Ö÷²¥´óÐã

Ö÷²¥´óÐã - Mark Kermode's film blog

« Previous | Main | Next »

5 live review: Paranormal Activity 2

Post categories:

Mark Kermode | 11:32 UK time, Tuesday, 26 October 2010

5 live's resident movie critic Dr Mark Kermode reviews Paranormal Activity 2.

Go to Mark on 5 Live for more reviews and film debate.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit Ö÷²¥´óÐã Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    I have to agree with Mr. Kermode. Absolutely thoughtless, lazy and mind-numbingly dull filmmaking. The only thing that kept me in the cinema was that I was on a first date which was otherwise going rather well. Avoid like the plague!

  • Comment number 2.

    Probably the best last 2 seconds of a review I've ever heard.

  • Comment number 3.

    Haven't seen the first one, don't particularly want to see this one. To quote the amazing Mark Gatiss from A History of Horror Part 3
    "I have little appetite for it".

  • Comment number 4.

    God, I've missed reviews like this!!!

    Keep up the good work, Mark! :D

  • Comment number 5.

    I haven't seen the first film, or the sequel. But it seems to me the first film was trying to do something different, and it seemed to work for a lot of people. It cost $15,0000 yet grossed over $200million. However, contrasting Mark's response to the first film with his response to its sequel (though he said the first one didn't scare him) tends to suggest that yet again Hollywood have let money ruin a film. They have let them think that with more money it will be even better. Quite evidently, it isn't.

  • Comment number 6.

    The biggest problem i had with the first one is that you really don't care about the people in it. The characters were so annoying i felt they just deserved the things that happened to them and it sounds from your review Mark that they haven't fixed this problem.
    I will avoid.

  • Comment number 7.

    So far this is the best outcome I've seen of the film:

  • Comment number 8.

    Mark, hate to jump in on an unrelated note, but fire up your internet connection this Halloween for Frank Darabont's new horror extravaganza "The Walking Dead" for the US network AMC (Mad Men etc) Darabont and Zombies! Thought it would be your cup of tea!

  • Comment number 9.

    Liam, unfortunately Mark doesn't watch TV so he'll be missing on the walking dead... But I'm really looking forward to it

  • Comment number 10.

    Paranormal Activity 1 was a cracking movie if you "dug" it. However, these types of "one-off" movies are just that - "one-offs".
    The writer/director of the first one knew what he was doing, and he got the whole thing spot on. Only certain people can get in the right head space to make that kind of low budget psychological horror.

    Did it really need a sequel? No. The only thing it needed was a violent and disturbing ending which in my mind we did not get.

  • Comment number 11.

    Dr Kermode's second "uhhhhhhhhhhhhh - BOO!" actually made me jump a little (at 1:32).

    Generally I agree with Dr K. The only difference is that he came to it after an hour and a half of dental work, and I came to it after an hour and a half of Saw 3D.

    Is it considered bad form to post links to one's own reviews here?

  • Comment number 12.

    Ok I thought it would be incredibly dull from seeing first movie... so I didn't bother going to see it.

    I can recommend Fringe, just watched series 1 and 2, but this is TV.

    I could have gone to see para norm 2, but I wet to see Reds and Wall Street...

  • Comment number 13.

    i went to see this, instead of vampire/kermode helped it into top 10/sucks. and liked it, it did what a sequel/prequel should, believe it or not, these type of psychological horrors scare people too. and for me it worked

  • Comment number 14.

    Wow, THE check-list for horror fans:
    1) Did it go anywhere?
    2) Was it scary?
    3) Was it predictable?
    4) Did you care about any of the people?
    5) Did it fool you into believing it at any point?
    6) Did you want it to be over?
    7) Was it dragging its feet?
    8) Did it rely on the previous part of the series to do its job for it?

    This should become a standard they teach at schools.

    Let's not call them re-makes. Let's just call the old ones pre-makes.

  • Comment number 15.

    I watched this film with the missus and I have got to say that it really scared me! The tension building that Mark mentions in his review, I thought worked quite well. I think it's much better than the first one, definately worth a watch!

  • Comment number 16.

    I have to totally and utterly disagree the panning of the movie. It is not a true gory horror film, it is a slow build up to further tension, if you watch the first one properley, then it was known that a second one had to be made, but again it depends on what ending people saw on the first one (there was three). This movie got a huge thumbs up from me, but i suppose it was always going to be considering i am a paranormal investigator, and things like what was seen in the movie happen in real-life paranormal problems, as it normally circles the people not property. Love the fact that Kermode hates it!

  • Comment number 17.

    total cr*p

Ìý

Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD

Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation

Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.