IMDb RATING
5.7/10
113K
YOUR RATING
After experiencing what they think are a series of "break-ins", a family sets up security cameras around their home, only to realize that the events unfolding before them are more sinister t... Read allAfter experiencing what they think are a series of "break-ins", a family sets up security cameras around their home, only to realize that the events unfolding before them are more sinister than they seem.After experiencing what they think are a series of "break-ins", a family sets up security cameras around their home, only to realize that the events unfolding before them are more sinister than they seem.
- Awards
- 1 win & 2 nominations total
Featured reviews
As a longtime horror aficionado, and huge fan of the first film, I was looking forward to seeing this. I just did. I wish I hadn't. This is not a patch on the original. Its not even a true sequel, as the credits state it is "inspired by the motion picture, Paranormal Activity"!
It's slow, terribly-clichéd and -- as a long-time horror fan of all kinds of horror films, especially the psychological ones -- not very scary. The film takes forever to get into, has very few scares, is highly unrealistic (thus ruining the whole "found footage" feel) and nosedives into tired Hollywood scare tactics towards the end, with screeching sound design and people diving at the camera.
Very, very disappointing.
It's slow, terribly-clichéd and -- as a long-time horror fan of all kinds of horror films, especially the psychological ones -- not very scary. The film takes forever to get into, has very few scares, is highly unrealistic (thus ruining the whole "found footage" feel) and nosedives into tired Hollywood scare tactics towards the end, with screeching sound design and people diving at the camera.
Very, very disappointing.
8fmc3
If you liked the original Paranormal Activity, you'll like this one. Myself, I was not really that impressed with the original, and I liked this one quite a bit better. The mood and creepiness was pretty intense at times.
It is NOT just a remake of the original movie, as some would have you think. Yes, it uses that format, and follows it pretty closely, but does it better and takes it a few steps farther. Just because it uses the same format doesn't mean it is the same movie. That is like saying all 'Cop' movies or all 'Buddy Pictures' are the same, just because they also follow the same format.
If you saw the first movie, you will recognize everything that is happening here, but that doesn't decrease the sense of dread and hair-raising-on-the-back-of-your-neck scariness. Instead, I think it will increase your enjoyment as you watch things develop. Talk about things that go 'bump in the night!' And sometimes in the daytime, too! I thought this movie was more intense than the original, and it helps to put the original into a context, and makes more sense out of it all.
Is it a perfect movie? No, but show me a perfect movie. They all could be better in SOME way, and this is no exception, but I think it is a pretty darn good movie, and worth the time.
Oh, I should also tell you kind of "Where I'm coming from." I LOVE a good horror movie. I LIKE to be scared. But I hate slasher, torture, vicious movies or movies that get too overt about hurting people. Give us something we can feel, something we are afraid of, but don't make us sick. I think Paranormal Activity 2 is just my kind of horror movie.
It is NOT just a remake of the original movie, as some would have you think. Yes, it uses that format, and follows it pretty closely, but does it better and takes it a few steps farther. Just because it uses the same format doesn't mean it is the same movie. That is like saying all 'Cop' movies or all 'Buddy Pictures' are the same, just because they also follow the same format.
If you saw the first movie, you will recognize everything that is happening here, but that doesn't decrease the sense of dread and hair-raising-on-the-back-of-your-neck scariness. Instead, I think it will increase your enjoyment as you watch things develop. Talk about things that go 'bump in the night!' And sometimes in the daytime, too! I thought this movie was more intense than the original, and it helps to put the original into a context, and makes more sense out of it all.
Is it a perfect movie? No, but show me a perfect movie. They all could be better in SOME way, and this is no exception, but I think it is a pretty darn good movie, and worth the time.
Oh, I should also tell you kind of "Where I'm coming from." I LOVE a good horror movie. I LIKE to be scared. But I hate slasher, torture, vicious movies or movies that get too overt about hurting people. Give us something we can feel, something we are afraid of, but don't make us sick. I think Paranormal Activity 2 is just my kind of horror movie.
