I rate this a high 6/10, gave the first one 7/10.

Follow me on twitter and we can exchange film opinions and recommendations: FilmGeek89

This sequel takes everything that was decent about the first one and craps all over it.

Literally, it spends an hour and a half sucking itself off with the whole "The first movie was real!" nonsense. Plus, this time around, we've got weed-smoking college kids who laugh loud and scream even louder. The effects are better, but when all they do is show giant moronic zombies chasing after the camera with that clichéd distorted movement thing that made Kayako from The Grudge so creepy (but of course, it doesn't really work here), who cares? It's got the whole half-assed package of jump scares (complete with sudden loud noises edited into the footage) and none of the cleverness of the original (yes, the original at least had SOME clever ideas and stuff, but not that much). The movie is a chore to sit through, and you'll probably find yourself constantly checking the runtime to see how much longer you have to wait for the credits.

Give it a pass, or just watch the first one again. Or not. I guess it all depends on how productive you'd like to be during a quiet afternoon.

I think the fact it's a sequel really hurt the movie, but then again the movie wouldn't exist without the first one. First off you must know going into this I knew what to expect, a "found footage" horror film sequel. Though I enjoy both types of movie those two combined just doesn't sound too great (except REC1 and REC2.. REC3 was an abomination). I got what I expected and was alright with it.

The Bad: Normally movies in this category if not always have acting rated a C (normal) which is fine. I'll give the acting here a C-, it wasn't on par but not bad enough to make the movie experience dreadful The plot really struggled to connect with the first movie, and the movie's own plot was good but poorly executed. The characters were not likable and showed no growth but I think I could say that for every 'found footage' film. Some of the scares were the same from the first movie which took away from the surprise factor. I could foresee a lot of what was going to happen just based of the first movie but I guess when you're basically recreating the same film that happens. The characters make stupid choices which always bothers me though

The Good: It wasn't terrible? Some of the scares were creepy nothing to dramatic. In the end I got what I expected, an alright found footage film and a probably 'worse than the first' sequel.

Conclusion: If you're bored yeah I'd suggest it.

Who should watch it: Grave Encounters Fan? Sure. Found footage fans? Sure. Horror fans? Maybe. None of the above? No.