Thanks for the memories!

Expected more

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Silent Night, Deadly Night is hailed as a bit of a cult classic in the slasher genre. It told the story of a young man who snapped and went on a killing spree while wearing a santa costume.Part 2 tells the story of his brother who is basically doing the same thing but is a tad brighter.Sadly the first third of the film is heavily flashbacks so it feels like you're watching the first film all over again. When the new material kicks in it's essentially more of the same.The original film despite it's fame remains to me as a distinctly average feature and this sequel is about on par.A couple of fairly original deaths, a competent lead playing the manic Ricky Caldwell and the usual tropes and cliches of the sub-genre.It's astounding that this managed 5 movies total, hopefully they haven't peaked already with this one as I'm part 3 bound shortly.The Good:Eric FreemanFollows on from the first film well enoughThe Bad:FAR too much footage from the first filmThings I Learnt From This Movie:A nun would have no problem moving into house no.666Nuns are trained in the art of wheelchair ninjutsuThe church provides a spare wheelchair in case of acts of god

Quite possibly the worst sequel EVER!!! With the first film being nothing short of a masterpiece of slasher cinema, this film is a complete and utter disappointment.So much potential...wasted.The entire first half is a cheap rehashing of the first film...making the entire thing come off as a lazy cash grab (though I can't imagine word of mouth did it any good).What is most frustrating, is that they set themselves up so perfectly for a sequel at the end of the first film. But then chose the most uninspired and least creative route, they could have possibly taken.And the second half isn't much better, either. It's boring, drawn out, uninspired, poorly acted, and chock full of some of the most patently ridiculous kills you'll ever have the displeasure of watching.The whole story is retold here, from the perspective of Billy's (the antagonist from the first film) now institutionalized little brother- in flashbacks- despite the fact that he couldn't possibly have been privy to many details (as all parties involved would end up deceased).Far too much time is dedicated to the attempted development of our antagonists psychological character...and what follows simply doesn't make up for it.In the end, this film fails in every regard, where the original managed to succeed...and is simply a waste of time.2 out of 10.

The first 40 minutes of this 88-minute-long movie is a recap of the prequel. I'm not even joking, with the end credits being 4 minutes long, almost half of the movie is a recap. So, unless you want to watch a shorter version of the first movie again, you can do yourself a favor and just skip the first 40 minutes. You won't miss anything, believe me.Now, what we basically have left is a 44-minute film with ridiculous plot and one of the worst acting in the history of cinema I've ever seen, done by the main actor, Eric Freeman. Coincidentally, he never got any major roles after this movie ever again.If you are really curious, and really want to watch this movie, I do not advise watching it alone. Not because it's scary or anything (it's not), but because watching it with friends might end up entertaining after all as you laugh together how bad this movie is.

Ricky (Eric Freeman), the brother of the killer in the first film, talks to a psychiatrist (James Newman) about how he became a brutal killer after his brother died, leading back to Mother Superior (Jean Miller).I can say with confidence that this movie ranks among the worst in the horror genre. I have seen worse, but it is not often. In 2012, I watched roughly 500 films... and "Silent Night, Deadly Night 2" ranks in the top three for being terrible. I would not wish it upon anyone.The biggest problem is that it spends the entire first half of the film showing clips from the first film. So, you have no reason to watch the first movie if you watch this one. And if you did watch the first one, this film will bore you to tears... maybe even to death. The second half improves, but that does not take very much.The second biggest problem is Eric Freeman. We could call his performance "unintentionally funny", but that would be too complimentary. He cannot act, he chews the scenery, there is nothing sympathetic or interesting about him. How he was hired remains a mystery, and he can wear it as a badge of honor that he may be the worst "actor" ever to get a paycheck.