IMDb > Paranormal Activity 2 (2010) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Paranormal Activity 2
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Paranormal Activity 2 More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 36:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 353 reviews in total 

14 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

The only thing worse than Paranormal Activity, is Paranormal Activity 2

Author: meggyy from United States
4 November 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The title says it all. Well, I guess the joke's on me because these people actually got me to pay to see these two movies. Seriously, it was the biggest load of garbage I have ever seen. Honestly, I think I may just be bitter because these people made millions off of a movie I could have made at home myself. Just put a camera in a dark room and make some noises, and you've got Paranormal Activity 1 & 2. From what I hear, they're going to "Saw" the crap out of this movie and make like.. another 10 of them. Do people even go see the Saw movies anymore? Anyways, this movie sucks, and you shouldn't waste your time/money seeing it. Maybe if people stop seeing it, we'll get lucky and they'll cancel the franchise before their yearly previews become a bigger joke than any movie with M. Night Shyamalan's name attached to it.

Was the above review useful to you?

23 out of 40 people found the following review useful:

A great formula, repeated and washed down

Author: lechonita from United States
22 October 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

IF you enjoyed, or I should say got scarred from the first release its normal to want to see PA2. Despite the hype and disappointment of it never being a true story - as viewers we don't really care, we feel like we want to see what happened to our characters, and what else is new in this story.

This review may contain spoilers.

So the first disappointment is that is is a prequel, that at some point runs parallel to the original story. This doesn't explain much of what happened, and what would happen to anybody but is merely an expansion of the original story, a parallel if you will - that gives no payback at the end. This is due to the obvious option to leave the franchise open to another film. Just wait for PA3 "the explanation" coming sometime next year. this franchise is the most successful movie ever done from a cost / profit standpoint - i could see why they want to keep on milking this cow for at least another run.

The story felt somewhat as an afterthought, even if they claim it was announced about at the same time as PA1. It had the same approach, but this time being the second release, some of the elements felt a little forced - as viewers I feel we had higher expectations on the "scary" parts, and though there were a couple hits here and there, the movie built up too slowly, and lacked the surprise of the original.

Overall is a cool flick to watch at night around halloween, and somewhat of a decent story parallel to the original. but there's a lot of holes and questions, and really no resolution. Not bad at all, but nothing of a game changer like the original.

Also I admire the concept of going to the grocery store, and spending $40 on groceries to make sandwiches, and then selling those for $10,000 each. From a business standpoint this movies are plain brilliant, they took my money for sure.

Was the above review useful to you?

26 out of 46 people found the following review useful:

JUST TERRIBLE, Please save your money....and time!!!!

Author: kblazers from Canada
22 October 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This has to be one of the worst movies ever written. The lack of any substance is very visible. Scary.......NOT........Funny.......MAYBE.....just awful for a horror flick. Now come on, his wife has a big bite mark on her leg and he doesn't take her to the hospital!!! He finally finds his child in the basement and doesn't pick him up!!! Just brutal. His daughter locked out of the house for how long with baby inside, yet really not much attempt to get in, then comes home thirty minutes after the parents come home!! Give me a break!!! Still wondering why he wanted security cameras installed, yet he never wanted to look at them and rarely did throughout the movie. This truly was a joke, surprised it never came out on April fool's day! I am still shaking my head at some of the reviews that say this is such a scary movie with such great acting, it really is anything but. Save your Money..... Save your Time!!!! Go see the opera instead.....

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Corporate Activity

Author: doctorsmoothlove from United States
20 December 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Whoever said that money doesn't grow on trees isn't familiar with the Paranormal Activity franchise. The series has become the cash cow of every movie studio's dream. It currently stands at two entries, but will have many more by the time people tire of seeing the same film multiple times. Paramount did a very good job with the first sequel and was aware of what the fans wanted. Paranormal Activity 2 has more quick scares than the original and builds on its story. It also canonizes the first one's theatrical ending.