One profitable turn deserves another. I believe almost everyone will have balked at the return of investment for the first Paranormal Activity (PA) film, which continues to build upon the recent trend of films seen from the first person perspective by way of a video camera. So confident about the prospects of this film being able to spawn an ongoing franchise (hey, Saw managed 7) that Paranormal Activity 2 was announced shortly after the first film was released into cinemas.
So let's cut to the chase and get to the point - is this film any good? I continue to state that films like this one are an acquired taste. If you do not appreciate films from the first perspective, or are constantly annoyed at plot loopholes that stem from the use of a camera, then this film is not for you, as with any other film of any genre employing the same storytelling technique. Otherwise this is a film that requires you to have watched the first in order to maximize your enjoyment because it makes references to, and ties in intricately with the first, without which you'll be questioning who's who, and the significance of things that can be innocuous if seen by itself.
Writer-director Oren Peli who created the original film takes a backseat here as producer, handing over the directing reins to Tod Williams and writing responsibility to Michael R. Perry. While the first film focused on only one camera with most things happening when the audience is fixated as bedroom voyeurs, here we have more cameras thanks to the introduction of a baby and a series of house break-ins, which give reason for more vantage points to be set up by way of strategically located CCTV and nanny cams, and thus a larger stage set up with various situations to spook, but not quite. Filmmakers can attest to difficulties when it comes to handling either animals or children in films, but Williams prove that both can share the same frame together, and I suspect a lot must have gone into coaxing what the end result was, perhaps with a little help from the CG department.
Michael R. Perry's story though sums up this prequel-sequel (sprequel?) nicely, building upon and expanding the world of PA. The first film posed a number of questions, some of which get addressed here, but in turn builds upon what's known thus far to create more unknowns through the narrative, which is more "talky" since there are a handful of scenes involving a HD camera bought by the family to document baby Hunter's growth, now used to document the strange apparitions that happen more frequently as the story wore on. Some scenes involve switching the camera on during a conversation (yeah, perhaps the social-media aware teenager of today will require everything to be made available and put online), and the constant refusal of the father figure to look at evidence will stretch believability just a tad bit
The spook factor gets considerably dumbed down from the first film, though making the same impact as the filmmakers went all out to shock you out of complacency as you think by darting your eyes around the screen trying to pick up clues or signs would mean you can keep a step ahead. Some tactics like the moving door get repeated, but only so because as I mentioned, there's an intricate link between the two films. Here we follow the Dey family of four - Dad Daniel, Mum Kristi who is the sister of the first film's Katie, and kids Ali the teenager and Hunter the toddler, where Perry's story provides the backstory, some opening doors for another prequel, while providing closure from PA.
Will there be another Paranormal Activity film? I don't see why not, since the seeds already got sown with more fruits to be harvested by future filmmakers who may want to come on board and stem their mark in providing a fresh perspective to the now mature storytelling technique. If the basis of the film continues to be that of putting oneself into the shoes of an investigator (as how I will approach this) sieving through tons of archived material just to piece together and reverse engineer the source of all that have happened, PA will grow its own fanbase (if not already) and probably develop into a franchise to be reckoned with.
So let's cut to the chase and get to the point - is this film any good? I continue to state that films like this one are an acquired taste. If you do not appreciate films from the first perspective, or are constantly annoyed at plot loopholes that stem from the use of a camera, then this film is not for you, as with any other film of any genre employing the same storytelling technique. Otherwise this is a film that requires you to have watched the first in order to maximize your enjoyment because it makes references to, and ties in intricately with the first, without which you'll be questioning who's who, and the significance of things that can be innocuous if seen by itself.
