Paranormal Activity 2 Reviews

  • Even when nothing is happening, the often dead-silent shots tend to grow scarier the more you look at them.

    Owen Gleiberman — Entertainment Weekly

  • Cannily marketed as a collective experience, the Paranormal franchise works best in midnight screenings. The hunger for cold, dead chills is usually best indulged in the company of warm, living bodies.

    Jeannette Catsoulis — New York Times

  • Rarely is the second film in a horror franchise more frightening than the original, but Paranormal Activity 2 has more innocent victims and more scares than its predecessor.

    Claudia Puig — USA Today

  • (Paranormal Activity 2 movie review at Boston Globe)

    Ty Burr — Boston Globe

  • Eagle-eyed audiences watching every corner of the screen are rewarded with spooky "did-you-see-that?" moments.

    Joe Neumaier — New York Daily News

  • The filmmakers up the ante here with the addition of a smart teenage girl, an adorable toddler and a protective (but freaked-out) German shepherd named Abby.

    Joy Tipping — Dallas Morning News

  • The movie numbers the days as they tick away, and along about Day #12 I'm thinking, why are these people still here?

    Roger Ebert — Chicago Sun-Times

  • Demons of mediocrity, be gone! Here we have a shrewd sequel a touch better than the original.

    Michael Phillips — Chicago Tribune

  • Like Oren Peli, who created the first film, director Tod Williams keeps the dialogue So-Cal dumb and colorless, which must be part of the scare plan but makes both these movies hard to sit through.

    J. R. Jones — Chicago Reader

  • This is a date-night fright fest that delivers the goods, and will have you checking behind the door when you go to bed at night all over again.

    Adam Graham — Detroit News

  • What's unusual about these movies is that we know those scares are coming, and the filmmakers' drawn-out approach makes them even more effective when they finally arrive.

    Bill Goodykoontz — Arizona Republic

  • It's the screenplay that ultimately demonstrates too little imagination, beyond the manner in which it bookends its predecessor.

    Dennis Harvey — Variety

  • The movie's shortcomings are the Hollywood literalism in the third act, the need to show us things and connect dots that we don't need to connect.

    Roger Moore — Orlando Sentinel

  • As frightening as a bedsheet flapping on a clothesline.

    Peter Howell — Toronto Star

  • Succeeds by giving us another dose of what worked the first time.

    Eric D. Snider —

  • ...reaffirms familiar scare tactics...taps into a certain kind of eeriness implicit in the threat to suburban domesticity, which was precisely what made "Poltergeist" so frightening back in the day.

    Eric Kohn — indieWIRE

  • The best sequences are too familiar from the first movie, leaving a disappointing sense of deja boo.

    Liam Lacey — Globe and Mail

  • It's simultaneously a lot more expensive and a lot cheaper.

    Andrew O'Hehir —

  • Even knowing what's likely to come -- the doors opening on their own, the skeptical characters scoffing at metaphysical explanations, the unheeded warnings from paranormally gifted guests -- doesn't make it any less nailbiting to watch.

    Dana Stevens — Slate

  • The clumsy and obvious byproduct of the financial success of its predecessor last Halloween, this movie has no reason for existing except to provide Paramount Pictures with a few extra shekels.

    James Berardinelli — ReelViews

Top Movies