Candyman 2

The Candyman legend moves on to New Orleans, and has a whole new set of victims. Annie Tarrant (Kelly Rowan) is a school teacher. Her father was killed by the Candyman. Her brother Ethan (William O'Leary) is wrongly accused of murders, the latest being a Candyman denial writer.

The change in setting concerns me, but New Orleans has some great potential for urban legends. It goes into the life of Daniel Robitaille a little bit more with maybe a possible way to kill him once and for all. But it's not as creepy as it needs to be. The movie lacks any tension or fear.

Kelly Rowan is playing a typical scared victim. At least she has the skills to back it up. But the atmosphere isn't up to the original. It's all a weaker version of itself. It certainly doesn't have as powerful of an ending as the original.

It has a good story line and also a fantastic musical side to it as well that adds to the atmosphere of the film...does anyone know if there is a soundtrack? Highly doubt it. Kelly Rowan is well sexy (in a girl next door kinda way)and plays the lead really well. Each to their own on this film I guess, but it's good to see that I'm not on the only person in the world that rates it....Just something about it, the whole New Orleans/Mardi Gras thing just adds that special something to it. The first film is cool as well, def a little more freaky, especially the last couple of scenes. But this one is my fav and it does sound as if I'm not missing much when I say I haven't seen the third film.

In New Orleans during the Mardi Gras festival an author who wrote a book about the legend of the Candyman is murdered and someone who he had a confrontation with that night is accused of the act. Although the accuser's sister a schoolteacher tries to discover who actually did kill the expert and learns that the legend of The Candyman is for real. She has conjured up the mythical serial killer by repeating his name in front of the mirror five times. This is where the horrifying nightmare begins and some surprising revelations occur.

The sequel to the underrated original you could say its just another slasher because it lacks the psychological edge, but I thought it was a reasonably good one and above the usual routine slasher. Sure it doesn't have the hypnotic power and impact of the original, but it still delivers enough well arranged shocks and has an mildly interesting plot that delves a little a bit more into the Candyman's background. With it showing us flashbacks of the painful ordeal he faced and how he became this legend. The plot isn't entirely focused on the Candyman legend (like the original was), with the investigation leading more towards the sister finding out about her family secrets while trying to get her brother of the hook and basically the legend is woven into it. Though, it's not as smart, or incredibly gripping this time around, with it leading more towards graphic violence and having some tedious moments slowing down the pace. It starts off rather slow, but it gets better as the story moves along and some moderate surprises pop up, but really it isn't that hard to guess to where the story is heading and some things just don't add up. The cloud of mystery around the Candyman just seems to be gone, or I should say far less evoking, with it seamlessly rehashing a lot material and ideas which were done so more effectively in the first film. On a whole it just doesn't capture the intense power and poetic tussle of the original's subtle plot and elegant dialogue. The material seems to want to force-feed us the information and the narration by the damn DJ was really starting to get on my nerves after awhile. But nonetheless, it's a bloody treat (literally) and at least it's not just another slasher involving horny/drunk teenagers with a shallow plot.

The look and direction of the film was alright, but it lacked the polish production values and the touch of detail and class. Atmosphere was slightly disappointing, because the dreaded build up is only effective in short pockets because it's was replaced by too many jump out scares that eases the tension. Although saying that it did provide some freaky sequences, but that was on the behalf of Todd's towering presence. Also there's a nice amount of nasty deaths and blood splattering for gore fanatics. Great makeup achieved and you got to love those special effects. The score from the original is used again and it creates that sense of mystic and doom that flooded the original. On show again is strong camera-work that truly catches your eye. The performances are fair with two reasonable standouts. Easily Tony Todd as the harrowing Candyman, who lives the part as the tormented soul perfectly and Veronica Cartwright turns in a surprise performance. Kelly Rowan as the heroine isn't bad either. The dialogue isn't that riveting, but Todd's echoing voice causes chills to run up your spine. Something about this fictional legend is quite impressive in my eyes. He lives on the pain and the people's fear of him. This is what gives him power and keeps his legend alive. Really, he is nothing but a heart lorn soul.

Overall, it doesn't hold up to the original, but as for a sequel, it's not all that bad.