Writer-director Oren Peli who created the original film takes a backseat here as producer, handing over the directing reins to Tod Williams and writing responsibility to Michael R. Perry. While the first film focused on only one camera with most things happening when the audience is fixated as bedroom voyeurs, here we have more cameras thanks to the introduction of a baby and a series of house break-ins, which give reason for more vantage points to be set up by way of strategically located CCTV and nanny cams, and thus a larger stage set up with various situations to spook, but not quite. Filmmakers can attest to difficulties when it comes to handling either animals or children in films, but Williams prove that both can share the same frame together, and I suspect a lot must have gone into coaxing what the end result was, perhaps with a little help from the CG department.
Michael R. Perry's story though sums up this prequel-sequel (sprequel?) nicely, building upon and expanding the world of PA. The first film posed a number of questions, some of which get addressed here, but in turn builds upon what's known thus far to create more unknowns through the narrative, which is more "talky" since there are a handful of scenes involving a HD camera bought by the family to document baby Hunter's growth, now used to document the strange apparitions that happen more frequently as the story wore on. Some scenes involve switching the camera on during a conversation (yeah, perhaps the social-media aware teenager of today will require everything to be made available and put online), and the constant refusal of the father figure to look at evidence will stretch believability just a tad bit
The spook factor gets considerably dumbed down from the first film, though making the same impact as the filmmakers went all out to shock you out of complacency as you think by darting your eyes around the screen trying to pick up clues or signs would mean you can keep a step ahead. Some tactics like the moving door get repeated, but only so because as I mentioned, there's an intricate link between the two films. Here we follow the Dey family of four - Dad Daniel, Mum Kristi who is the sister of the first film's Katie, and kids Ali the teenager and Hunter the toddler, where Perry's story provides the backstory, some opening doors for another prequel, while providing closure from PA.
Will there be another Paranormal Activity film? I don't see why not, since the seeds already got sown with more fruits to be harvested by future filmmakers who may want to come on board and stem their mark in providing a fresh perspective to the now mature storytelling technique. If the basis of the film continues to be that of putting oneself into the shoes of an investigator (as how I will approach this) sieving through tons of archived material just to piece together and reverse engineer the source of all that have happened, PA will grow its own fanbase (if not already) and probably develop into a franchise to be reckoned with.
After experiencing what they think are a series of "break-ins", a family sets up security cameras around their home, only to realize that the events unfolding before them are more sinister than they seem.
When Paramount announced that they were going to do a sequel to PA, I was skeptical. Let's be honest, it felt like they were trying to cash in on the surprising success of PA. Then the trailers were released, which weren't really special, and the film wasn't screened to the critics. Either Paramount was trying to keep a tight lid on it or it must be a really, really bad sequel. I mean, the only person in the casting list is Katie Featherston, who plays Katie, which is still pretty vague. Fortunately, PA2 is actually a worthwhile sequel that retains everything that made the original scary.
With a much higher budget, PA2 boasts a bigger cast and has more elaborate scares and security cameras to capture the events. But, as you all know, bigger sometimes isn't better, and, in this case, it's true. What made PA so great was its amazing simplicity. The scares were limited to doors creaking, lights flickering, and footsteps thumping. In this film, I'm not going to even mention what they do. However, saying that, the film does have some very scary scenes, even more so than the simple scares in the original. It's apparent while watching the film that PA2 relies more on jump scares than on maintaining an atmosphere like PA, which may be good or bad news depending on which you prefer more. However, the film still retains the slow buildup of scares in PA as the film reaches to the end, where all hell breaks loose. It's also agonizing to see things move on their own that our characters don't notice. Don't you just hate that feeling of dread?
Most of the cast do a great job because they are more innocent than the victims in the first film, including a baby and a dog. Please, just spare the baby and the dog! I'm also glad to say that the climax is much better than the one in the first film, if you could even call it a climax in that film. However, the sequel does have the same main problem of PA: The ending. It's just as anti-climatic and disappointing coming off from a huge buildup.
