Critics agree: the only thing that scares Five Nights at Freddy's 2 how poorly built it is. GuardianJesse Hassenger says the film doesn't even transition between scenes with anything other than a lumbering robot in a pizzeria. The film has a stinking 12% on Rotten Tomatoeswith the vast majority of reviews calling the film boring, confusing or hacky. One exception: a review of RogerEbert.comwhich appreciates the film's core enjoyment: “They used to make simple sequels like this all the time in the 1980s. Now this feels like the best throwback, an Amblin/Spielberg-style horror adventure that's thoughtful and smart enough to deserve your attention.” Viewers also tell a different story. The Popcornmeter (at time of publication) is 88%. Viewers still can't wait to meet Freddy and his robot friends.
FNAF2 installed one year after first filmwith former security guard Mike (Josh Hutcherson), ex-cop Vanessa (Elizabeth Lail) and former 10-year-old (now 11) Abby (Piper Rubio) still dealing with the trauma of their last five nights at the same pizzeria. Vulture's Bilge Ebiri found the injury story particularly outrageous in FNAF2, because that's what every horror movie we're talking about present time. It used to be that you could just scare people with the concept of a guy in a hockey mask. Or a big drop. These days are no more.
“Injury. They did everything because of the injury. Even more than last time. If first Five Nights at Freddy's played as a clumsy attempt to introduce young children to horror pacing, and then continued the game feels like a clumsy attempt to introduce horror clichés to slightly older kids. And so, to the endless list of modern genre films about injurynow we have to add Five nights with Freddy 2. It makes some crazy sense: Isn’t the point of these movies to imitate all the other scary movies?” — Bilge Ebiri, Vulture
“Haunted Family Restaurant Animatronics” Five Nights at Freddy's the films are clunky and clunky, making it difficult to understand how they can physically move from place to place as quickly as is necessary for a meaningful kill. In what may be taken to be a case of form following function, Five Nights at Freddy's 2 moves exactly the same. It's so demonstrably awkward that it constantly draws attention for its clumsy imitations of actions that would be intuitive to other films, even bad ones, such as transitions between scenes or locations.” — Jesse Hassenger Guardian
“Original creator Scott Cawthon returns as sole screenwriter this time around. While there's generally more going on than the dull first film, the sequel's script exhibits a completely different kind of incompetence. Cawthon sets up a lot of rules and subplots only to later ignore them completely. It feels like his script never got any greenlight before filming out of laziness, as a sequel to a beloved IP is sure to make money.” — Tyler Taing Discussion of the film
“The sequel was also a disappointment in the horror department. Like the first film, it is rated PG-13, so no one was expecting a gore fest. However, the kills were more effective in the first film, as was the suspense throughout the film surrounding the secret truth about Freddy Fazbear. Tammy showed in the first film that she could pull off effective, entertaining PG-13 horror scenes, but somehow that didn't happen in this film.” — Chris Hayner Polygon
“Not only does the film have a more intricate plot, but also more active filmmaking, with more camera tweaks and visual vivacity. It also feels like an honest video game adaptation, as its melodramatic plot and formulaic but detailed plot are reminiscent of video game mechanics, especially the main characters' well-thought-out use of analog technology, such as computer cards and passwords, walkie-talkies and headphones. They used to make simple sequels like this all the time in the 1980s. Now this seems better.” a comeback horror adventure in the style of Amblin and Spielberg, thoughtful and smart enough to deserve your attention.” RogerEbert.com
