'Candyman', itself a well done adaptation of Clive Barker's excellent source material, still holds up very well. Find it well-made and genuinely scary with great performances from Tony Todd (terrifying) and Virginia Madsen (in a difficult role) and a goosebump-inducing score from Phillip Glass. Didn't find myself though caring very much for 'Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh', where almost every component (though there were redeeming merits) was executed the opposite to the original.
As much as it pains me to say it, for me 'Candyman: Day of the Dead' is even worse. It is as far removed from the first 'Candyman' as one can get, if it weren't for the title character and Tony Todd it could easily pass for something else entirely because it sure didn't feel like 'Candyman' and more like a knock off from SyFy or The Asylum. 'Candyman: Day of the Dead' also is an insult to Clive Barker (saying this even when trying to take it on its own terms), is even more pointless than 'Farewell to the Flesh' and it doesn't even have the redeeming qualities that that sequel had (the setting, score and Todd).
The least bad thing about 'Candyman: Day of the Dead' is Ernie Hudson Jr, who comes over as quite assured. Sadly, he is not in it an awful lot.
One cannot appreciate the setting, which is nowhere near as colourful or atmospheric here, because the film looks so cheap, even for direct to video. Everything looks so drab, while the editing nauseates and the gore and effects are so afterthought-like in how they look. There is nothing goosebump inducing about the score, which came over as monotonous and repetitive. Even Todd isn't a redeeming quality here, describing his performance as going through the motions is being far too kind, he actually looks and sounds like he had gone a long period of being sleep-deprived.
He is nothing though compared to the catastrophically bad Donna D'Errico, who has no presence and is supremely irritating. Again, the characters are uninteresting and unrootable, with motivations that are either vague or illogical (both at times too). The dialogue is repetitive and long-winded, with the cheesiness far too much that you feel like you're being assaulted by it.
The story is the biggest problem, and for the same reasons that doomed the storytelling of 'Farewell to the Flesh'. The complete lack of risks and originality further adds to the constant feeling felt throughout the film "why does this exist?" Furthermore there is no tension, suspense or dread, killed by a deadeningly sluggish pace, the mind-numbing and quite insulting stupidity and everything being so predictable. Not only does it feel watered/dumbed down because of this lack of atmosphere, but the over-reliance of cheap-looking gore gives the film a cynical, mean-spirited edge and cheapens the atmosphere.
To conclude, despite not caring for the second film this was even worse and something of a disgrace to Barker. 2/10 Bethany Cox
As much as it pains me to say it, for me 'Candyman: Day of the Dead' is even worse. It is as far removed from the first 'Candyman' as one can get, if it weren't for the title character and Tony Todd it could easily pass for something else entirely because it sure didn't feel like 'Candyman' and more like a knock off from SyFy or The Asylum. 'Candyman: Day of the Dead' also is an insult to Clive Barker (saying this even when trying to take it on its own terms), is even more pointless than 'Farewell to the Flesh' and it doesn't even have the redeeming qualities that that sequel had (the setting, score and Todd).
The least bad thing about 'Candyman: Day of the Dead' is Ernie Hudson Jr, who comes over as quite assured. Sadly, he is not in it an awful lot.
One cannot appreciate the setting, which is nowhere near as colourful or atmospheric here, because the film looks so cheap, even for direct to video. Everything looks so drab, while the editing nauseates and the gore and effects are so afterthought-like in how they look. There is nothing goosebump inducing about the score, which came over as monotonous and repetitive. Even Todd isn't a redeeming quality here, describing his performance as going through the motions is being far too kind, he actually looks and sounds like he had gone a long period of being sleep-deprived.
He is nothing though compared to the catastrophically bad Donna D'Errico, who has no presence and is supremely irritating. Again, the characters are uninteresting and unrootable, with motivations that are either vague or illogical (both at times too). The dialogue is repetitive and long-winded, with the cheesiness far too much that you feel like you're being assaulted by it.
The story is the biggest problem, and for the same reasons that doomed the storytelling of 'Farewell to the Flesh'. The complete lack of risks and originality further adds to the constant feeling felt throughout the film "why does this exist?" Furthermore there is no tension, suspense or dread, killed by a deadeningly sluggish pace, the mind-numbing and quite insulting stupidity and everything being so predictable. Not only does it feel watered/dumbed down because of this lack of atmosphere, but the over-reliance of cheap-looking gore gives the film a cynical, mean-spirited edge and cheapens the atmosphere.
To conclude, despite not caring for the second film this was even worse and something of a disgrace to Barker. 2/10 Bethany Cox