Sinister, in my opinion, is one of the more atmospheric, frightening, and interesting mainstream genre films of the last few years. Unfortunately, its sequel falls short. Despite relatively handsome photography and a striking, bombastic original score, it fails to satisfactorily expand upon the iconography and mythology of what came before. In fact, it betrays itself by even attempting to do so. The audience now knows the agenda—there is a mysterious pagan deity prompting children to murder their families on camera before spiriting them to his otherworldly realm—and the absence of mystery instantly and significantly neuters the intended atmosphere of doom and suspense. The film tries to compensate in a few interesting, unusual ways (there are brothers from a dysfunctional home who almost feud over who should be "chosen" for the climactic murder spree), but it largely overemphasizes, and by extension demystifies, many of the most novel elements of the first Sinister. The "home movies"—granulated, detached, do-it-yourself depictions of the domestic space turned macabre and violent—become amusing, but absurd torture-porn extravaganzas (crocodiles!) and are nowhere near as eerie as a result. The ghostly children, previously enigmatic specters at the edge of the frame, are now loquacious dispensers of exposition and, again, considerably less eerie as a result. (The well-tailored, Slipknot-faced Bughuul also pops up far more often, though the film at least resists the temptation to put words in his mouth as well.) James Ransone, who provided the nicely dour first film with a bit of comic relief as eager-beaver deputy sheriff "So & So," is elevated to lead status here, and he is a charismatic, loose presence, but the character is simply not as multi-dimensional and thorny as Ellison Oswalt, Ethan Hawke's jaded true-crime writer. Ellison's ambition, anger, and ego led him to stare into the abyss and endanger his family. "So & So," by comparison, is just a Good Samaritan along for the ride.

C+

This also has one of the worst examples ever of the Final Jump Scare trope. The last 15 seconds are so abrupt and arbitrary and corny. Which is a shame because the film could have ended nicely with the surviving characters driving away into an uncertain future. But, no, they have to go for the easiest jolt imaginable. (The first film did this, too, and it is one of my few problems with it.)

I wasn't a big fan of the first Sinister, so I didn't have high hopes for this one and my expectations were lowered even more after the dire reviews. It definitely was pretty awful but there were one or two bright spots. I did enjoy the finale to an extent, though I do wish it went into full slasher mode and that it wasn't mostly shown through the camera the child was shooting with. Also, the final 45 seconds was probably one of the worst 45 seconds I've seen in a horror movie to date.

D

This is the best/creepiest of the "home movies" in the sequel, in my opinion:

Sinister 2

Much worse than the first film. Bughuul's face is still not nice, but the film single handedly turns him into a shitty jump scare type of figure, and thus removing his ability to truly scare (that final jump scare, *groan*). The kiddie angle in this was awful. As was the chasing ex-police officer. The film was not scary at all. Not even dread this time around. The film really misses the presence of the Ethan Hawke character from the first film. Sinister 2 is a modern horror sequel disappointment.

D

I do not hate this movie, but it is definitely disappointing. It does a lot to defuse and..."movie"-fy a threat which feels elemental and ancient in the first.

Actually I thought that was the best part of this film. I was waiting for more movies. The non-8mm movie parts were a bore. They are not scary or eerie, but pretty fun to see how creative they can get at killing people.

Yes, yes! That's bang on.

I see your point. And yet. I don't know. In the first, the murders register as very realistic: people tied to chairs and thrown into a pool, for example. As a result, the sense of discomfort is high. Certain scenes in the first truly turn my stomach and get under my skin. Here, there is more just a sense of, "This is horror-movie fan service. This is a genre director trying to do quote-unquote creative kills and one up himself." This would be fine, welcome even, in many other horror films, but it bugs me in Sinister 2.

Everything you say is true, too. I guess I just don't hold these types of film in as high a regard. I think we can both agree that there is a chasm between the first and second in many ways. Seeing crocodiles (or probably alligators, actually) kill people in a horror film is awesome and I've never seen that before. The Christmas killing is also very sinister. The burning at the stake one is the least interesting, yet it was the one they chose as the main event. Strange.