Paranormal Activity 2
- 2010
- Tous publics
- 1h 31min
NOTE IMDb
5,7/10
113 k
MA NOTE
Après avoir vécu ce qu'ils pensent être une série « de cambriolages», une famille installe des caméras de sécurité autour de leur maison, pour se rendre compte que les événements qui se déro... Tout lireAprès avoir vécu ce qu'ils pensent être une série « de cambriolages», une famille installe des caméras de sécurité autour de leur maison, pour se rendre compte que les événements qui se déroulent devant eux sont plus sinistres qu'il n'y paraît.Après avoir vécu ce qu'ils pensent être une série « de cambriolages», une famille installe des caméras de sécurité autour de leur maison, pour se rendre compte que les événements qui se déroulent devant eux sont plus sinistres qu'il n'y paraît.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire et 2 nominations au total
Avis à la une
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.
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.
One profitable turn deserves another. I believe almost everyone will have balked at the return of investment for the first Paranormal Activity (PA) film, which continues to build upon the recent trend of films seen from the first person perspective by way of a video camera. So confident about the prospects of this film being able to spawn an ongoing franchise (hey, Saw managed 7) that Paranormal Activity 2 was announced shortly after the first film was released into cinemas.
So let's cut to the chase and get to the point - is this film any good? I continue to state that films like this one are an acquired taste. If you do not appreciate films from the first perspective, or are constantly annoyed at plot loopholes that stem from the use of a camera, then this film is not for you, as with any other film of any genre employing the same storytelling technique. Otherwise this is a film that requires you to have watched the first in order to maximize your enjoyment because it makes references to, and ties in intricately with the first, without which you'll be questioning who's who, and the significance of things that can be innocuous if seen by itself.
Writer-director Oren Peli who created the original film takes a backseat here as producer, handing over the directing reins to Tod Williams and writing responsibility to Michael R. Perry. While the first film focused on only one camera with most things happening when the audience is fixated as bedroom voyeurs, here we have more cameras thanks to the introduction of a baby and a series of house break-ins, which give reason for more vantage points to be set up by way of strategically located CCTV and nanny cams, and thus a larger stage set up with various situations to spook, but not quite. Filmmakers can attest to difficulties when it comes to handling either animals or children in films, but Williams prove that both can share the same frame together, and I suspect a lot must have gone into coaxing what the end result was, perhaps with a little help from the CG department.
Michael R. Perry's story though sums up this prequel-sequel (sprequel?) nicely, building upon and expanding the world of PA. The first film posed a number of questions, some of which get addressed here, but in turn builds upon what's known thus far to create more unknowns through the narrative, which is more "talky" since there are a handful of scenes involving a HD camera bought by the family to document baby Hunter's growth, now used to document the strange apparitions that happen more frequently as the story wore on. Some scenes involve switching the camera on during a conversation (yeah, perhaps the social-media aware teenager of today will require everything to be made available and put online), and the constant refusal of the father figure to look at evidence will stretch believability just a tad bit
The spook factor gets considerably dumbed down from the first film, though making the same impact as the filmmakers went all out to shock you out of complacency as you think by darting your eyes around the screen trying to pick up clues or signs would mean you can keep a step ahead. Some tactics like the moving door get repeated, but only so because as I mentioned, there's an intricate link between the two films. Here we follow the Dey family of four - Dad Daniel, Mum Kristi who is the sister of the first film's Katie, and kids Ali the teenager and Hunter the toddler, where Perry's story provides the backstory, some opening doors for another prequel, while providing closure from PA.
Will there be another Paranormal Activity film? I don't see why not, since the seeds already got sown with more fruits to be harvested by future filmmakers who may want to come on board and stem their mark in providing a fresh perspective to the now mature storytelling technique. If the basis of the film continues to be that of putting oneself into the shoes of an investigator (as how I will approach this) sieving through tons of archived material just to piece together and reverse engineer the source of all that have happened, PA will grow its own fanbase (if not already) and probably develop into a franchise to be reckoned with.
