Fresh and Exciting

Fantastic!

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Blistering performances.

I did not like the first movie of Alone in the dark. But I really like this movie. I do not why it got a 3.4. It one the horror movie I have seen. I give it 10. I had nothing to do the first movie of Alone it the dark. Which is probably why it is a good movie. Do not see the first movie of Alone in the dark. Just see this movie. This movie has a great story line. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. It is scarier then The Shining and that is not easy to do. Rcik Yune is a great actor. Rachel Specter is a great actress. This is a great horror film. If you want to see a really scary movie you should see this movie.

This movie has absolutely nothing in common with the first, except for its name. And unlike the same trick when tried by the makers of "The Skeleton Key 2", this one is thankfully much, much better than the first.It's still not what I'd call "great", but it's watchable. It's just that the first "Alone in the Dark" sucked SO MUCH, that almost -anything- would be much, much better in comparison.While there aren't a ton of special effects, the few that exist were done very well. The main male character's acting was flat, but then so were his well-defined and oft-shown abs, so I guess he can be forgiven that.All the characters were rather shallowly written. Lance Henrickson and Bill Mosley are the most well-known stars, but even their characters were written to about the same degree of quality as the lesser-known actors. They played them well, but there really wasn't much all that impressive to play.Still, like I said, it's watchable. It'll keep you entertained to some degree while it's on, just don't expect to be blown away.

Now THIS film should be tossed onto the dung heap of "worst films ever made". The anti Uwe Boll brigade obviously want to rub it in by giving this film a higher rating than its predecessor. Why the first AitD gets such a poor rating, while this one gets almost double is completely beyond me. In this film the story makes absolutely no sense. The actors are dreadful. The script is just god awful. The SFX are practically non-existent. I was amused when I saw that Lance Henrikson was in this film... he has this tendency to be in just about every bad movie ever made (he's managed to be in three good/great films so far - Aliens; Powder; Close Encounters of the Third Kind). So seeing his name is sort of a warning bell to me. Now, I actually BOUGHT this DVD after reading so many positive things about it, about how it was far superior to the first AitD, how the effects were so much better, the script, the acting... well, I want my money back. I'm thinking of sending a bill to everyone who posted on IMDb about this film. All that to say: rent it if it's at the video club. Buy it if you ABSOLUTELY must have everything that Lance Henrikson ever played in. Skip it if you really, really thought the first film was "bad"... because honey, this one ain't any better, it's FAR worse.

Alone in the Dark II starts as paranormal detective Edward Carnby (Rick Yune) helps some guy into a hospital morgue, in return the guy is going to give Carnby an ancient cursed dagger. During a scuffle with some Witch hunters Carnby is stabbed with the dagger & gets infected with 'lines' & has dreams & visions of a woman named Elisabeth Dexter (Allison Lange) being scarified with said dagger during a supernatural ceremony. Now Elisabeth is back as an evil ghost Witch who kills anyone who has become infected with the 'lines' & Elisabeth also wants to possess her ancestor Natalie Dexter (Rachel Spector) who along with her worried father (Bill Moseley) form half the Witch hunting team. The Witch hunters believe that by finding Elisabeth's remains she can be laid to rest for good & that Carnby's visions hold to key to where Elisabeth is buried but the evil ghost Witch tries to kill them all before they get to her remains...Written & directed by the duo of Michael Roesch & Peter Scheerer this is the direct to video sequel to Alone in the Dark (2005) which itself was based on a video game of the same name although had very little to do with the video game besides featuring lead character Edward Carnby & Alone in the Dark II has nothing to do with the game either but also has nothing to do with the original Alone in the Dark beside the returning character of Edward Carnby. Got that? Good. Alone in the Dark II is a spectacularly bad film on all levels, from the incomprehensible script to the cheap production values to a wasted cast of veterans who deserve to be in better films than Alone in the Dark II. The script is a mess from start to finish, there's so much supernatural nonsense that the makers keep bombarding the audience with that it becomes hard to keep up. By the time the end came & Carnby was holding that birds head in a wooden barrel with light shooting out I was thinking just who the hell did the film end up at this point? From things like a disintegrating dagger (that never does disintegrate at all) to an infection that causes'lines' on a person body that move for some reason to the ability of the Witch to track the infected to moving foundations of laboratories to character's firing machine guns at the ghost even though bullets don't do anything at all to people trying to look scared in a wire fenced cage to a guy who has kidnapped Carnby leaving his gun next to where Carnby is sleeping to a trap filled laboratory where all the answers to the traps are written on a piece of paper in plain sight to a senseless twist ending in which the Witch wanted the events that happened to happen exactly the way that they did & a climax where to bring his girlfriend back from the dead Carnby has to stab her in the chest with a dagger. At 80 odd minutes long I was throughly bored, it tries to be a mystery but each new part of the puzzle the script gives us just confuses things even more & the script ends up being a complete mess of character's talking supernatural rubbish that means nothing & trying to look serious &/or scared at the appropriate time.There isn't even any decent horror scenes here, to get a kiddie friendly PG rating there's no blood or gore apart from a leg wound & a dead body. The CGI computer effects are OK but a swirling mass of lines that merge to form a CGI Witch just doesn't look that impressive. There's no real build-up or tension or atmosphere, the whole film is quite bright & just looks like no-one involved tried that hard. Surely fans of the video game series & film fans in general won't be happy with this senseless & confused supernatural ghost story that lacks logic, scares & any sort of gore.The IMDb says this had a budget of about $4,600,000 which I find hard to believe, surely it was a lot less than that? Where did all the money go? Sure it's competently made but totally uninvolving & bland. Apparently shot in California & New York. There's a good cast here with the likes of Lance Henriksen, Danny Trejo, Bill Moseley & Jason Connery but the material is awful & they are slumming it here.Alone in the Dark II is an awful fantasy horror thriller that is a total mess from start to finish with a senseless script that tries to do too much. No real horror thanks to the PG rating, several well liked stars wasted & a really boredom to the whole affair I would say that the original Alone in the Dark is far better than this.