The movie is both a prequel and sequel to Paranormal Activity. The cast of characters has been enlarged to include the sister of the first film's Katie. Her sister, Kristi, lives with her husband Dan and his daughter Ali. They have a newborn son, Hunter, who serves as a focal point for many of the scares. After Hunter's first birthday, unusual things begin to happen. Objects begin to move independently and loud noises trouble the family. Dan installs security cameras everywhere, and Ali becomes afraid the family is being bothered by a demon. She does some research and finds out that her hunch is true. The demon is after Hunter because of some deal family ancestors made with it a long time ago. After Kristi becomes possessed by it, Dan performs a ritual that transfers the demon to Katie. At this point, the events of the first movie take place. Kristi's new normal life is interrupted when Katie arrives and kidnaps Hunter.

The sequel is clearly a corporate production. The movie follows a formula for the entirety of its running time. The characters speak for a few minutes about inane things, a scary event happens, and they react. Admittedly, the first film does this too, but it is able to link the "boo" moments into a feeling of lingering dread. Its downtime doesn't permit viewers to relax like they may this time. Baby Hunter becomes necessary to artificially insert tension and get audiences ready to jump. It's more unsettling to see a defenseless child, whose crib is always kept in a different room despite his frequent crying, than it is to see capable people in terror.

Given the lack of a well-presented story, the movie has to resort to several clichés to sew each vignette together. The family's Hispanic maid and lovable dog are the only characters besides Hunter that interact directly with the demon. The maid warns the family to take precautions, which Dan ignores. She is fired and the dog has a seizure just in time for the longest vignette. There are even photos of ethnic people on the walls as an added touch. These outdated stereotypes and the scare formula make the movie seem like such a product. The script was intelligently written to tie in well with the original, but it's superfluous. If you want to see a shaky camera movie this fall, go see The Last Exorcism.

Not Recommended

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

If you think this is scary, you are a stupid.

Author: sarahj287 from United States
19 February 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I don't even give this a 1.... This movie like the first one was the dumbest "scary" movie i have ever watch. And like during the first movie I was bored to sleep by about half way through. A complete and total waste of my time!!

There is nothing scary, shocking or disturbing about this movie at all. When the mom was drug screaming down the stairs into the basement I was laughing my ass off. I was also laughing when Katie showed up as the demon and killed the dad and then punched the mom into security camera. Baby Hunter and his sisters whereabouts are unknown.. oh dear.. now the only thing scary about this movie is that they are going to make a 3rd one... a movie that i will not waste my time with!!

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

What a letdown.

Author: venus_doom_001 from United Kingdom
1 November 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

After seeing the first film at the cinema and not being too disappointed (but not completely overwhelmed with praise) I thought I'd give the second one a chance after hearing pretty good reviews from it. I'd also heard that those who liked the first one would find the second one better. I, however, did not feel this way in the slightest. First of all I had to convince my boyfriend to come and see the film with me, making the first 20 minutes of nothing incredibly painful for particularly myself as it was my fault we even bothered to see it. Regarding these first 20 minutes, I watched in anticipation of it getting better and tried to appreciate that tension had to be created for a successful climax. This however, did not occur. I found myself laughing at the incredibly slow progress of 'scary' events such as the mobile spinning and a couple of bumps here and there. I was not the only one. The whole audience at my screening laughed at the film's poor attempt to shock the viewer by levitating a baby. The ending was also pretty meagre as it ended with more people dying just like in the first one, except in the first one it had been unexpected. By the end of paranormal activity 2, I felt almost cheated. Despite this there were some positive elements to this film. The scene in which all the cupboards opened suddenly and unexpectedly was probably the highlight as this did actually spook me. The possession part was also pretty OK, particularly when she was dragged down the basement. These were the few scenes that stood alone from the cheesier, more predictable events such as Kristi being dragged down the stairs - this part had me laughing at it's pure failure to even surprise me. Cristisms aside, the acting had improved vastly so from the first one and I found the actors to be more convincing. I also liked the link between the two films, though I felt it was rushed even so. To conclude, Paranormal Activity 2 is not worth seeing if you are not easily scared. For those of you that find a couple of pans dropping terrifying, then this is the film for you. Other than that, I recommend seeing some more old school, horror type films like The Ring, which I suspect this film got it's main idea from anyway. As for my own enjoyment, the most entertaining part of my experience was the teenager that tripped in the middle of the aisle before jumping out of his skin at a 'scary part' as he went to sit down.

