"Die Heilerin 2", which is a sequel to "The Healer" obviously, is a German/Austrian co-production from 2008, so this film is slightly over a decade old now. It came out four years after the original and just like that one, it runs for minimally under 1.5 hours, the usual running time for small screen releases in my country. I saw the first film last weekend and I felt that one was already one too many and two is definitely two to many I must say after watching this one we have here. Director Barthel and writer Mitterer returned as well as most of the cast members. But first a few words on this duo in charge of the script and work behind the camera. Barthel started directing in the mid90s, so he as already pretty prolific back then. However, his body of work (even to this day in 2019/2020) is the epitome of quantity over quality. You will have to dig really deep to find at least one project there that is mediocre quality and not lower. Tough challenge. Mostly he has been focusing on series, but here and there you will also find a film just like this one here. He almost never wrote the screenplays for his direction himself, so no surprise that somebody else was in charge here too, namely the aforementioned Mitterer. On him, I ould not be as harsh, even if his body of work is also not packed with great quality gently-speaking. But it is there on some rare occasions in contrast to Barthel, especially in his earlier years. That goes way back because he began working on screenplays in the mid/late-1970s already. Long time passed. His most recent work is from 2016, so he may be retired now, especially because he had another five-year break before that. But this Austrian writer is over 70 now, so it would not be surprising. His film here aired in December, so even later in its respective year than the first film from four years earlier. The title character is again palyed by Ruth Drexel that most will probably still know from "Der Bulle von Tölz", but here she is the woman at the center of the story for once. Or is she really? In the first film without a doubt, but in this one here not so much. Her screen time is clearly limited, which definitely had to do with her age and maybe also with her ailing health already. She died only a fe months after the release of this project and (if we ignore one final episode from the aforementioned long-running show), then this is her final career output, almost 60 years after her first film role (according to imdb). It is even debatable if Drexel can still be called a lead in this movie. Actually, you can maybe make a point for the title referring to the child actress in here because apparently she inherited the old woman's powers. This is what we are told. It is not really what we see. By the way, the protagonist is called Seelig, which does feel a bit cringeworthy if you look at the meaning of the worst with just one e here in my native language. It is at least slightly based on a real life character, namely Halfried Siess and the also gets credit here in contrast to the first film strangely enough. But yeah, the first name of the main character is slightly different, the last name very different, so you can say it is really just very, very loosely based on her life.
Now, let me mention a few scenes and inclusions from the story that I struggled with. It all seemed so random and incoherent honestly, like when we have the daughter at the very beginning call her father, insult him and then call her mother and annoy her. This made no sense other than to show the family situation to the audience, to people who watched the first film and also those who didn't. The young actress is Lea Kurka by the way, who launched her career the most memorable way possible by starring in an oscar-winning movie, but this was seven years earlier or so and this movie we have here was sadly among her final film appearances already. She left the industry as the 2010s began and lived a normal (or "normal") life afterwards. One away from the limelight. Good for her hopefully, but also a bit of a pity because I think her weak moments in the two films were really only because of the script and sometimes she even managed to elevate the material given to her. Something that should not be taken for granted from an actress her age. Not to say too much about the other cast members here. With the majority of cast members nothing clicks for me here. Samarovski is one exception, but then again, he is almost not even in this movie, that is how minor his character is. In the first he had more screen time, much more because he plays the old woman's partner. Lauurence Rupp also comes to mind. He was not in the first film, but I believe he is now also enjoying a decent career over a decade later. He went for the plan to stay an actor also in his adult years. In contrast to Kurka. But back to the story: Many rather cringeworthy moments here. The pseudo important talk from the old woman that the young girl should focus on the living. The creepy guy who constantly dishes out film references. The way how Kurka's character was supposed to put on display that she is kinda lost, but also the solution in the end when she starts developing feelings potentially for the young fella who's into her. Also what was up with the one scene where she wore such heavy make-up and costume to go to a birthday. Very bizarre. Aside from that, I also struggle with the general idea behind all this, namely the powers the old woman has and now we are even supposed to believe that she gave them to her granddaughter, even if she does not want her to use them because it may ruin her life. Oh well. And don't even get me started about the idea that the girl's mother all of a sudden has breast cancer. I mean that was really the epitome of how fake drama is created in a movie. And how she is cured all out of nowhere near the end for the purpose of a happy ending is so disrespectful and offensive really to actual cancer patients. Not just to breast cancer patients. To everybody else. They are literally mocking this horrible disease for cheap entertainment and faky happy ending purposes. I am at a loss for words really. This is one reason why I certainly do not hesitate one second to give this film a dedicated thumbs-down. One of many. Highly not recommended and the good news is they never made a third movie. Which makes sense because Drexel as barely alive in this one here. Shame she did not end her career on a higher note quality-wise. Go watch something else instead. But still, to end the review on a somewhat positive note, I would find it nice if I see Kurka acting again in some project in the 2020s. Do it, girl. Go for it!
Now, let me mention a few scenes and inclusions from the story that I struggled with. It all seemed so random and incoherent honestly, like when we have the daughter at the very beginning call her father, insult him and then call her mother and annoy her. This made no sense other than to show the family situation to the audience, to people who watched the first film and also those who didn't. The young actress is Lea Kurka by the way, who launched her career the most memorable way possible by starring in an oscar-winning movie, but this was seven years earlier or so and this movie we have here was sadly among her final film appearances already. She left the industry as the 2010s began and lived a normal (or "normal") life afterwards. One away from the limelight. Good for her hopefully, but also a bit of a pity because I think her weak moments in the two films were really only because of the script and sometimes she even managed to elevate the material given to her. Something that should not be taken for granted from an actress her age. Not to say too much about the other cast members here. With the majority of cast members nothing clicks for me here. Samarovski is one exception, but then again, he is almost not even in this movie, that is how minor his character is. In the first he had more screen time, much more because he plays the old woman's partner. Lauurence Rupp also comes to mind. He was not in the first film, but I believe he is now also enjoying a decent career over a decade later. He went for the plan to stay an actor also in his adult years. In contrast to Kurka. But back to the story: Many rather cringeworthy moments here. The pseudo important talk from the old woman that the young girl should focus on the living. The creepy guy who constantly dishes out film references. The way how Kurka's character was supposed to put on display that she is kinda lost, but also the solution in the end when she starts developing feelings potentially for the young fella who's into her. Also what was up with the one scene where she wore such heavy make-up and costume to go to a birthday. Very bizarre. Aside from that, I also struggle with the general idea behind all this, namely the powers the old woman has and now we are even supposed to believe that she gave them to her granddaughter, even if she does not want her to use them because it may ruin her life. Oh well. And don't even get me started about the idea that the girl's mother all of a sudden has breast cancer. I mean that was really the epitome of how fake drama is created in a movie. And how she is cured all out of nowhere near the end for the purpose of a happy ending is so disrespectful and offensive really to actual cancer patients. Not just to breast cancer patients. To everybody else. They are literally mocking this horrible disease for cheap entertainment and faky happy ending purposes. I am at a loss for words really. This is one reason why I certainly do not hesitate one second to give this film a dedicated thumbs-down. One of many. Highly not recommended and the good news is they never made a third movie. Which makes sense because Drexel as barely alive in this one here. Shame she did not end her career on a higher note quality-wise. Go watch something else instead. But still, to end the review on a somewhat positive note, I would find it nice if I see Kurka acting again in some project in the 2020s. Do it, girl. Go for it!