Goosebumps 2 is a lazy and uninspired followup

Wow, I can't believe it's been so long since I wrote my last negative review. Whilst I've seen a lot of dissapointing movies lately, most of them had been direct to video B movies filmed on shoestring budgets, so their problems can atleast be somewhat excused. This one however, really dropped the ball on what could have been an albeit unnecessary, yet still highley entertaining sequel. Sadly, that wasn't the case here.

Before we start the review I feel like I should state my feelings on the previous installments in the franchise.

I don't have much nostalgia for the original books nor their TV adaptation. As they were never published in Croatia (however the Fear street series was) I didn't get to read them when I was their prime demographic, plus my mom had a ban on all things horror (which, strangely enough, didn't encompass things like The X-Files, Viy or Gravity Falls), so it's safe to say I didn't really have many resources of getting introudced to them. When I finally read them and watched the TV series, I was far beyond the target demographic. However, I still appreciated the creativity and spooky atmosphere they brought to the table, even though they can come off as cheesy and predictable by more objective standards.

The first movie was very entertaining. It was fun seeing many classic monsters from the books pop up (althought not in a way I imagined them whilst reading) in a big budget Hollywood setting. Whilst it could have worked fine as a simple anthology movie adapting a few of the books, I appreciate that they went bigger and decided to connect all of the stories into one grand narrative equally entertaining for both kids and adults. Also that R. L. Stine cameo was just ingenious.

And now for the dreaded sequel which I was honestly a tad bit excited for, only to be immediatley be let down upon watching it. I'll save you from the time I wasted myself and hope you folks find something a bit more enjoyable to watch...

(1) Mediocre Writing

This movie falls into one of the biggest storytelling cliches imagineable, committed by soo many sequels over the years: repeating the same plot in a different setting or with different characters. We've had Speed 2: Cruise Control, US Marshalls, The Hangover sequels, Home alone 2, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Star Wars: The Force Awakens etc. Now, to join these dreaded ranks, we have Goosebumps 2 as well.

The biggest problem this presents is the opening of loopholes in the narrative. So the whole narrative crux of the film revolves around a manuscript Stine wrote prior to penning his Goosebumps series called Haunted Halloween. Now, this creates a question, if Stine knew about this (which he did as shown in the film), why wouldn't he keep it safer instead of simply leaving it to rot in his old house? And why wouldn't he bring it up during the events of his first movie? The events of that film are never adressed within the plot of this one either, which makes no sense as, after all, it is a sequel, and this series didn't establish itself as an anthology like Halloween or Urban legend tried to.

It's also very much apparent when entire scenes are recycled, but with new monsters. For example the original had a pretty fun fight scene with the evil sentient garden gnomes. This movie copies that scene almost word for word but adds murderous gummy bears showing us that the writers are too lazy to come up with new material.

The first movie's writing was also a lot smarter when it comes to comedy. It knew how cheesy and cliche the original books were, so it embraced the cheese, the cliches, the sillyness and the twisted wackyness of the whole situation, satyrizing it, whilst still retaining a spirit of the original books. It had a perfect amount of comedy, adventure, fantasy and horror that never felt like it was trying too hard to go into any of the waters which those genres inhabit, carefully dipping it's toes in each and every one of them.

The second film really doesn't feel like it has enough of an identity of it's own. The jokes are on a level of an afterschool special and wouldn't appease many audiences other than kids, it never tries to be overtly scary or frightening (which the first film did try despite it's sillyness) and it not having many connections to the original books makes the actual book characters feel rather shoehorned in.

Another thing that ruins the movie is the time it's set in. Setting a movie on Haloween night would be perfect and wouldn't take much away from the movie's premise. The first film did this wonderfully have the whole affair take place over one evening/night, aloowing for a briskier and more urgent pace, which still works in an organic manner. By setting a story over a longer period of time it turns the movie into an incohesive mess of the main plot and unnecessary filler.

Overall it's quite dissapointing to see a film with so much promise get reduced to something so effortless and cheap.

(2) The Weak Effects

Ok, hear me out.

Yes, the first film wasn't exactly Lord of the rings when it comes to it's visual effects. But it's effects atleast felt like a part of the world it was inhabiting. We all knew it was fake, but they looked real enough within the universe's (and the budget's) confines.

These, however, feel like stock fottage or even stolen assettes and 3D models. Imagine if Asylum made a Disney Channel Haloween special.

I especially hated how they dealt with Slappy. In the original film, whilst he was the catalist and the mastermind behind the narrative, they never showed him moving. He would move around in complete silence with a flicker of a light signalling his movements. Whilst he dropped a lot of quips and one-liners, he had a mystical and foreboding aura around him that made him a geniuenly scary villain. It was brilliantly achived through a combination of practical effects and the afframentioned mystique.

This movie manages to ruin that.

Whilst they still use a real ventriliquist dummy for most of the scenes, they made a ridicolous decision to show Slappy move for which they used shoddy, obviously fake CGI which took me out of the experiance completely. It really kills (pun fully intended) all of the scare factor the character might have possesed.

The other monsters in this film fall within the same trope. They're either creatures reused from the original (The Abominable Snowman of Pasadena and the werewolf of Fever Swamp for example) or brand new additions, mostly Haloween decorations brought to life. Some could have worked, like the three witches with flaming faces or the giant tarantula made from balloons. That sounds wonderfully creepy and corny for a movie like this. However, they ultimateley don't do much within the film and are brought by the obvious fakeness and oversimplification of the designs.

To put it simply it didn't feel like a lot was invested in the effects, and at some points it really feels like an Asylum movie with a slightly bigger budget (that goes for the writing too).

(3) Lack of Any Actual Scares

As is probably apparent with my previous two pointers this movie has a general lack of all things scary. Now I can already hear the complaints: But Kris, this is a family film, you can't expect it to be all out horrifying. Yes, I realize that, however, here's the thing. Goosebumps is meant to be scary. It's in the name for crying out loud.

The first film, just like the books, knew this. Whilst it was never outright disturbing, it was scary enough for it's target demographic, thus achieving a perfect balance. Scenes like the one with the Murder the Clown pressed against the glass sent chills down my spine, despite not being outright traumtizing.

However, there's a distinct lack of any scares here, which is a blame of the marketing crew who thought kids enjoyed the first film and the books for their wacky comedy and goofy storylines. No, the kids loved them because they like reading and watching things which put them on the edge of their seat and make the shiver under the covers, just like adults. Making Goosebumps not scary kills the whole premise and concept of the series as a whole.

Would I reccomend it?

Not really. If you're in any way a fan of the original books, their TV adaptation or the 2015 film this will just be a painful, lazy and just an overall dull experiance. There's virtually no redeeming qualities about it. However, if you have a kid who really wants to get into Stine's creation, but you think he's too young for the books or their previous adaptations, then this will be simple Haloween fun they'll probably enjoy quite a lot. It wasn't for me, but, who knows, maybe somewhere out there there is somebody who actually enjoys this one for what it is.

Trailers: