Sinister 2 (2015) - Horror, Mystery, Thriller

Hohum Score



A young mother and her twin sons move into a rural house that's marked for death.

IMDB: 5.3
Director: Ciarán Foy
Stars: James Ransone, Shannyn Sossamon
Length: 97 Minutes
PG Rating: R
Reviews: 38 out of 170 found boring (22.35%)

One-line Reviews (106)

It's damaging when there's promise and something so cliché like that is still resorted too as a means of scares.

The presence of children makes the thrilling film.

Derrickson's original horror film was, much to everyone's dismay, an unexpected surprise for me.

Despite not being very memorable, Sinister was an entertaining horror film which found an adequate angle to the "vindictive ghosts" formula.

Aside from some atmospheric sequences, such as the ominous shadows in the church, this was pointless.

I got so bored I had to turn it off.


Now the plot is set after the events of the first film and considering the first film was a snooze fest, it's not surprising that this film is also very boring.

They're just a rehash of decades old clichés of poorly lit scenes when something steps out, things suddenly moving into shot, and unexpected events that catch the viewer off guard with a little bit of misdirection.

Certainly for me just because my wife is so scared every time he appears on the screen and just that alone is entertaining for me.

Just gross torture scenes - no plot, per se, just mindless torture scenes of pain, blood, and screams.

Boring, unimaginative and not scary in the slightest .

It did have some creep factor and managed to build up some good atmosphere; but as with most horror films, it relied too much on empty jump scares.

This sequel has a bit different feel to it, but it's still relatively low key and slow paced.

The first movie was an abomination, boring, devoid of scares, and Ethan Hawke wearing a rather fetching cardigan.

Sinister stands on its own, while Sinister 2 lays in the pile of pointless, unwanted, cash grab horror sequels that deserve to be erased from human history.

The movie has some really creative and haunting horror imagery and atmosphere, but it is slow paced and not that involving.

The plot was entertaining.

I found subplot of the crazy dad, so pointless.

Even though I already knew what was driving the children to do such horrible acts, Sinister 2 was still very enjoyable.

Sinister 2 was definitely worth the watch.

We are introduced to a mother and 2 sons living a dull life next to some church that the people from the first film were killed in or something like that, it was hard to pay attention when the actors don't even sound like they care.

Enjoyable and atmospheric in spite of an innocuous and confused plot .

Are you looking for a movie with no plot, actors who play like they just started acting school and about to fail all of the classes, CGI thats worse than the app that you got on your 2005 nokia phone?

But if definitely had some very slow parts too.

I recommend watching if you're bored one night and you've seen just about all the horror movies out there.

Explanations don't exist and without good lines to explain the plot, it's just a waste of time.

The lack of horror, and poor acting, leads to the film being very dull.

The climax and resolution (which baits for a sequel, as most horror films do, the cliché that "and everything got back to normal ...

The scene where Mr. Boogie suddenly shows up behind Deputy "So and So" is extremely unnecessary (besides of being cliché).

These scares, which are throughout the majority of the film, don't work because you know exactly when they are going to occur, making them extremely predictable.

About as "sinister" as the Teletubbies and just as predictable.

It's not scary, it's boring.

worst boring movie of 2016 .

Along with a ridiculously over-the-top abusive husband side plot, a weak script and bland direction, Sinister 2 is one of the biggest disappointments of the year for horror.

I enjoyed it, although not quite as much as the first film.

But then the third act arrives, which was depicted several times in nightmarish visions so was hardly a surprise, using every horror cliché available to ensure that any literary meaning had been taken by "Mr.

It leads him to a farmhouse near the site of a mass murder in a church which he expects to find empty.

Wow this was poor , a bore fest , I had been really looking forward to this so was very disappointed.

And a terribly dull performance from Sossamon who says "okay" in every frickin' sentence whilst obviously chewing her gum like a cow grazing, "okay?

I am almost certain that if Deputy So & So wasn't in this, I wouldn't have enjoyed it as much as I did.

Another problem with the scares in this movie is that the imagery is significantly more mundane.

Literally, worst movie I have ever watched by far.

" moments, and even the murder videos feel a bit lazier and more contrived.

and the ending was SO ABRUPT that I left the theater, feeling like ''WTF????

They were, for the most part, pretty dull / tame.

The main character guy was lame as hell, seemed like he had autism, kids were annoying and bad actors, the mom was a bore, step dad was a over the top, and the monster looked like Michael Jackson wearing a Slipnot mask.

No need to have watched the first one, but if you did, and enjoyed it, then you should like this one as well.

The 'scares' are cheap, predictable and, well, not very scary.

It definitely lacks what a horror film required the most, and predictable too.

I enjoyed it a lot and so should you if you're in the mood for something different rather than the thousands of action movies where the main character beats up 100 guys and walks away without a scratch.

Clearly, implausible plotting and convoluted predicaments are two other problems that afflict this contrived chiller.

:-D ), the ham radio scene and the intense ending.

It lost his element of surprise but it is still enjoyable .

