Damien Leone’s, Terrifier 2, is dividing audiences with its gratuitous on-screen violence. Some are hailing it as a blood-soaked masterpiece while others view it as a one-dimensional horror which relies on shock value to compensate for weak real narrative and a lack of depth.
Terrifier 2, the sequel to Damien Leone’s Terrifier, was released in the US on October 6, 2022. It has turned out to be one of the most successful films of the year when looking at the numbers. The film was produced on a meagre budget of $250,000 and has pulled in $12.6 million at the box office.
This success could be attributed to the film making headlines for making squeamish cinema goers reach for a vomit bag, faint, or flee the cinema in disgust. The on-screen depictions of violence have been crafted to the most minute gory detail, which includes buckets of blood, dismemberment, and torture. In between this gore fest, there is some semblance of a plot. It tells the story of a young teenager, Sienna Shaw, and her encounter with the perpetrator of the Miles County Massacre, Art the Clown.
The film’s narrative is lacking. The film’s director and writer, Damien Leone, promised that the second film would provide some background and understanding to the backstory of the film’s antagonist. The film provides a very unremarkable protagonist with a background that remains unclear till the end of the film. The film tries to establish a connection between the protagonist and the antagonist but the film fails to provide any understanding of what this connection was. The protagonist feels almost disposable, as the film doesn’t effectively invest the audience in her.
It does have a certain charm reminiscent of the grindhouse films of the 1970’s which have inspired directors such as Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino. The film is campy and entertaining at parts, but it is obvious that the film banks on its shock value to keep the audience’s interest.
It is obvious that the majority of that $250,000 dollars was spent on the practical effects of the film. The props and bloody practical effects are effective and were crafted to make the kill scenes as visceral as possible. The cinematography was mediocre. There were no shots in the film which were memorable or required any form of interpretation. There were some attempts at shot stylisation to create an ambience of a B horror, but in my opinion, it could have been done more effectively. However, the sound design was fairly impressive considering the tiny budget. The sound created the ambience of a B horror film more effectively than the cinematography. The sounds accompanying the on-screen brutality were nauseating. Every splatter and bone cracking sound effect created a sense of unease.
The acting was very mediocre. With such a small budget, it was unlikely to draw any big names in Hollywood onto the project. The lead role of Sienna Shaw was filled by Lauren LaVera, who been in some larger Hollywood projects as a supporting actor. The character she plays in the film lacked depth, so it would have been difficult for even a seasoned actor to make the role more interesting. The role of Art the Clown was filled by David Howard Thornton. For a role with no dialogue, he does manage to make the villain interesting. His timing and facial expressions do add a certain appeal.
The Verdict:
3/5
Despite all the criticisms I mention above, the film does manage to be entertaining, but it is by no means a horror classic in my opinion. The plot is patchy, the acting is uninspiring, but the film has a morbid appeal that fans of gory horror will appreciate. If one considers the logistics of the film and the meagre budget, Damien Leone managed to do a lot with very little. Definitely not a film for the squeamish
Marius Writes Stuff for You?! 
Leave a comment