Sinister 2 -review

Spoilers obviously. 

I am biased. I'm a great fan of haunted house stories. And if they involve ghostly characters (the woman in black, Hugh Crain) I'm happy as can be

Now, in a horror movie, I can usually do without all the detailed bloodshed. Just a creepy ghost peeking around the corner every once in a while is enough for me to have a frightening time. And that is why I liked Sinister 2.

True the story isn't much. It's pretty much a coat rack to hang those creepy 16mm (not 8 in this one) segments on (I'll come to that later). But, then again, not much is needed.

You need a family undergoing the haunting, a bit of elaboration on the first movie and enough thrills and scares. The movie delivers on that front.

The story involves a mother and her twin sons who -having just left her abusive husband/father- find shelter in a house on the countryside where previously a massacre has taken place. The police officer from Sinister 1 believes that this involved the so-called demon ‘Bagul’ and investigates.

The big twist from part one is already out in the open at the start of the movie. The aggressor is one of the children. So, by making the kids twins, the movie cleverly asks the audience which of the two boys it will be. We already know that the final aggressor will be one of them, the question is who? However, the minute one kid becomes friendlier and the other more of a bully it becomes rather obvious how it is going to go down. Nonetheless the level of ambiguity is fun to play around with.

Also including the cop from part one gives the movie enough to elaborate on the rules of this fiction. Creating the universe wherein a demon uses children to make sacrifices. Even though his storyline doesn't have much to hold on to it is an interesting addition. And in the hands of the capable actors this basis of a story happily moves from one 16mm segment to the next.

Those segments are horrifically good. But, to be honest, a bit too farfetched. Part one only needed a lawnmower. But here we need poison, rats, hot coals and whatnot to commit a 'simple' murder. It's Scream 2's infamous rule of horror-sequels: "The murders are always more elaborate". Which is great and all. But the minute I need a two page shopping list to kill I might opt for something simpler.

Which brings me to another little point: the ghost-kids. Ghosts are scary. The way they remain scary is because we don't know a lot about their motivations. They don't talk much. In this movie the ghosts, however, have full on monologues (including corny lines like: "Come out, come out wherever you are..." - if memory serves). This doesn't really help. Plus -let's be honest- kids aren't the greatest actors in the world. But, then again, the involvement of the ghost-kids in the final act do make it all worthwhile. I loved the poltergeist-ing things moving around.

But then there's the script. Everybody who has ever written a story knows that getting a character from A to B requires believable actions and motivations. In Sinister 2 I don't completely buy it (but -to be honest- the movie does try).

As I pointed out before the whole movie basically uses a minimal of story to get from one creepy 16mm film to the next. But a character has to watch those movies for us (the audience to see them). In Sinister 1 Ethan Hawke's character was a true crime-writer who, during his investigation, watched those movies. It makes sense. It was the reason why he rented that house in the first place. But here the one watching the movies is one of the boys and this is where my 'I don't buy it'-logic gets in the way.

Imaging this: A creepy boy ghost stands by your bed every night and -basically- blackmails you in watching horrific snuff movies or else you will get nightmares. Moreover, the ghosts outright tell you that they did the things you see on the screen and that they want you to do the same.

My reaction would immediately be, not only to run away, but to run far away with mom and bro. I'll take nightmares over ghostly visits anytime.

True, kids don't make the wisest of choices. And the fact that this boy was abused by his father, or the blackmail-element, doesn't help. But still, this 'going along with the ghost' part of the story doesn't sit well with me. It's needed to show those 16mm movies (and you can't have an investigator every movie). But logic dictates to me that this isn't a great character move.

And then there are the underwritten characters. The good/evil brother pretty early on becomes outright evil and abusive. The final twist suffers from this. I honestly believe it would have been stronger if the boys got along well, confided in each other. Remember these are twins, so the audience would hop from one foot to the next wondering who the final aggressor would become.  Who suspected the little girl in part one? Not me. The movie could have done the same here with the twin element but it doesn't. It simply points out the bad boy halfway through and that's it.

Then there's the abusive father. He really is frighteningly real and, therefore, very interesting. But, unfortunately, he only serves as cannon fodder. There is no real comeuppance. He just dies to show the audience that the boy has crossed the line. The movie could have done that better. For starters, it is the (by him) favorite son that ends up killing him. Wouldn't it be nice to see his face when he realizes*.

Finally the demon. Well that's simply. He isn't scary at all. But that doesn't really matter. He's part of the fun. The movie does overuse him though. He pops up in scenes where he isn't needed. Like I said before, ghosts have to stay mysterious. So don't show the big bad too often.

But apart from all this I still liked the movie. As I said before I am biased but Sinister 2 simply is too much fun. There is some great imagery (the flashlight and ghostly figures scene) and some outright steals from better movies (the radio sequence - The exorcist and others, the children of the corn obviously). But that doesn't matter. Sinister 2 wants to show you some sinister 16mm murder scenes with a small story encapsulating them and it delivers beautifully.

* Moreover I missed the opportunity of the two boys changing places. They are twins after all. But then again, this is one of those tropes. And you don't always have to use them.