Was the above review useful to you?

30 out of 55 people found the following review useful:

Paranormal Wanktivity

Author: thebogofeternalstench from New Zealand
27 October 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

How is utter garbage like this allowed to make money? Paranormal Activity 1 was unbelievably $hit too, but no.2 takes the pi$$ big time.

NOTHING happens in the movie except from a bit of dragging, door opening, bangs.....ITS NOT SCARY.

Atrocious acting, plot holes, annoying teenager.

Honest to god, a 2 min sketch of the nickelodeon claymation Brown and Purple is incredibly more entertaining that Paranormal Activity 1 and 2 put together.

What an utter waste of time.

Never paid to see either movie as I watched both online.

I feel very sorry for all the morons and simpletons that found either movie 'scary' or worth their time.

Truly a disgustingly waste of anyones time and money. Utter garbage.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

So Bad That I Can not contain any spoilers...

Author: dognotbarking from Belgium
24 July 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What is this? Is this supposed to be a movie? I liked the first Paranormal Activity. It was a fresh look, with ordinary people you can relate to and a story!!!!Story people story!!!What happens in the second?Yes the family has a pool we have seen it. Yes they have a kitchen and there is a mug on the island in the middle.They kept showing the same scenes over and over again every night. May be it is a way to save more money. And nothing happens!Literally nothing. There was 3 door slamming; 5 cracking noise; 1 flying baby; 1 woman dragged on the ground; 1 barking German shepard. And that is it! Nothing more. No story; there are too many characters you can not relate to them because it is so superficial;no explanation...Just some brief conversation about how those two girls were hunted (1 sentence)and the curse of the first born. At the end; you understand it is around the same time Katie get possessed. So it is like a prolongation of the first one. All non sense really. Do not waste your time on this. The producers have to have a little respect for the audience. Such a shame I wasted my time on this.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

Sequel prequel with more paranormal exposition.

Author: amesmonde from Novelist of The Final Version
3 March 2011

A couple become increasingly disturbed by Paranormal Activity in their home that maybe linked to their an infant son. His teenage half-sister against their father wish tries to uncover the truth.

This sequel /prequel contains some quality direction by Tod Williams who takes over the reigns for this instalment. With the usage of static security camera's and some thought out camera work it gives P2 a slight edged and a grander film quality over it's predecessor. However, the jump out sound moments aside the sound effects and design appear less creepy this time around.

The whole cast are fantastic. The acting is plausible and natural by the leads, notably Molly Ephraim who plays the inquisitive everyday daughter and Vivis Cortez as the 'help'. Those with young children and pets will be left a little more disturbed by this follow up and fans of the first will be pleased by Katie and Micah's return.

Sadly, for the most part its purpose is to build up to a big scare at the end. Again it's simply another story told through the eyes of a camera lenses and the writers inject some unnecessary connections and exposition to the goings on which takes away some of the mysteries random edge.

It's nearly 15 years since the 'The Blair Witch Project' used the camera point of view and while Paranormal Activity 2 looks better than the first it goes over the same old formula.

If you enjoyed and were scared by 1st you'll be blown away by Paranormal Activity 2. Yet, old school haunted house fans maybe left less chilled and thrilled.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

Surfing on the popularity of the first one, this prequel tries it's best to deliver the same scares with lame results.

Author: samuel-legassick from London, England
22 October 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Article By: Sam LeGassick Twitter: LG45 <- Please follow! Website: Facebook: <-Please Add To Your Page

For those who have not yet seen the first Paranormal Activity, you're missing a real treat. Released in 2007 the film was shown around festival circuits to great acclaim, the cast was essentially two people, it was shot in the directors house and used very simple techniques to great effect. In fact, I would go as far as saying it's really a masterclass in film-making.

