The Descent: Part 2: Review By Bryan Yentz

As one of the biggest fans of Neil Marshall's The Descent, nothing could cut me deeper than learning that a sequel for one of this generation's best genre films was in the works. And not just any sequel, but one based off of the "tame" ending developed for American audiences. Then again, it's not the first time big ol' studios have ruined my appreciation of archetypal films. Just look at what became of Hostel with its sequel; and Cabin Fever with the recent (and appalling) "Spring Fever". I wish someone would just get it through their damn head that just because a movie is great DOES NOT mean that it warrants a sequel. In fact, a sequel for these breeds of film, are NEVER wanted by the true fans and the more they're released only serves to solidify that. They only serve to undo that which was done and in turn--cripple appreciation for the movie it was based off of (example: what Eli Roth did to Paxton's character in the prologue of Hostel: Part 2).

But considering I'm a critic, I try to give all films a fair chance despite my blatant bias (hell, I figured I was pretty lenient with Avatar). So, with a reluctant heart and an open mind, I popped in The Descent: Part 2 to either be surprised up the wazoo, or have all of my arrogant predispositions confirmed. By the time the credits hit, guess which one I was? No, no... Just guess.

I was surprised. Surprised that the film could not only dash my hopes upon the rocks of despair, but also deliver--atop the pile of awful it already developed--one of the hokiest "twists" of recent memory.

What Neil Marshall accomplished with the first film was simply phenomenal. Not only did it contain claustrophobic tunnel systems enveloped in darkness, ferocious intensity, and feral creatures galore, but it also contained, character, heart, an emotionally draining score by David Julyan, and an utter gut-punch of a finale. It was horror heaven. And while Part 2 seeks to maintain pieces of the original, it can't stop itself from crapping all over its predecessor's accomplishments in the process.

Things actually begin on a decent note with some fine outdoor cinematography showcasing the sun-lit exterior of the Appalachian Mountains, forests, and a gloomy abandoned mining entrance. Sadly, as soon as the actual conflict arises, the problems never stop building. Taking off directly where the American version left off, Sarah (Shauna Macdonald reprises) has escaped the confines of the cave system and happens upon an old geezer which brings her to the hospital. Meanwhile, a bunch of police-officers and cave spelunkers join forces to find the rest of the missin' gals in the deep, dark depths. Being the prick that he is, Sheriff Oswald (Michael J. Reynolds) forces the near catatonic Sarah from the hospital and back into the caves with he and the rest of the small rescue party.

The atmosphere and claustrophobic terror of the first installment was palpable, it was an enemy unto the heroines plaguing them at every turn with seemingly bottomless pits, dead-ends, and cave-ins. This dank interior was furthered by a strong use of realistic light and shadow. Rarely, if at all, did the lighting seem fake; as if various lamps were dwelling right next to the actors. Part 2 doesn't take this into near as much consideration. The aspect of fear and what's lurking in the darkness is gone as scene after scene is lit by some unseen force which creates tension free bouts of creature on human violence. Some shots try to justify this with the use of flashlights and glow sticks, but the utilization of these items can only illuminate so much. If a character is holding a glow-stick at waist-level, why is it obviously emanating from overhead? What hinders the "fear factor" even more is that every moment you may guess a beast to strike--it does, typically with awful effects.

And about them effects...

Portions which encompass bits of CGI wouldn't even look appropriate on a home video--particularly when certain characters plummet down pitfalls. Just laughable. The remaining effects range from decent to obviously low budget. The wear an' tear character's receive look brutally good (especially in outdoor light), but the blood and gore (especially a prolonged hand severing) just look ridiculous. As for the dwellers themselves, their physical form has been slightly tweaked but for the most part retains the animal-like behavior and look of those in the first. Though, sometimes it does obviously look like a guy in a suit. And don't even get me started on the lazy attempt at the female version (thankfully only in it for a good minute).

With the film's ending, it finishes digging its own grave. The climax plays out just as the original did (butchering Julyan's score as it does so) and as if wasn't pointless enough ***SPOILER***kills off a once forgotten protagonist it just reintroduced five minutes back, which further makes one wonder why the hell they even brought them back in the first place. I also mustn't forget the final rotten cherry upon the pinnacle of this sour sundae-the "twist". While the uncut ending of the original was depressingly beautiful, Part 2's ending--like the entirety of it--is uncalled for. It's laugh-inducing because of its stupidity, and it even creates more plot holes than before. And it took three people to write this?!

Director Jon Harris and writers J. Blakeson, James McCarthy and James Watkins, might have been determined about this endeavor, but it matters naught when the result is a complete spit in the face to the fans which elevated the first to the high status it now retains. As pointless a sequel as it is a film, The Descent: Part 2 is better off being left cold and alone in the black dwellings which its monsters permeate.