They had to do it. They had to make a sequel to one of the greatest horror movies of the 90s. But it's always sad to see how much difference in quality there has to be. I have to say, as far as sequels of slasher movies go, this ain't that bad. It has good production values. But of course the great acting performances of the original are gone except for Tony Todd's, who is almost equally as good as he was in the original. But also gone are the great editing and photography, the gritty realistic feel of the original, the eerie and moody score of Philip Glass. Candyman just continues ripping people up with motives that are standard in slasher movies. The bees are involved more in the gory scenes, but are still underused.

Not half as good as the first movie. I haven't seen the third nor am i interested in doing so.

If ever there was an underrated horror classic of the 90's that is unfairly looked over or even often looked down upon, it's the beautiful and haunting film "Candyman", inspired by the stories of famed author Clive Barker. The 1992 original is one of the few true classics to emerge from the genre in its decade of release, boasting moody visuals, clever writing, fantastic characters and a unique point-of-view with its leaning towards being a sort-of dark "urban" fable. It cleverly used African American culture, commentary on racism and social unease to its benefit, crafting a thoughtful and heinous story revolving around the urban legend of a devious figure that emerges should you call his name into a mirror five times. A figure with a hook for a hand that was birthed from the dreadful murder of the son of a slave... a man who had fallen in love with a white woman and was hunted down and tortured to death as a twisted form of retribution from the racist townsfolk that surrounded him.

It was in many ways a perfect horror film. It was filled to the brim with tragedy and heartbreak. Demented scares and horrific visuals. But also well-developed and well-rounded characters and strong visual storytelling. Even to this day, there are people who are too frightened to say the name "Candyman" into a mirror because of the fears that the film has left with them.

It should come with no surprise then, that a sequel was soon commissioned and delivered just three short years later. "Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh" is very much a highly entertaining and enjoyable sequel, building the lead villain into much more of a classic "boogeyman" figure and piling on the scares (and bodies) to new heights. With some good direction and the continued grand performance of the devilish Tony Todd as our antagonistic vengeful spirit, the film has a lot going for it. However, as is all too often the case with sequels, bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. And despite the fun that is certainly to be had with the concept and execution, it does unfortunately come at the cost of a developed story and thought-out characters. The original "Candyman" was horror as art. "Farewell to the Flesh" is horror as junk-food. Just satisfying enough to be worth a go now and then... but not as fulfilling or as high-quality as you'd probably prefer.

Set in New Orleans just before the city explodes with Mardi Gras fever, we follow schoolteacher Annie Tarrant (Kelly Rowan), a young woman whose life has been shattered by the myth of the "Candyman"- her father murdered in the fashion of the mythical killer and her brother accused of murdering academic Philip Purcell (Michael Culkin in a fun-but-short-lived reprisal of his character from the original), who had written a book based on the myth and the events of the first film. Trying to prove to herself that the urban legend of the Candyman cannot possibly be true, Annie inadvertently summons him forth, setting off a chain of events that will not only reveal his dreadful origins in shocking detail, but threaten to tear Annie's life apart, piece by piece.

The thing that really throws me for a loop with this particular follow-up is just how often it seems to both hit and miss the mark in each and every scene. Director Bill Condon is certainly adept when it comes to moody, stylish visuals, and he seems to be having a grand bit of fun behind the camera. And he often does help elevate sequences beyond the shaky writing, giving us plenty of scares and jumps that will keep the audience entertained throughout the proceedings. But it never quite amounts to much outside of being general movie "fluff." It's not substantial, it's just shallow entertainment. This is mostly because of the script courtesy Rand Ravich and Mark Kruger, which is so focused on bringing us blood by the bucketful that all sense of story and character is often lost in the rush to get to the next horror set-piece. And while I am perfectly fine with horror as entertainment and "fluff" (it'd be hypocritical for me to say otherwise, as I do like mindless entertainment quite a bit), the issue is that this is a sequel to a highly artistic and deliberate original. It feels like too much of a step backward.

Still, I can't say its not a fun ride to take. Those stylish visuals and constant attempts at scares make it a breezy watch. Tony Todd once again delivers the goods with his continued chilling presence and phenomenal performance as a tragic villain with a dark history. There's a lot of interesting things to explore with its setting in New Orleans during Mardi Gras. And it even occasionally does some really cool things with the concept. At its core, there's just enough going on here to make it well worth checking out. It may be a bit of a shallow retread of the much better original. But you'll have a blast watching it, and you won't regret giving it a shot.

I'm giving "Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh" a slightly above average 6 out of 10.