Grave Encounters 2

As good as "Grave Encounters" was, "Grave Encounters 2" was that bad. It was a complete joke. You know a movie is bad when you're saying to yourself, "Won't they just hurry up and get killed so this nightmare can be over?" Every aspect of the film was a miserable failure.

The story. "Grave Encounters" is an actual movie in the movie! Some film students decide to go to the location of "Grave Encounters" in order to "find out the truth." And the main character, Alex (Richard Harmon), is being directed by e-mails from a mysterious person named "Death Awaits".

They used some absurd reason to drum up a part two. "Oh, lets go back to the creepy psych ward because it's all true and we have to prove it." So lame.

The script. Cheap. Should've been flushed. The dialog in there was so sophomoric.

The acting. Terrible. Part of the lure of the first "Grave Encounters" was the believability of it. Each character made sense and each character played their role well. In this movie these characters made zero sense and they put on like they were trying to be clichés.

The directing. I'm going to blame this on directing because I don't know who else to blame. Once you've realized that you are no longer in Kansas Dorothy shouldn't the cameras be the least of your worries? Do you really need to continue to film EVERYTHING! And that's one of the serious drawbacks of found footage films. There comes a point when it doesn't even follow human behavior to keep filming things.

The entire production. It was virtually a re-shoot of the first GE with a few little tweaks that were more harmful than helpful. There was nothing new (worth being in the movie), nothing fresh, nothing redeemable. It was lazy and pretty much like the majority of sequels: stale and uninspired.

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.

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 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