This might seem far-fetched but it's so clever in it's execution that any budding auteur ought to take note. Firstly, the narrative is simple and the 'monster' is really a metaphor for the relationship between Micah and Katie. The film also relies on your imagination to create fear, you're actually subconsciously interacting with the film, it's framing makes you look in places that you wouldn't normally find interesting, in fact you're looking for something in the shadows. It's open doors invokes a Hopper-esquire sense of desperation and mystery with the depth of the image playing an important part in creating the tension. That's the real killer, the tension, there's more tension than anything Hitchcock could have done, and I don't say this lightly. You know watching every diary insert that you're about to see something and it's gradual development from an opening door, a light switching on to a more violent intrusive force makes every night shot more and more unbearable. It plays on the post-9/11 paranoia and terrorism-at-home American sensibility (which in fact is joked about in the sequel). Not only all this, but the sound, the simple effects and the 'possession' (a brainwashing of sorts) all create this horrible yet thoroughly enjoyable 90 minutes of the fear of the unknown and no matter what anyone says, if you're at home by yourself at night you can freak yourself out by just thinking about it.

However, once Spielberg got a hold of it and wanted to release it internationally, he wanted to do different scenes and a different ending. Therefore, if you went to see this on the cinema or saw this on DVD recently, chances are it's Spielberg's monster that you saw. I would thoroughly recommend viewing the original, or at least watching the different endings on YouTube because the original ending is a million times better. Anyhow, it's the re-released 2009 version that this prequel draws from, which is important.

This might sound like a long-winded approach to dealing with the second film, but it's very important to make people aware of these issues because the problem with the second one is that it recreates, to a much less effect, almost exactly the same as what happens in the first one. The deal is Katie's sister has just had a baby boy with her new family she's married into, after a while things start going bump in the night as the monster tries to claim baby Hunter.

The problem is (and here's a SPOILER if you haven't seen the first one) you know you're not going to see the monster harassing them because of the first one. So every noise, every opening and shutting door is just stuff that you've seen before so you don't find it scary, instead you're waiting for the more hardcore stuff. However, all this ghoulish foreplay takes up about 70 minutes of the 90 minute film and there is a LOT of watching nothing, but you're watching it knowing not to look out for anything because you know you won't see anything. The idea of the baby being harassed yet guarded by a brave dog is a good one that doesn't get interesting until near the end and, unlike the original first one (not the remake), they get hassled during the daytime and the night-time. But it's everything we've seen before, dragging them away, opening doors and a ridiculous pool cleaner that keeps turning up outside of the pool (a machine not a man). However, there's something going on in the basement which I thought could turn into something interesting but instead becomes a REC wannabe that wasn't scary at all. Katie's sister becomes possessed and she is completely lame and the whole thing lacks all the originality, all the fear, tension and mystery that the first one thrived on. In fact, it was what made the first one any good, so if you take that away you're just watching people doing nothing and getting scared about tiny things.

The company have also not released the details of the cast which is trying to keep to the 'real' element of the first one (when it obviously cannot be real) as we know full well, with enough interviews, promotions etc. that it wasn't real. Why try and recreate the Blair Witch effect the first one had? 'Found footage'. We're not idiots! Who would actually think this was real? The girl was in 24 for God's sake.

During the film they try to create more of a backstory and a 'why' to all the attacks but I don't want to know why. The whole point is it could happen potentially to anyone and even though the first one made it clear this stuff had happened to Katie before, that's all I needed to know, I don't want to know all the details of their family tree, of deals with the devil or whatever, MYSTERY remember? When it coincides with the first film it is completely cr*p and the ending made me want to throw something at the screen. It took everything that made the first one great and shat on it, in fact it might have potentially corrupted the experience of the first one for me by being so sh*t. I'll never want to watch this again, in fact I'm really angry about it. (Cut short due to IMDb guidelines please go to to read full review)

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 2 of 36:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history