Editor’s Note: Spoilers for the movie are included

Blumhouse Productions released their anticipated sequel to “Five Nights at Freddy’s” on Dec. 5, 2025. “Five Nights at Freddy’s 2” is a supernatural horror film based on the iconic video game franchise of the same name, which opened to not-so-great reviews. Don’t panic yet; this movie still has a lot of great moments for fans and casual moviegoers.

To give a spoiler-free summary, “FNAF 2” resumes the story a year following the events of the first movie. Josh Hutcherson and Piper Rubio reprise their roles as Mike and Abby Schmidt, a brother and sister duo, as both try to move on from the events of the first film by starting a new life. Abby, still grieving the potential loss of her animatronic friends from the first movie, tries to reunite with them throughout the film while Mike tries everything in his power to stop her.

The movie reiterated its central theme of dealing with past trauma while also diving deeper into topics of childhood grief and PTSD. I thought the inclusion of these themes in the sequel was OK, but needed to be polished a lot more in the writers’ room. These themes also leave a few plot holes, but again, the writers’ room should have fixed them. 

While on the topic of writing, this movie’s dialogue is painful at times, making it difficult to listen to. The script was written by the creator of “FNAF,” Scott Cawthon, and you can tell which sections were his and which ones were rewritten by a professional. Before you raise your pitchforks and throw on a $5,000 animatronic bear suit, I will say this script added juicy lore to the movie. 

But the lore, in fact, left more questions than it answered. This also brings in a major issue with the movie — it’s written for the fan base, not general audiences.

Essentially, I needed a PHD from Harvard in “FNAF” lore to understand this movie. A wider audience is going to struggle comprehending the plot because of how complex the lore dropping is. I’d much rather catch up on “Muppets” lore than “FNAF” lore.

Speaking of the Muppets, the animatronic characters become a lot more quirky in this installment. The Jim Henson Creature Shop returned to the film and came back swinging, as always, with the new animatronics that appeared on screen. They looked and moved incredibly and were more terrifying than in the first film.

Spoilers below!!! 

I can’t believe Jim Carrey came in toward the end and teamed up with Sabrina Carpenter to defeat Ariana Grande from “Wicked” in a ping-pong match. These are not spoilers, but a buffer to make sure people don’t accidentally read them. Spoilers actually begin now!

The ending of this film was absolutely confusing and unnecessary. The animatronics from the first movie coming back to save Mike, Abby and Vanessa from Michael was an ok choice, but also was a complete scapegoat to make sure FNAF 3 happens. Don’t get me wrong, it totally would have been a crazy moment if it were written and set up properly, but truly, that was terrible writing. 

Also, the main conflict is disappointing and poorly written. Why is Mike pushing Vanessa away because she can’t deal with her trauma? She was doing what you were instructing, and you pushed her aside like it was her problem? 

The writing in this movie is just awful. FNAF fans should go full 1985 Chicago Bears and demolish Scott’s script with their own. The ending was also dissatisfying because what do you mean, Vennessa is turned evil for no reason, just to cut to the credits? I understand it’s game-accurate, but it makes zero sense.

Also, Michael Afton’s appearance was a treat. I know a little bit of the lore, so seeing Michael show up and instigate all of this was perfect; however, he escaped too easily. Also, that teacher, who I found out was played by Wayne Knight, AKA Dennis Nedry from “Jurassic Park” or Al from “Toy Story 2,” had one of the worst acting performances of his career. 

It was not his fault because mainly the dialogue got him, but also, you are Wayne Knight. You are funny, and you can totally make those lines better. 

Overall 4/10

First off, this movie is not as bad as everyone thinks. I grade movies not on story alone, but include cinematography, production design, editing and sound design. I used to study film theory and production before changing my major, so I have a very interesting perspective on why these critics are wrong for bombing this movie. 

The movie, as I have previously stated, has terrible writing. I do not even know how this movie got greenlit, but everyone is sleeping on the production design. The movie looks like it takes place in the early 2000s. Every flashback, overgrown building and murderous robot bear feels authentic to that time period. 

The cinematography was great. There were a lot of shots during which I actually said, “Wow, that’s pretty.” The lighting in this movie was done well and deserves more recognition. It successfully captured the ability to light a subject and make them look like they are in the area without sticking out. 

The post side of production did an incredible job. The score of this movie is from the infamous Newton Brothers, who killed it on the last movie with the score and continued their hot streak. The sound design for this movie is also very high quality and deserves recognition. 

If the script were better and the production crew hired an acting coach, maybe this film would have been higher on my list. Critics love to only look at the story and the writing of movies, so I can see why this film was ranked lower in critics’ eyes compared to mine, but hey, that’s just a film theory.

Advertisement