Nattevagten - Dæmoner går i arv

Ole Bornedal's "Nattevagten - Dæmoner Går i Arv" ("Nightwatch: Demons Are Forever") is a horror sequel that delivers a satisfying blend of tension, and eerie sound design. While it doesn't reach the heights of its iconic predecessor, this Danish film proves that lightning can strike twice, even if it doesn't rewrite the horror rulebook.

The original "Nightwatch" shook the local industry, proving that Danish filmmakers could craft compelling horror. Two decades later, Bornedal revisits his classic, exploring generational trauma and the weight of the past. The result is a competent, if familiar, sequel that delivers on entertainment value, even if it doesn't break free from the shadow of its iconic predecessor.

The story centers around Emma (Fanny Leander Bornedal), a young medical student drawn into a web of horror as she attempts to clear her family name. It's a tale of mistaken identity and confronting the sins of the past, with a strong performance by Bornedal, who portrays a character trying to escape their legacy.

While the film follows a similar formula to its predecessor, with familiar story beats and character types, it excels in building tension. The sound design is particularly effective, with the unnerving sound of a utility knife adding to the sense of impending danger. The film also doesn't skimp on gore, delivering plenty of bloody moments to satisfy horror enthusiasts.

However, "Nattevagten - Dæmoner Går i Arv" falls short of fully exploring its potential for intergenerational dialogue and commentary. It feels like a missed opportunity, as the film stops just short of delving into deeper themes, instead opting for a safer, more familiar path. This is a common pitfall of legacy sequels, and while it doesn't detract from the enjoyment of the film, it does leave you wanting more.

In conclusion, "Nattevagten - Dæmoner Går i Arv" is a solid addition to the horror genre. It effectively balances tension and gore, delivering an entertaining and satisfying experience. While it may not be the most innovative entry, it is a worthy successor to the original "Nightwatch," reminding us of its impact and proving that some formulas are worth revisiting.

To be totally honest.. Its a stinker. And i have a hard time figuring out why people can actually give it a good rating. A film made at this 'level' have to perfom better. It solely lives on the name.

Which sucks, because the first one is so good. Already in the beginning there is some of the worst dubbing work I've ever seen in a film, ever. The whole setup is just so bad. The pacing is off and in general the work takes you away from the movies. Not that the plot is good. The story is in general thin as paper, and you sit with that feeling that the protagonist's action is so unreal. In know we talk about a film here, but come on. Its not good, and a real disappointment.

Cant recommend.

It is extremely smart to make a follow up to a danish cult classic almost 30 years later. You manage you capture a new audience, while reintroducing and appealing to the ones who watched it on release back in 1994.

Now this new installment feels and looks like a modernization of the first one and delves into the story years later. It manages to keep the creepyness from the first one, despite lacking the humor and the "out-there-ness" the first movie brought in its delivery and script.

The performances are great all around, but it doesn't do anything new in terms of the genre. To be honest, I personally didn't like the ending, as I felt it lacked a sense place as a lot of the problems the movie explored through its runtime, is resolved with a cliche ending.

It's a good enough movie, even if it doesn't justify its existence because of the sense of conclusion we got in the original.

A 30 year later sequel is a strange thing, but probably what's even more strange is that it took 30 years at all considering how successful the original was. I didn't even have to check if 'Nightwatch: Demons Are Forever' was made by the same writer/director as the original. I could tell by the chaotic structuring that both films possess. If you enjoyed the original then I'm sure you can at least find some enjoyment in this film.

Again, just like the first, for the first 40-50 minutes of the film I really had no idea where it was headed or what it was even about. Then out of nowhere, just like the first, it straightens the wheel and puts itself on course for a pretty entertaining and well done final hour or so.

Most of the original cast are back, which is a great effort all this time later. Considering the success Nikolaj Coster-Waldau has had in the meantime I'm a little surprised they were able to entice him, particularly considering they made his character a shell of his former self. There is one scene where he interrupts his daughter at the school that really should've been left on the cutting room floor.

In a lot of ways this is going to come across as a strange sequel. But considering how much later it is and that they were able to work the entire original cast into and still make a somewhat creepy and coherent story out of it, I think it is an impressive effort. 7/10.

First of, I saw the critical reviews and I had to write my own.

I'm 35 Years old now and I grew up with the original and the it gave me nightmares as a kid. The sequel is not perfect and didn't even come close to the original. But, it is a good sequel and the fact that they casted the same actors and they even filmed at the same locations, as the first movie, is something that increased my rating.

It's no multi dollar creation with hollywood in the background and they gave their best to make the movie as good as possible. The other actors were likeable even if their actions weren't understandable.

I'd recommend to watch the original first, even if you saw it already. Everyone who loves the original will be pleased with the sequel should low their expectations.