If you didn't like the first film, just skip this sequel. It's more of the same in terms of structure and style. However, if you liked the first film, you'll definitely enjoy this. I thought the storyline was rather clever in that it ties in with PA. Overall, even though this isn't as scary as PA, PA2 should be an example of how to make a proper sequel to a great first film which stays true to the original's overall tone. And considering the fact that we are familiar of the set up before, PA2 still has its own share of effective scares. Now that's an accomplishment.
When Paramount announced that they were going to do a sequel to PA, I was skeptical. Let's be honest, it felt like they were trying to cash in on the surprising success of PA. Then the trailers were released, which weren't really special, and the film wasn't screened to the critics. Either Paramount was trying to keep a tight lid on it or it must be a really, really bad sequel. I mean, the only person in the casting list is Katie Featherston, who plays Katie, which is still pretty vague. Fortunately, PA2 is actually a worthwhile sequel that retains everything that made the original scary.
With a much higher budget, PA2 boasts a bigger cast and has more elaborate scares and security cameras to capture the events. But, as you all know, bigger sometimes isn't better, and, in this case, it's true. What made PA so great was its amazing simplicity. The scares were limited to doors creaking, lights flickering, and footsteps thumping. In this film, I'm not going to even mention what they do. However, saying that, the film does have some very scary scenes, even more so than the simple scares in the original. It's apparent while watching the film that PA2 relies more on jump scares than on maintaining an atmosphere like PA, which may be good or bad news depending on which you prefer more. However, the film still retains the slow buildup of scares in PA as the film reaches to the end, where all hell breaks loose. It's also agonizing to see things move on their own that our characters don't notice. Don't you just hate that feeling of dread?
Most of the cast do a great job because they are more innocent than the victims in the first film, including a baby and a dog. Please, just spare the baby and the dog! I'm also glad to say that the climax is much better than the one in the first film, if you could even call it a climax in that film. However, the sequel does have the same main problem of PA: The ending. It's just as anti-climatic and disappointing coming off from a huge buildup.
If you didn't like the first film, just skip this sequel. It's more of the same in terms of structure and style. However, if you liked the first film, you'll definitely enjoy this. I thought the storyline was rather clever in that it ties in with PA. Overall, even though this isn't as scary as PA, PA2 should be an example of how to make a proper sequel to a great first film which stays true to the original's overall tone. And considering the fact that we are familiar of the set up before, PA2 still has its own share of effective scares. Now that's an accomplishment.
Saw the movie today. Only a handful of people in the theatre but it was a 2:30 show.
Here goes......... I had some mixed feelings about PA2. I would sum it up as not quite good enough.
It's a decent flick but can't measure up to the original with the scares or the ending. Actually for me, the ending felt somewhat rushed and just wasn't that scary. Disturbing, yes. Scary? No. And the pace was a tad slow at times.
The film does in my opinion, an excellent job actually, at establishing the introduction of the characters and very nicely ties in the events of this film with PA though there are some unanswered questions.
Why if Katie's sister is having problems with things going all "paranormal" doesn't Katie then mention this while talking about it to Micah when filming during their paranormal events. And how did that burnt pic get into their attic? But I digress.
I had mixed reactions to the explaining as it were, of the demon's intent and motives outlined by the one of the character that actually uses their brain in this movie and does some investigative work.
I thought it an interesting twist that nicely tied the events of both movies through the obviously frustrated demon and ultimately using Katie to get the job done though it had some help from one character that ultimately involves betrayal. People should be talking about this.
One major nitpick?
The slow buildup up in tension never comes close to delivering anything to what PA did and I really let down with the general lack of overall good scare moments and just how few and far between the great ones there were.
I was hugely disappointed with this. My biggest nitpick of the movie.
The best ones take place in the kitchen and with the daughter on the couch. That entire sequence in the basement where the mother takes the baby, was annoying and fell flat. Not going to lie to you, that second kitchen scare got me though.
One of the few truly, good scare moments.