You don't have to see the first movie to see this one, but I highly recommend it.

Predictable .

It is thrilling, creepy when it needs to be, and the acting is good.

However, Sinister 2 didn't leave me very satisfied, because a good part of its running time consists on repetitive nightmares, mostly cheap shocks and unnecessary digressions (such as the obligatory visit to the "expert" who fills in some holes regarding Bughuul's story).

It was a really gripping story with a lot of interesting characters.

The plot of this Sinister 2 is also unpredictable just like the first Sinister.

Sadly though I think the franchise is following The Ring, Insidious, Children of the Corn, The Messengers and The Conjuring with unnecessary sequels and follow-ups and I'll bet that in a year or so we'll be seeing a Sinister 3 and it'll just become repetitive.

Your paying for over an hour and a half of jumpscares, filled with a terrible plot, cliché characters, decent script, with practically the entire movie pretty much told in the trailer, along with two of the worst twists I've ever seen.

To Repeat An Old Cliché...

Sinister 2 almost made me leave the cinema as well, only for a different reason: it's an unbelievably dull movie which makes you disturbed with how bad it is.

most pointless sequel EVER.

I had high hopes coming into this movie but what a bore...

It's more productive, and enjoyable than EITHER Sinister flick could ever be.

The main story was stale and predictable and the characters were unsympathetic and cold.

It's convoluted, contrived and pointless.

While some were predictable- actually no VERY predictable, some still managed to catch me when I least expect it.

The following is why:-Bad acting -Predictable storyline -Characters you "feel in touch with" -Those real annoying kids(2sons -The utterly abysmal ending

The ending feels rushed and familiar, but getting there is more exciting and uncertain than it is for most sequels.

Worst Movie Ever.

I could have left to go the shop across the road and come back again and still wouldn't have missed anything worth watching, in terms of either relevance to the story or to scare the audience.

There were a number of confusing things - the big one that stands out to me is, how did the deputy know where Clint's house was?

After seeing the trailer, it looked like they were going to go over the top with this one and make it intense.

My husband fell asleep about half way through so that tells me he wasn't all that impressed either.

This is the second outing for Bughuul and I must say that his rules are the most complex and difficult to follow of any horror baddie I can think of.

Dull, and Not Scary .

Overall, I thought the film was quite dark, intense & scary!

Here, again, it's devoid of scares, pretty boring in parts, and Shannyn Sossaman wearing a rather fetching line of just post Victorian London attire.

The problem is that the A Plot is so focused that the narrative needs the B Plot to slow the movie down.

Quite frankly, I found the subplot about the custody nastiness far more compelling than the supernatural shenanigans.

When Baghuul popped out of nowhere for the tenth time, I just wanted to leave the cinema.

My guess is that SINISTER 2 is supposed to get most of the slower parts of a franchise out of the way so the future sequels don't get bogged down too.

But there is one thing I found enjoyable in this movie and it's the "film" scenes.

It all just felt contrived and superficial.

So I found the original "Sinister" film to be quite entertaining despite its flaws.

Pretty pointless and dumb.

It was suspenseful, it was scary, and it was well thought out.

This film is so god damn boring, even while baked off my head I struggle to enjoy this film.

The movie had a few jolts, but it wasn't as interesting because the family was boring and it was also a custody movie about the abusive father taking the kids away from his ex-wife.

So in the end, Sinister 2 is a dumb, dull, clichéd, sequel that completely abandons the things the original film did well, most importantly the horror.

"Sinister," through assured directing, slowburn suspense, and a gripping, clearly invested performance by Ethan Hawke, was one of the genre's standouts, proving that the paranormal had some discernible life and potential longevity in it.

While this improves on the first in few ways, it takes enough risks and gives us the right amount of the unexpected, that which we didn't get before.

I saw Sinister in theaters and really enjoyed it, so finding out about a sequel was pretty exciting.

In this version, Bughuul seems more like one of those cliché-type of horror entities that shows up behind the main character (as it naturally does in this version) with the intention of just going unseen.

Sinister 2 is one of the worst movies I've seen this year and its definitely worthy of 4% on RT.

The "twist", sadly, is terribly predictable, with the actual ending obviously trying to cover for it in an obviously amateur way.

The atmosphere was brooding, the imagery was disturbing, the pacing was deliberately slow, the acting was convincing, the suspense was constantly lingering, the scares were genuine, and you were on the same page as the protagonist the entire time.

Suspense was established but - in my eyes - the last piece for a stunning grand finale was missing.

The kind of horror that seems to be dying is genuine good horror that also manages to be an engaging story.

The rare sequel that lives up to the legacy of its predecessor, 'Sinister 2' offers gripping suspense while amping up the shlock for a genuinely unnerving experience .

I have a low tolerance for bratty depictions of troubled youngsters in films like this, and the often dewy-eyed mother's intense efforts in trying to 'understand' them.

The horror in this film was just awful, very predictable, nothing original apart from one scene.

It was okay-ly entertaining.