Critics Say Five Nights at Freddy's 2 Is a Clunker

"Trauma. They made it all about trauma. Even more than it was the last time. If the first Five Nights at Freddy's played like a clunky attempt to introduce youngish kids to the cadences of horror, then its sequelplays like a clunky attempt to introduce now slightly olderish kids to the clichés of horror. And so, to the endless list of modern genre films about trauma, we must now add Five Nights at Freddy's 2."

"The film has a stinky 12% on Rotten Tomatoes, with the vast majority of reviews calling the film boring, confusing, or hack. One outlier, the review at RogerEbert.com, which appreciates the film's basic pleasures: "They used to make unpretentious sequels like this all the time in the 1980s. Now this feels like the best kind of throwback, an Amblin/Spielberg-esque horror-adventure that's thoughtful and smart enough to warrant your attention." The audience also tells a different story."

The film holds a 12% score on Rotten Tomatoes, with many reviews calling it boring, confusing, or hack. Critics describe the movie as poorly constructed and clunky in scene transitions. The sequel emphasizes trauma as a central theme, prompting complaints that it recycles modern horror clichés. One review praises the film as an unpretentious, thoughtful throwback that recalls 1980s Amblin/Spielberg horror-adventure sensibilities. Audience response diverges from critics, with a Popcornmeter rating around 88% indicating strong viewer enthusiasm. The plot follows Mike, Vanessa, and Abby one year after their previous traumatic nights at the pizza restaurant.

Read at Vulture