Movie Review: ‘Sinister 2’ not sinister enough

SINISTER 2 (R)

“Sinister” proved to be a surprise hit in 2012, and as is often the case with horror movies in particular, the modest box-office take paved the way for the inevitable sequel. Screenwriter C. Robert Cargill has returned, but in the time since “Sinister” was released, director Scott Derrickson‘s stock has risen. For this follow-up, Derrickson has remained on board as a co-writer and producer, but since he’ll be handling directing duties on Marvel’s upcoming “Doctor Strange,” “Citadel” helmer Ciarán Foy was brought in to call the shots this time around.

In “Sinister 2,” single mother Courtney (Shannyn Sossamon) relocates her young sons, Dylan and Zach (Robert Daniel Sloan and Dartanian Sloan), to a remote home in the middle of nowhere in an effort to steer clear of her abusive husband (Lea Coco). Unbeknownst to Courtney, Dylan has been fraternizing with the youthful spirits who reside in their new abode. As it turns out, these ghostly children prove to be a bad influence on the youngster. They convince Dylan to watch disturbing home movies in the basement in an effort to please their supernatural master, Bughuul. Meanwhile, an ex-Deputy (James Ransone) who lost his job for aiding Ellison Oswalt (Ethan Hawke) in the first picture continues to obsess over the mystery behind a sinister presence that is Bughuul, an obsession that ultimately brings the erstwhile lawman closer to Courtney and her sons.

“Sinister 2” picks up on threads introduced in the first movie, but thankfully it isn’t a straight-up rehash. Foy does a solid job establishing an eerie tone, and the movie is well shot. Furthermore, there are certainly a few nice creep-out moments, and the home movies that Dylan is forced to watch—most notably a horrific massacre in the snow, a gruesome bit of business involving rats, and a visceral crocodile attack—are disturbing

Having said that, “Sinister 2” simply isn’t sinister—or scary—enough. And the subtext at the heart of the movie—the power violence in movies has on our youth and how violent behavior is passed down from generation to generation—is overwrought and buried in a movie that suffers from severe lapses of logic and character traits that border on parody.

Ranson is unconventional in the lead, which would be fine if he proved to be convincing in some shape or form. Ultimately, his offbeat demeanor and awkward sense of humor don’t go very far to suggest he’s a strong protagonist or the kind of guy Courtney would consider getting romantic with … no matter how drunk they might get. And Lea Coco’s abusive ex-husband is so one note and so over the top that I found myself laughing at him rather than fearing him.

I’m well aware that many viewers could care less about characterizations in a horror picture like this. They simply want a genre flick that delivers the goods. Unfortunately, despite Foy’s keen eye, “Sinister 2” is fairly forgettable. There is so little attention given to the Bughuul mythology that this boogeyman is all but lost in his own movie.

Ultimately,  “Sinister 2” offers a sub-par setup, and it’s capped off by an incredibly weak payoff. And the film commits the cardinal sin of subjecting audiences to one of those really stupid final-frame-jump scares.

I dig Cargill. It’s clear he has an undying love for the genre. “Sinister 2” pays loving homage to the likes of “The Omen,” “Nightmare on Elm Street,” “Children of the Corn,” and countless other horror classics. I also liked this writer’s decision to tell the majority of this story from Dylan’s point of view. Sadly though,  the intensity and grim vibe that was so potent in the first movie feels diluted here. This year’s “Insidious: Chapter 3“, suffered from a few of the same problems, but in the end I found it scarier and considerably more effective than “Sinister 2.” Here’s to hoping the “Sinister” franchise comes to a close, because it clearly peaked with the first entry.