Les enfants du diable

I recently rewatched Sometimes They Come Back... Again (1996) on Tubi. The story follows a father who moves back to his hometown with his daughter, only to confront a dark chapter from his past. As a child, he witnessed a group of young men murder his sister-now, they have returned as demons to finish what they started. Can he protect his daughter in a way he couldn't protect his sister?

Directed by Adam Grossman (Carnival of Souls), the film stars Michael Gross (Tremors), Alexis Arquette (Pulp Fiction), Hilary Swank (Million Dollar Baby), and Patrick Renna (The Sandlot).

This is one of those films where you can see what they were aiming for, but it just doesn't come together. The acting feels stiff, though it's fun to see a young Hilary Swank. I enjoyed the tarot card sequence, and there's a wild sex scene, but the kills are underwhelming, and the eye contacts didn't have the impact they were clearly going for. The ending, unfortunately, falls flat.

In conclusion, Sometimes They Come Back... Again is a lackluster sequel that's only worth watching if you're a diehard fan of the original. I'd rate it a 4/10.

Sometimes They Come Back...Again is better than the original in some parts, but it is also worse. The flashbacks that appear throughout the movie are interesting and leak out information about the main character's past bit by bit. There are some good characters. My two favorites are the main villain, Tony (Alexis Arquette) who is very creepy, and Father Archer Roberts, a mysterious priest who the main character seeks help from. (Father Roberts is played by William Morgan Sheppard, who also had a similar role in Zork Nemesis, a cinematic computer game that also has a very somber, creepy mood. Check it out) The story is similar to the first movie, Jon Porter (Michael Gross) moves back to his hometown with his daughter after his mother dies. When he gets back, three demons from his past come back to terrorize him and his daughter. I smiled when several references were made to the original movie. Stephen King had put a demon raising ritual, in which you must cut off a finger, in his short story and it didn't make it for the first film, but this part of the story ...came back.. for the sequel. With all that the movie had a great, creepy mood to it, but unfortunately it begins to feel like a slasher movie, with a few characters dying miserably. That's the only element of this movie I don't like. Two characters died horribly on-screen, crying and screaming. In my opinion, that was a little inapropriate but, oh well. This movie is still good for any fan of the original movie.

...that pays lip service to the original movie...which in turn was a somewhat weak adaptation of the original King short story. As such, the focus is on the gore rather than the peripheral back-plot of why the ghost/demons are stalking the protagonist. It's a merely adequate horror movie, but don't go into it looking for a glimmer of the Master's work.

That's right! It's WORSE than the original! Interesting characters? Suuuuuuuure, uh-huh, have fun in that padded room of yours. The plot, characters, etc. all could've been pulled out of the Big Hollywood Grab Bag-O-Cliches, and probably were. Think about it: The wonderful good girl, the slutty but friendly girl, the extremely sweet at first but turns-out-to-be-evil guy, the weird psychic girl. Real original, you can only find THAT in about 436 other movies. It wore out the already-tired original one, plus screwed it up even more with the stupid (and you can't say this isn't the King of Cliches, or at least some royalty) occult theme. Done in a very cheezy way, also. (Personally, though, I did find it quite funny with--that thing about the ears. But that only lasted a second, so it's not much in the way of redeeming value.)

SOMETIMES THEY COME BACK should not be compared to the original, which really has nothing to do with this except for the mention of a name. There is horror in this film because the evil ones are cruel, efficient and powerful. It is true horror. My only criticism is a valid one, I believe. The main evil character looks too much like Jerry Seinfeld to scare me, although he is so evil a character you may forget that for an instant. There is enough here to really scare you on a dark night. Try it.