The first movie of course is one of the best horror-terror movies of all time.The movie scare to they all generation of the 80's and still scare new generations.That what happen because 2 important things:Tobe Hopper and Steven Spielberg. This time this masterminds are not comeback and you can see the result of that.The movie simply don't have soul,don't have the magic of the first movie,don't have the scares,the terror,the chemistry,the emotion,the mystery nothing of the original movie.This movie feels like a chapter of THE TWILIGHT ZONE of the 80's (i see better chapter in the series than this movie) so this nothing great or special of this movie that deserves your attention.Believe you not lost something not see this movie...If you wanna see a good sequel of the 80's see FRIGHT NIGHT 2,CHILD PLAY 2,ALIENS to say some movies.

Poltergeist II is one of better ghost/horror sequels I've seen, a story where the Freeling family moves to a new house, but followed by the supernatural, in the form of Reverend Kane.Being a movie made in the early 1980s, like its prequel, it still holds a great amount of horror, as its elements will grip you and send chills down your spine. This movie doesn't rely on gore and violence to make it entertaining, but rather relies on the ghosts' presence and their frightening powers that they are able to unleash onto the unfortunately family, highlighted also in very polished and keen special effects.The screenplay and story by Michael Grais and Mark Victor were well-written, giving us a captivating and exciting plot, and the direction by Brian Gibson is solid and thrilling like the original. The cast of characters gave another superb and heartfelt performance.Overall, it's a good continuation of the original Poltergeist, but also works great as a sequel with its unique storyline superb acting.Grade B+

Well, hadn't she been killed by her real ex-boyfriend, i'm sure that the big sister would have rejoiced this Freeling family again! Strangely, her absence is never explained in this sequel, nor the next one. In all cases, the best thing of this movie is again the incredible cast because the parents and the kids are really the best family ever made for screen. Then, i'm straightforward and i acknowledge that the movie hasn't the quality of « P1 ». The great difference is that « P1 » was about ordinary getting extraordinary while « P2 » is totally extraordinary : with the opening of a native exorcism, you can only expect ghosts afterward! The characters of reverend Kane, very creepy, and Taylor are a bit too Old West for me. Sometimes, i thought i was watching the episode « Showdown at Malibu Beach High » from Baywatch (SE3EP6). And notice that the pair would be the next two victims of the curse (read about the stunning anecdote of Nelson visiting his grave !). However, there are good scenes in the movie, especially when the father becomes infected. At this moment, i thought to « alien » and « Prometheus » and it was a surprise to discover on the credits that the monster was designed by Giger. If it's still difficult to understand the explanation about the light and why they need Carol Ann, what i will remember definitely about the movie is that Carol Ann said that she didn't want to grow up and that her last words to her dying Grandma was « i love you », the same she told her real mother at the end.

"Poltergeist II: The Other Side" is sound and fury signifying nothing, a good-looking special effects show that contains no less than a flying chainsaw, a set of killer braces and a creature excised from the human body through vomiting, yet it can't find a cohesive foothold to string any of those ideas together. Then again perhaps they couldn't. How exactly do you build a narrative that leads to killer braces? It isn't exactly news to report that "Poltergeist II: The Other Side" is a sequel to the hit 1982 thriller, but the surprising news is that this movie does everything wrong that the original film got right. Like "The Exorcist", key to the success of "Poltergeist" was that the characters were so grounded in reality that when the supernatural stuff started to happen, it leant the effects a degree of credibility. This sequel goes the other way around so we feel the effects but the characters are simply there to be knocked around.That's too bad because "Poltergeist" is one of the rare horror films that actually earns the right to a sequel by virtue of ending on a note so melodramatic that we might have been disappointed if someone didn't find a way to get that family out of their funk. That film, you will recall, ended with the Freeling family fleeing their house as dead bodies popped out of the ground before the house was sucked into oblivion. The family, now homeless, checked into the Holiday Inn.As much as "Poltergeist II: The Other Side" is valid enough to continue their story, it does not, however, live up to the original. The story is silly and the characters feel like cardboard cut-outs, with witty little jokey dialogue, when it isn't laced with supernatural hoo-ha. The supernatural stuff in the original was mounted on a semi-plausible idea: their house was mounted on the grounds of a relocated cemetery. Here there's some nonsense about protection from evil forces and the protective force of the family bond. This is filtered through Indian mystical nonsense and something about a 200 year old religious sect that wants Carol Anne's life force back on "the other side". Whatever.The story picks up a year later, which is a problem because the two movies were produced four years apart. That means that the little blonde Carol Anne, who was five years-old in the original is six now and played by Heather O'Rourke, who is actually nine. That gives us the agonizing sight of watching a nine year-old playing a six-year old. Why not just set the movie four years later? Anyway, the story deals once again with the Freeling family, Dad Steve (Craig T. Nelson), Mom Diane (JoBeth Williams), and the kids Robbie (Oliver Robins) and Carol Anne. The teenage daughter Dana is absent here and never mentioned even in dialogue. They have moved in with Grandma (Geraldine Fitzgerald) after their house was sucked into oblivion. Naturally, Dad refuses to buy a TV.The hole where their house once stood is under investigation by the medium Tangina Barrons (Zelda Rubenstein) and a Native American mystic named Taylor (Will Sampson) because "there's a presence." What that "presence" is steps on the premise of the original film. In the earlier film, it was explained that a real estate company made a strange decision to uproot the cemetery without moving the bodies.Now we learn that a 19th century cult sealed itself inside a cave at the urging of an evil minister named Henry Kane. Kane is alive and well and stalking around trying to capture little Carol Anne and take her back to the other side. It is hard to figure out exactly what Kane is, whether he's a spirit or some kind of satanic manifestation. We never know. There's some suggestion that he can manifest himself into a different forms but that is never really explained either. This movie is one long series of loose-ends.The movie is also one long series of special effects for their own sake. Hardly a scene in this movie isn't crafted without one. The back half of the movie is a strange venture into the mystical world that seems to be neither here nor there. Somehow the family does battle with the forces of evil by using their strong family lifeforce - nevermind the fact that one of their numbers, 17 year-old, Dana is missing. Somehow they enter the netherworld through a multi-colored Indian campfire, and I was never completely sure how they got out. I suppose I wasn't supposed to ask. It's a sad day when the only way to enjoy a movie is to stop questioning its overwhelming gaps in logic.The one thing that does work here is the performance of Julian Beck as Henry Kane. Dressed in the vestments of an 19th century minister, his face is skeletal with large teeth bared over curled lips. His voice is slippery and unnerving. There is something about his presence that, in a better movie, could have really come to something. He shows signs of what the movie could have been. More priest and less family bonding might have helped. You know what would have been a great sequel? This family in therapy.