Also, the the scene with the daughter sleeping on the couch is another. Why, oh why, couldn't they have had more scenes like this? What she experienced was genuinely creepy. I just wished they had more of these types of scares throughout the movie.
It would have been brilliant. And what was the deal with the demon and the basement?
Unlike others, I found the acting was just fine in my books. I saw nothing that indicated lousy, unconvincing acting for the most part. Just a couple of parts that felt forced.
But for all the hype, I still walked away thinking that despite a great job of tying in the events and the overlap between both movies, that it felt like they struggled to come up with something fresh to scare us with this time.
And how can they possibly do a third PA with what happened at the end and the fate of several of the characters? Who gets haunted next?
The movie is going to be successful and I did enjoy most of it despite my nitpicks but still...... They dropped the ball somewhat.
Here goes......... I had some mixed feelings about PA2. I would sum it up as not quite good enough.
It's a decent flick but can't measure up to the original with the scares or the ending. Actually for me, the ending felt somewhat rushed and just wasn't that scary. Disturbing, yes. Scary? No. And the pace was a tad slow at times.
The film does in my opinion, an excellent job actually, at establishing the introduction of the characters and very nicely ties in the events of this film with PA though there are some unanswered questions.
Why if Katie's sister is having problems with things going all "paranormal" doesn't Katie then mention this while talking about it to Micah when filming during their paranormal events. And how did that burnt pic get into their attic? But I digress.
I had mixed reactions to the explaining as it were, of the demon's intent and motives outlined by the one of the character that actually uses their brain in this movie and does some investigative work.
I thought it an interesting twist that nicely tied the events of both movies through the obviously frustrated demon and ultimately using Katie to get the job done though it had some help from one character that ultimately involves betrayal. People should be talking about this.
One major nitpick?
The slow buildup up in tension never comes close to delivering anything to what PA did and I really let down with the general lack of overall good scare moments and just how few and far between the great ones there were.
I was hugely disappointed with this. My biggest nitpick of the movie.
The best ones take place in the kitchen and with the daughter on the couch. That entire sequence in the basement where the mother takes the baby, was annoying and fell flat. Not going to lie to you, that second kitchen scare got me though.
One of the few truly, good scare moments.
Also, the the scene with the daughter sleeping on the couch is another. Why, oh why, couldn't they have had more scenes like this? What she experienced was genuinely creepy. I just wished they had more of these types of scares throughout the movie.
It would have been brilliant. And what was the deal with the demon and the basement?
Unlike others, I found the acting was just fine in my books. I saw nothing that indicated lousy, unconvincing acting for the most part. Just a couple of parts that felt forced.
But for all the hype, I still walked away thinking that despite a great job of tying in the events and the overlap between both movies, that it felt like they struggled to come up with something fresh to scare us with this time.
And how can they possibly do a third PA with what happened at the end and the fate of several of the characters? Who gets haunted next?
The movie is going to be successful and I did enjoy most of it despite my nitpicks but still...... They dropped the ball somewhat.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaUpon release, this broke the record for the biggest midnight gross of an R-rated movie with $6.3 million, and the biggest opening for a horror movie of all time, earning a total of $41,500,000 in its opening weekend.
- GoofsDuring the first 17 nights or so, you can see two things that never change/move. A white cup in the kitchen in front of the fruit plate and the pillow arrangement on the sofa. Clearly a lot of different night scenes were shot in the same night.
- Quotes
[last lines]
Kristi Rey: Daniel, is that you? Katie?
- Crazy creditsSound effects from the film play over the end credits.
- Alternate versionsAn Unrated Director's Cut on Blu-ray/DVD Combo with six extra minutes.
- ConnectionsEdited into Paranormal Activity: The Chronology (2012)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Languages
- Also known as
- Actividad paranormal 2
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $3,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $84,752,907
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $40,678,424
- Oct 24, 2010
- Gross worldwide
- $177,512,032
- Runtime1 hour 31 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content