source: Alone in the Dark 2

When I first heard about this movie, and the fact that it was released straight to video, I was not optimistic. Then I noticed that Lance Henriksen was in it, and that Bill Moseley was joining the cast. Definitely it is not supposed to be a masterpiece, but there are some good points in the movie like the demonstration of how somebody who fights against evil becomes evil himself. The acting was fine and the plot was decent, although the CGI wasn't anything special but it was okay, believe me there are far worse examples of of CGI animation out there. This movie may not win any awards but it was definitely worth watching. There's really not a lot of gore here, and no sex whatsoever. The ever-brilliant Lance Henrikson (the man with THE coolest voice in the world) turns in a great performance as disenchanted old witch hunter. The plot prefers to turn slowly into a gnarled tale of battling with an inner demon.

A group of highly armed investigators end up somewhere in park escaping into a restroom. One of them suffers from some condition that makes his veins pop out. They are being chased by some smoke that also materializes into a woman. We find out that she's a witch. Some dagger is of importance, a dagger that has a piece of the witch's heart in it. Some guy ends up witnessing the massacre of this group by the smoke. Later he's stumbling through New York as he suffers from the same vein-popping condition. He finds an expert in occult matters who perhaps can help him, named Edward. But the investigator ends up infected himself. Another group of investigators comes to their rescue and takes them to the country. This group involves the leader, played by Bill Moseley, his daughter played by the delicious Rachel Specter, Danny Trejo, and the giant Ralf Moeller. They are trying to capture the witch but are somewhat overwhelmed so they seek the help of someone who has faced the witch before, a retired expert in the occult played by Lance Henriksen, who reluctantly agrees to help. It all turns into a race to kill the with before Edward dies. We learn the witch is after the Rachel's character. In flashbacks we learn that a relative of hers confronted the witch before. There's a lot of story in this movie that gets somewhat confusing. The dagger is important, the piece of heart in it, the witches heart itself, the flashbacks of Rachel's relatives, and so on. One gets the impression that the story doesn't work out quite well. But we're dealing with witches, ghosts, and the supernatural, so perhaps it's pointless to expect realism and logic. The special effects are very good. The menacing smoke looks very neat. Rachel Specter is so gorgeous, she steals the show. She has a great body, not just skin and bones. And while her acting is iffy, Lance Henriksen's acting makes up for it, and then some. His acting is just superb. This movie has its moments and highlights but also its weaknesses.

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.

I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THEY MADE A 2nd FILM until I seen it on the supermarket shelf... Plotwise it actually has one. And one that is reasonably well fleshed out. Characters are given good reasons for their actions and are developed quite well, given the constraints of the budget. The effects, though looking a little poor in some scenes, never dominate the movie anyhow and are there purely to further the story. Acting-wise, there are a few less than stellar performances and when you can say, with complete certainty that Lance Henriksen gives the most convincing performance of the cast. The fact is, I never expect much with sequels so I was pleasantly surprised by this one. While it is not the best movie I've ever seen, it is no slouch and far better than the last horror movie I saw, Boogeyman. No comparison whatsoever.

I'll watch just about anything that has Lance Henriksen in it because he's one of my favorite actors. The movies can range from good quality to bottom-of-the-barrel quality, but even in the stinkers, Lance manages to keep them entertaining with his own unique style of doing things. I'll say that this movie was somewhat better than i expected. What i got was an interesting piece which i might sooner qualify as a supernatural thriller than a horror movie. The movie was enjoyable in a not-to-be-taken-too-seriously sort of way. This movie had potential. The story and especially the themes are interesting and the movie did have a huge cast of names. Lance Henriksen, Bill Moseley, just to name a few. The only important drawback of this film that it's not scary enough. To summarize, "Alone in the Dark Two" had a promising beginning and if the premise could be better utilized, it could have even been a great horror film.

This movie was bad, but not horrible. I enjoyed Bill Moseleys performance, because, well he's awesome, but besides that, the movie was pretty shite. Plus they kill his character off pretty early on(Yeah, they kill the one interesting character in the movie less than half way through!!!) The main thing that ticked me off was that the characters made stupid choices that no logical person would think were a good idea. It was established pretty early on in the movie that bullets don't work against ghosts, so why do the the Protagonists fail to realize this, constantly trying to mow down the witchy phantom with machine gun fire?! Its like trying to kill the Blob with a knife, it ain't gonna work folks. I didn't see the ending because I was watching it online and once I reached 70 min in the movie the website showing it pulled the good ol' you must pay to watch the rest of this movie. I assume the remaining characters all die horribly and in a manner so that an Alone in the Dark 3 can never be made.

Yes I'm one of the few people who thoroughly enjoyed the first Alone in the Dark. So I was extremely excited to find out the is a second one. There are some interesting characters in the film. Lance Henriksen plays most compelling and best performed character in the picture and Bill Moseley gives a very good performance. Unfortunately is the lead (Rick Yune as Edward Carnby) a disappointment. The story is not too bad. If you are willing to overlook some flaws you might find to like it. Alone in the Dark 2 is strange, as it's not your typical B or Z horror movie. Unlike Alone in the Dark 1, this movie has a strong potential in its deep roots, directly inherited from the game. PLUS it adds stuff from H. P. Lovecraft, which is always a good thing. From the get go, the movie goes look like a low-budget film, but compared to some of the crap I've seen, it's a good one. And for a low-budget DVD sequel, it's pretty good with a really great cast.

I always rate films I turned off as the lowest possible, and with Alone in the Dark 2, I could bear no more after only 35 minutes! I'm not a harsh judge of films, and I like to give them a chance to improve (hell, I sat through the entirety of the first one), but when the writing is such an absolute mess as this was, I knew already after 10 minutes that it had the go, and had totally given up on it after 20. The next 15 minutes were spent on me trying to use The Force to get the controller from the table. Hmm, so what's this film all about? Who cares? No, seriously, if you're curious or dumb enough to give it a go, you'll soon realise that this is a spot-on assessment. Some people die, there's some CGI mist, meant to be a ghostly witch, a dagger, some kind of infection, some weird racial transformation of the lead from the first film, some boring stuff, some nonsensical stuff... You get the point. Anyway, my summary above really does sum it all up, but for those who still need further warning: AVOID!

ALONE IN THE DARK 2 is a sequel that has virtually nothing in common with the first film except for the main character this time played by DIE ANOTHER DAY's Rick Yune but it is in a way better than the first one because it has a well put together storyline that is well fleshed out and the direction is very nicely handled, the best part is Uwe Boll didn't even direct this one. The acting is a case of hit and miss, some of cast hit their mark such as Bill Moseley and Lance Henriksen that both play their parts convincingly, the one cast member that misses the most is Rick Yune, I also saw him in a film called THE 5TH COMMANDMENT and between this one and that one, the ideal leading man he is not because he doesn't bring any energy to his character which results in him failing to carry the film. The fact that this film is better shows that the writers and directors Peter Scheers and Micheal Roesch put in more effort with this film than Uwe Boll did with the first, so take notes Mr. Boll you might learn something.