tomgillespie2002 The names Argento and Bava alone are enough to cause the average gore-hound to salivate, and fans of over-the-top splattery were treated to an exercise in excess with the Argento-produced, Bava- directed Demons in 1985. While I still felt the film sucked despite the talent behind the camera (although this is Lamberto Bava, not his legendary father Mario), there was still enough bone-gnawing and blood- spraying to enjoy amidst the terrible 80's fashions and soap opera-level dialogue. For the follow-up, the horror maestros inexplicably took out the bite and accentuated the goofiness, and the result is a clumsy, camp and somewhat annoying mess of atrocious acting and even worse film-making.The film begins with what looks to be a documentary based on the events of the first movie, with a bunch of disposable teens trespassing into an quarantined city deserted following the demon outbreak. It turns out to be a film-within-a-film, with 'reality' taking place in an apartment block as loathsome teenage brat Sally Day (Coralina Cataldi-Tassoni) locks herself in a room during a birthday party tantrum to watch the movie on her television. Thankfully, a demon quickly bursts through the screen to turn her into a poster-girl for tooth decay and drip bile through the various floors, turning many of its residents into blue-skinned monsters. Amongst the many archetypes fighting for survival, douchebag George (David Edwin Knight) must get back to his apartment to rescue his pregnant wife and badass gym instructor Hank (Bobby Rhodes) leads his group of oiled-up bodybuilders into battle.It all sounds like a lot of fun, and it really should be. An apartment building is the perfect setting to induce feelings of claustrophobia, with a vast labyrinth of corridors and narrow vents for our heroes to fight their way out of. Instead, Bava ignores the need for any resemblance of atmosphere or tension in favour of a never-ending stream of badly executed set-pieces, where grisly attacks tend to take place away from view. There's also the matter of the ending making little sense and a scene in which an unexplained demon monster thingy that looks like a discarded prop from Troll bursts out of the chest of an infected young boy, in a special effect so bad you wonder why on Earth the film-makers left it in. Only the antics of Hank (a winning combination of Fred Williamson and Mr. Motivator) and a terrific British new wave soundtrack gloss over the abominable acting and frankly unprofessional direction.

Leofwine_draca Take the first DEMONS film, re-locate it in a high-rise tower block and that's the basic premise of this little number. A few twists and turns are included to differentiate it from the original classic, but otherwise it follows the same kind of pattern. Dario Argento and Lamberto Bava team up again from the first film and deliver exactly the same kind of badly-dubbed formula that we know and love from DEMONS.The acting is average but this time around the actors playing the demons are hugely over-acting - take for instance the main female demon, who contorts her face and pulls lots of stupid expressions in a vain attempt to be scary. The film is a success due to the return presence of Bobby Rhodes, from the first film, this time as a bodybuilder (instead of a pimp) who has to fend off the demons. He has great lines of dialogue again, for example, "Put that fire out - if not, we'll suffocate!" , "You've got more muscles than brain!", and the old favourite, "Get some weapons and defend yo' selves!".As well as Rhodes, a lot of plot devices have been taken from DEMONS as well; the teenagers in a speeding car are an example of this, as well as the pounding soundtrack. Lots of people get bitten and scratched, for gore fans. Once again we have plot inconsistencies to add to the fun; why does the car speed throughout the film only to explode on arrival? In addition, there isn't as much gore in this as in the first film. Instead, we get demonic creatures - a demon dog and a baby demon which bursts out of a kid's chest (thanks to SFX maestro Sergio Stivaletti, but these aren't up to the original's standards, they look rushed). Sure, this isn't logical, it isn't believable either, but this is still a fun film to watch. If you're looking for quality, though, then the first film is the one to go for. The two would make a nice double bill, as they follow on nicely, but the first has the edge.

metalrage666 All I could think of when I saw this was that it sullied the reputation of the first demon movie. While the first movie was full of plot holes, it was still quite enjoyable and for any fan of 80's horror, still watchable over and over. Demons 2 is just a confusing, painful mess.The story takes place in a new ultra-modern, (for the time), secure high-rise apartment block. One evening several residents are watching a documentary about the now deserted and completely walled city where the demon outbreak occurred in the first movie. Some teenagers scale the walls and go searching through the deserted city. They come across a demon corpse and one of the teens who cut themselves earlier, drips blood into the demons mouth. This somehow revives the demon who chases them off. Now this is where it gets weird and loses all common sense. A college student, Sally, is alone in her room depressed as her boyfriend didn't turn up to her birthday party. She's watching part of this demon documentary on her TV and is somehow noticed by the demon she is watching on screen via the camera that is filming it. So this indicates that the camera that is filming is somehow operating independently. The on-screen demon decides to enter into the real world by forcing it's way through the TV screen. Sally screams and turns away only to turn back to see the TV now just showing static. Thinking it was her imagination, she's about to rejoin her party friends when the demon attacks her. This demon is never seen again, but Sally slowly turns into a demon and begins attacking all her friends who in turn also turn into demons. The demon blood seems to be highly corrosive and begins to burn its way through the floors of the building shorting out the electrics. Being a secure building, everything gets shut down, so essentially everyone inside is now trapped. Lifts are shut down, phones are out and the windows can't open as air-con is ducted.What happens next is much the same as the first movie, it's a hide and seek gore-fest as the demons go floor by floor killing everyone they come across. The most notable scene is the stand off in the lower level car park between a bunch of bodybuilders and the remaining residents against the growing horde of demons. After a brief fight the demons gain the upper hand, turn all the people who weren't killed into demons and then go back up the building looking for more victims.Again there seems to be only 2 people remaining, a pregnant woman, Hannah, and her husband George who need to get somewhere safe as she is about to give birth prematurely. George lays a trap for all the demons making their way up the stairwell by rigging up a delayed explosion with a severed gas line. This kills all the demons except Sally, who is now blinded. George and Hannah make their way to the roof and then abseil down the side to the next building which looks like a TV studio. In one of the most hilarious scenes ever, a blind Sally is somehow abseiling down the side of the building after them, face first, and gets killed by George, and all of this is caught on camera. As Hannah gives birth, they notice Sally on the TV monitors running towards the screen. Somehow, George puts 2 and 2 together, as if demons popping out through TV's is a regular thing and proceeds to smash all the TV screens.This is really a stupid sequel that is best left ignored. They could have done so much more for a sequel, but demons coming out of the TV just never sat well with me and while some actors make a reappearance in this in other roles, it never flows properly and the sequence of events is quite pedestrian. While the acting in Demons 1 wasn't the best, it was a hell of a lot worse in this and the whole thing appears rushed. Stick with the first movie and pretend this doesn't exist.

jez-47 This is a sequel in the worst sense of the term - not a continuation but a complete retread of the first film, albeit in a different location. It does indeed make no sense whatsoever and the acting is beyond dire. Strangely, it sounds dubbed, but the actors are clearly speaking English.It's certainly more ferocious than the first movie and the scene with a demonised boy is quite effective. However, the gremlin puppet is the most dreadful addition to a horror film I have ever seen. It is hard to see how Bava/Argento could have intended this be anything other than laugh-inducing.There are some nice effects - especially when the first demon enters the real world - but the uneven tone, inappropriate music and nonsensical plot make this instantly forgettable. If you must see a "building ravaged by demons" film, go see REC. Now that's scary.