Mirrors 2 (2010)

Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

After watching the first feature of this rare mainstream Horror duology, I've had very little expectations. If there's one thing I believe all of us Horror fans learnt from The Ring, is that high expectations for a sequel are doomed to come crashing down. Then again, lowered expectation leave room for some nice surprises and a better viewing experience.Knowing that, I sat down to watch Mirrors 2. The first thing I was glad about was seeing the incredible Nick Stahl, one of the most outrageously underrated actors in Hollywood, staring in his own Horror film, and one that is pretty high budget and mainstream (this is not to sat that mainstream is always good, only that it's nice that when Horror finally gets another mainstream feature, it's Nick Stahl who stars in it). Absolutely magnificent in Terminator 3, Sin City and On the Inside (you probably haven't seen it, I recommend you do), Stahl brought his absolute A game to work. Again. The slightly awkward ever struggling facial expressions, the friendly relatable body language, all the fine acting that make Stahl the perfect tragic hero and everyone's best friend is all here. Simply a pleasure! Having said that, I must say the rest of the cast (Emmanuelle Vaugier and Larence Turner in particular) did a fine job as well, and it's difficult to get recognized for good acting when you're hopelessly overshadowed by an actor of Stahl's proportions.The story is not half bad, yet not that impressive. Pretty much the same as in the first film. On one hand it means that there's nothing breathtaking, special or unusually good about it, on the other hand, it's not a complete fall compared to the first. Always nice to see the rules of Horror sequels broken. As in Mirrors, Mirrors 2's story lacked any substantial plot twists, and the direction it took towards the ending felt very out of place to me. Not to give any spoilers, but when it comes to ghosts haunting mirrors - attempting to reinvent the wheel in regards to their motivations is slightly off putting.Effects are of course Hollywood-level impressive, which means all the blood and gore you fans of all things revolting and nauseating could want. I, personally, am not a fan of these, and so I find these affects to be redundant to the point of being a nuisance. Unnecessary. You hear me, Hollywood? Unnecessary. It's high time we separated Horror from Gore, they are two completely different genres, and making an audience sick to their stomach is a million miles away from making them terrified.All in all, Mirrors 2 is nothing special, nor does it need to be. Mirrors 1 was nothing special, and only specific points of the story and Kiefer Sutherland's acting made it above average. Mirrors 2 is about the same, with Stahl having no problems in filling Sutherland's shoes. A good sequel, fun to watch, scary at times, definitely worthy of your time.

In all of it's mediocrity mirrors 2 fares better than it's predecessor. At least this time there's a story we can follow well enough. Even though it's completely clichéd and pretty much the plot of Shutter the original and the remake with a touch of Mirrors added in. I'm not sure what divulge exactly but I guess I can say it's a ghost revenge movie. Something bad happened involving a missing girl and her spirit comes back to take revenge against the people responsible. it's all fairly generic and fright free but there are a few genuine chills and some good death sequences. The film is pretty gory with shotty cinematography and by the numbers direction. The performances from Nick Stahl slumming it and Emmanuel Vaugier are solid enough for the material and maybe a little too good for it to be honest. The film is mildly inventive as far as genre films go. It just kinda feels like you've seen this all before and it's because you have... 2.5/5

"Mirrors 2" is pretty okay as a stand-alone feature, but it pales in comparison with Alexandre Aja's first film (which on its term was a re-make of an Asain film). This time, the film isn't exactly what the first one was about. Instead they turned it into a 'vengeful ghost' story. Not bad, really, but pretty standard stuff. Nevertheless, we get a couple of bloody death scenes, a bit of nice atmosphere, a dash of mystery (which isn't too hard to figure out) and some okay performances (though no Oscar worthy material, naturally). The over-all end result is just about decent enough. You could do a lot worse with other stuff that's being cranked out on DVD nowadays, especially when it comes to (loose) sequels. Teaming up "Mirrors 2" as a double bill with something like "White Noise 2: The Light" wouldn't be a bad way to spend a straight-to-DVD horror sequel night with your girlfriend.

Terrible movie, at times I wanted to stop watching it, but decided to watch it until the end. I think that they should have started a movie from telling a little bit about this mysterious girl. One more thing was unclear, why she did not start taking on her vengeance from the guy who killed her?Dialogues are really stupid, two policemen were really bad in their acting. Even the main character was wooden.Well, don't even waste your time on this terrible movie. There's nothing in common with the first Mirrors. They could have called this movie anything but mirrors, since visions appear on any glassy surface.My vote: 2 out of 10