So let's cut to the chase and get to the point - is this film any good? I continue to state that films like this one are an acquired taste. If you do not appreciate films from the first perspective, or are constantly annoyed at plot loopholes that stem from the use of a camera, then this film is not for you, as with any other film of any genre employing the same storytelling technique. Otherwise this is a film that requires you to have watched the first in order to maximize your enjoyment because it makes references to, and ties in intricately with the first, without which you'll be questioning who's who, and the significance of things that can be innocuous if seen by itself.
Writer-director Oren Peli who created the original film takes a backseat here as producer, handing over the directing reins to Tod Williams and writing responsibility to Michael R. Perry. While the first film focused on only one camera with most things happening when the audience is fixated as bedroom voyeurs, here we have more cameras thanks to the introduction of a baby and a series of house break-ins, which give reason for more vantage points to be set up by way of strategically located CCTV and nanny cams, and thus a larger stage set up with various situations to spook, but not quite. Filmmakers can attest to difficulties when it comes to handling either animals or children in films, but Williams prove that both can share the same frame together, and I suspect a lot must have gone into coaxing what the end result was, perhaps with a little help from the CG department.
Michael R. Perry's story though sums up this prequel-sequel (sprequel?) nicely, building upon and expanding the world of PA. The first film posed a number of questions, some of which get addressed here, but in turn builds upon what's known thus far to create more unknowns through the narrative, which is more "talky" since there are a handful of scenes involving a HD camera bought by the family to document baby Hunter's growth, now used to document the strange apparitions that happen more frequently as the story wore on. Some scenes involve switching the camera on during a conversation (yeah, perhaps the social-media aware teenager of today will require everything to be made available and put online), and the constant refusal of the father figure to look at evidence will stretch believability just a tad bit
The spook factor gets considerably dumbed down from the first film, though making the same impact as the filmmakers went all out to shock you out of complacency as you think by darting your eyes around the screen trying to pick up clues or signs would mean you can keep a step ahead. Some tactics like the moving door get repeated, but only so because as I mentioned, there's an intricate link between the two films. Here we follow the Dey family of four - Dad Daniel, Mum Kristi who is the sister of the first film's Katie, and kids Ali the teenager and Hunter the toddler, where Perry's story provides the backstory, some opening doors for another prequel, while providing closure from PA.
Will there be another Paranormal Activity film? I don't see why not, since the seeds already got sown with more fruits to be harvested by future filmmakers who may want to come on board and stem their mark in providing a fresh perspective to the now mature storytelling technique. If the basis of the film continues to be that of putting oneself into the shoes of an investigator (as how I will approach this) sieving through tons of archived material just to piece together and reverse engineer the source of all that have happened, PA will grow its own fanbase (if not already) and probably develop into a franchise to be reckoned with.
The audience jumped, and begged for it to be less scary. A really fun night out that must be seen in a cinema, otherwise you're just a big scaredy-cat.
I purposely avoided trailers for this because I didn't want any of the story spoiled and I can safely say I wasn't disappointed. Top notch acting, especially the younger sister - I hope we see more of her on the big screen in future.
The original is better but this is a class act too and some very spooky moments.
One scare in particular is worth the ticket price alone.
Go see it!
I purposely avoided trailers for this because I didn't want any of the story spoiled and I can safely say I wasn't disappointed. Top notch acting, especially the younger sister - I hope we see more of her on the big screen in future.
The original is better but this is a class act too and some very spooky moments.
One scare in particular is worth the ticket price alone.
Go see it!
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.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesUpon 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.
- GaffesDuring 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.
- Citations
[last lines]
Kristi Rey: Daniel, is that you? Katie?
- Crédits fousSound effects from the film play over the end credits.
- Versions alternativesAn Unrated Director's Cut on Blu-ray/DVD Combo with six extra minutes.
- ConnexionsEdited into Paranormal Activity: The Chronology (2012)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Actividad paranormal 2
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 3 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 84 752 907 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 40 678 424 $US
- 24 oct. 2010
- Montant brut mondial
- 177 512 032 $US
- Durée
- 1h 31min(91 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant