TV & Beyond on 2025-10-08 15:10:00

by | Oct 8, 2025 | TV & Beyond Articles | 0 comments

TV & Beyond on 2025-10-08 15:10:00

best horror movie sequels; The films that took an already scary idea and found a way to make it even more terrifying. Sadly, that doesn’t always happen.

The worst horror movie sequels can completely undo all the goodwill that was built up in the first film. Sometimes, this happens immediately, but some horror franchises take six, seven, or even eight installments until you can feel the creators are running on fumes and putting whatever nonsense comes to mind on the big screen. There’s also a fine line between playing it too safe and basically recreating what came before and taking too much of a risk and alienating the fanbase.

Jason Voorhees, Michael Myers, and Freddy Krueger aren’t immune to some truly dreadful sequels, but you may be surprised to see who else ended up on this list. If you want to be scared out of your mind, these are the horror sequels to avoid. 

American Psycho II: All American Girl

Rachael Newman (Mila Kunis) in a lecture hall in American Psycho II: All American Girl

Lionsgate Home Entertainment

“American Psycho” starring Christian Bale is a good litmus test as to whether a guy you’re dating actually understands the satirical undertones of the work or genuinely has an affinity for Patrick Bateman. If it’s the latter, run, girl. But there’s no denying how well the film holds up as a psychological horror film that takes an axe to consumerism. The same can’t be said for its sequel, “American Psycho II: All American Girl,” and that’s because it wasn’t supposed to be a sequel in the first place. 

The film was originally titled “The Girl Who Wouldn’t Die,” and its premise follows Rachael Newman (Mila Kunis) as a college student who wants to work for the FBI, but upon realizing the stiff competition she’s up against, she starts killing her classmates. In case you’re wondering how this ties into the original “American Psycho,” there’s a tacked-on scene at the beginning where Bateman murders Rachael’s babysitter when she’s still a little kid, and she kills him in turn. 

The film winds up on the worst horror movie sequels list since it’s technically a sequel, but even ignoring its tenuous connection to the original, it’s just a plain bad movie. Maybe there could’ve been some social commentary about how difficult it is for college graduates to get jobs, but that would require some actual thought, and this movie has nary a thought in its head. It’s probably no surprise that Bret Easton Ellis, the author of the “American Psycho” book, isn’t too fond of “American Psycho 2,” although, to be fair, he’s also pretty lukewarm about the original adaptation.

Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare

Cartoon Freddy Krueger stomping on John Doe (Shon Greenblatt) in Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare

New Line Cinema

Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) is a horror icon. He’s a fascinating figure who haunts his victims’ dreams before killing them in horrific fashion, and unlike the stoic Jason and Michael, he’s actually a jokester. He’s the kind of menace who plays with his food, and that’s part of his charm. But there needs to be a fine balance between jokester and monster versions of Freddy. “Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare” gets that ratio completely off to where he’s too silly to take seriously any longer. 

This time around, Freddy’s successfully killed virtually every teenager in his hometown, so he moves elsewhere and discovers his daughter, Maggie (Lisa Zane), works as a therapist with a lot of teenage clients. He wants to bring her into the family business while slaughtering more youths, but the magic that made Freddy an icon all those years ago has faded by this point. He’s effectively a caricature of himself, something more befitting of a kids’ lunchbox than a genuine existential threat.

There are other “Nightmare on Elm Street” sequels that are pretty bad, but this one has the distinction of being the “end” of the franchise. Yes, the excellent “Wes Craven’s New Nightmare” would come out a few years later as a response to Craven’s concerns surrounding censorship, but this film concludes the mainline continuity, at least until “Freddy vs. Jason.” A horror icon like Freddy deserved to go out with a bigger bang and fewer cringeworthy gags. 

Exorcist II: The Heretic

Regan MacNeil (Linda Blair) wearing a head device in Exorcist II: The Heretic

Warner Bros.

William Friedkin, the director of the original “Exorcist,” had this to say about its sequel to The Huffington Post: “‘The Exorcist 2’ is one of the worst films I’ve ever seen. It’s terrible. I find it worse than terrible; I find it disgusting.” That really says it all about “Exorcist II: The Heretic,” which isn’t just one of the worst horror movie sequels ever made, but one of the worst films of all time, period. 

To be fair, it’d be hard for any sequel to match up to “The Exorcist,” one of the most well-regarded horror films ever, which can be appreciated even by people who don’t like horror. Even if few films can top the original, “The Exorcist III” is at least enjoyable in its own right, with one of the best jump scares in horror history. But there are no redeeming qualities in “Exorcist II,” which brings back a few of the original cast members for a far more convoluted story. 

Regan (Linda Blair) still suffers from her exorcism years prior, and a new priest investigates the supernatural phenomenon surrounding her to defeat Pazuzu once and for all. It’s a perfectly fine set-up, but the film suffers from an overarching identity crisis. In addition to the Regan storyline, the priest has to go to Africa to check out locusts, and the climax finds a ham-fisted way to bring the characters back to the Georgetown home from the first film. “Exorcist II” can’t decide what it wants to do, and this indecision makes is a bad movie.

Hellraiser: Hellworld

Pinhead (Doug Bradley) in the dark in Hellraiser: Hellworld

Buena Vista Home Entertainment

Considering Henry Cavill’s star power these days, some folks may be inclined to revisit one of his earliest films, “Hellraiser: Hellworld.” It’s the eighth installment of the Hellraiser franchise, and one that went straight to DVD. But rest assured, not even Cavill’s presence can save this trite horror film that’s packed to the brim with cliches.

The film’s plot feels very 2000s: A group of “Hellworld” gamers are invited to a mansion by a mysterious host. Once there, they realize they’re trapped inside with Pinhead (Doug Bradley) and an assortment of Cenobites. The bulk of the movie follows more or less the same format, where each of the characters get separated and are then stalked by Pinhead and/or his minions and meet gruesome deaths. Once you’ve seen one kill in “Hellraiser: Hellworld,” you’ve seen them all, and it doesn’t help that the humans seem ludicrously oblivious to the danger they’re in. When Cavill’s character is about to meet his doom at the hands of a Cenobite, all he can muster to say is “Not good.”

To make the film even worse, it marks Bradley’s final turn as Pinhead, and he’s barely in the movie. Instead of a fond farewell for the horror icon, he goes out with a whimper.

Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers

Tommy Doyle (Paul Rudd) on the phone in Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers

Dimension Films

Part of what makes a lot of horror so effective is how much is left up to the imagination. Not everything requires an explanation, especially when you have a perfectly scary antagonist like Michael Myers throughout the Halloween franchise. While the original is naturally a slasher classic, it had its share of ups and downs throughout its existence, and for many, the absolute nadir of the series is “Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers.”

The sixth installment, which helped introduced Paul Rudd to the world as Tommy Doyle, explains the powers of Michael Myers (George P. Wilbur) as related to a cult. Michael has been infected with the Curse of Thorn, which makes him virtually invincible. It removes a lot of mystique from the character, and that’s only part of the problem. The chemistry between Tommy and the rest of the cast feels off. Tommy enters the lives of the remaining Strode relatives, which could be interesting, if not for the fact that they’ve never been mentioned before.

“The Curse of Michael Myers” would eventually receive a producer’s cut with an extra 45 minutes of footage that expands upon some of the more glossed-over plot points. It’s marginally better and is the version of this film worth watching if you’re a completionist, but “The Curse of Michael Myers” proves this is one horror villain where the less said about his powers and backstory, the better.

Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan

Jason Voorhees (Kane Hodder) in Manhattan in Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan

Paramount Pictures

Let’s be clear: No one’s expecting greatness out of a “Friday the 13th” sequel. They’re dumb, fun movies, and this is coming from someone who’s repeatedly defended “Jason X” as being a hilarious romp. That’s a movie that delivers on its promise of “Jason goes to space.” The same can’t be said for the worst of the franchise, “Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan.” 

The title promises Jason Voorhees (Kane Hodder) wreaking havoc in Manhattan, which fans would be all for. Unfortunately, that barely happens. Instead, the film spends the first hour of its runtime following a high school class on a boat that Jason has gotten aboard. He’s only in New York for about 20 minutes, and while his time there does result in one of the best kills in the entire Friday the 13th franchise, it’s too little, too late. 

By this point in the franchise, Jason has developed a similar issue with Freddy in “Freddy’s Dead.” The deaths are more comical, so it’s harder to take the icon more seriously. Most of the attempts at humor fall flat because Jason doesn’t lend himself to as many quips as Freddy. If the movie had been called “Jason Goes on a Cruise,” maybe it would’ve allowed audiences to adjust their expectations. As it stands, there still needs to be a movie where Jason thoroughly takes over Manhattan, or at least Staten Island.

Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice

Kids lined up in a field in Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice

Dimension Films

Pro Tip: If a horror movie sequel has the word Final in it, it’s definitely not going to be the last one. “Children of the Corn” didn’t waste anytime promising the end of the franchise, as the second installment is called “The Final Sacrifice.” Plenty more films would come out, and none of the sequels are that great, but when looking at the worst of the worst, “Final Sacrifice” takes the cake.

The first film may not be a masterpiece, but at least it has some interesting things to say concerning religious fanaticism. “The Final Sacrifice” doesn’t seem to have anything on its mind other than weird, poorly executed death scenes. The kids from the first movie are adopted by folks in a nearby town and begin killing off anyone they don’t like. Between the soap opera-esque acting and a plot that appears to make up its own rules by the second, there’s nothing scary here.

The only saving grace of the film is if you decide to view it through the lens of a comedy. The scene where the kids take over an old lady’s wheelchair and have her roll into oncoming traffic (that truck could’ve easily stopped in time, by the way) is something that could’ve appeared in “Scary Movie.” Of course, there’s a difference between “bad” and “so bad it’s good,” and “Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice” doesn’t quite make the leap.

Rings

Samara (Bonnie Morgan) in the woods in Rings

Paramount Pictures

“The Ring” from director Gore Verbinski is a true masterpiece. Even though it’s built around dated technology like VHS tape, its story about people escaping via media as opposed to confronting the emotional turmoil they’re going through has aged excellently. And above everything else, it’s a haunting film. Unfortunately, neither of those really apply to 2017’s “Rings.”

To be fair, “The Ring” hasn’t had any luck in terms of sequels, since “Ring Two” is also pretty bad. But coming out over a decade since the original, there was at least some hope “Rings” had a worthwhile story to tell as opposed to existing as a cash grab. For people who prefer exposition to scares, maybe there’s something to take away from “Rings,” but for everyone else, it’s a slog to get through. As with other films on this list, “Rings” sees fit to try to explain the supernatural world around it rather than build suspense and get you jumping out of your seat. 

What makes the whole thing even worse is that there’s a decent twist at the end. If everything leading up to it had been better, it could’ve at least been salvaged through that. But “Rings” isn’t worth it; You’ll feel like you’ve been bored for seven days. 

Amityville 3-D

Lisa (Meg Ryan) and Susan (Lori Loughlin) looking up in Amityville 3-D

Orion Pictures

There was a period in the early 2010s when a lot of movies were inspired by the success of “Avatar” and fully embraced 3D technology. A lot of these were horror films, and 3-D sadly made many of them more hilarious than scary. This actually wasn’t the first time 3-D was a blight on the genre, as the ’80s also had their share of bad 3-D movies, like “Jaws 3-D,” “Friday the 13th Part III 3-D,” and, of course, “Amityville 3-D.”

The problem with “Amityville” is that 3-D is more of an excuse to have characters throw stuff directly at the camera so that you can hold your hand out in front of you and say, “Huh, that’s something.” It’s particularly egregious here since the film itself is so dark, you might find yourself straining your eyes to see what’s happening in addition to straining them with the 3-D visuals. Maybe it’d be worth the pain if the characters went beyond being absurd caricatures of actual human beings.

Even if you took 3-D out of the equation, none of the scary moments look real enough to chill your spine. Things start looking promising toward the finale, but then it abruptly ends. If a movie’s going to engage in a 3-D cultural trend, it should at least have some fun with the proceedings. There’s no fun to be had here. 

Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2

Ricky Chapman (Eric Freeman) looking through broken door in Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2

Ascot Entertainment

Silent Night, Deadly Night is a fascinating film franchise. The first film’s pretty good, but it was more known for the controversy it caused when it was first released, when TV ad spots showed off a killer Santa Claus. It was pulled from theaters after a week and then developed a cult status. “Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2” came out just a few years after, and the most controversial thing about it is that it plays like a sitcom’s best-of clip show rather than a proper sequel. 

There is something of a new story: Ricky Caldwell (Eric Freeman), the brother of the previous film’s Billy Chapman (Robert Brian Wilson), goes on his own Santa-themed rampage. It’s a retread in more ways than one, as it uses about 30 minutes of footage from the original film. If you’ve seen the first, you’ve pretty much already seen the sequel, although “Part 2” does offer its own contributions to the franchise’s canon. The maniacal way Ricky laughs is oddly wondrous to behold — and of course, there’s his infamous “Garbage day” line.

As a horror film, you’re probably not going to be too scared by anything in “Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2.” In that way, it’s one of the worst horror movie sequels ever made. But as a source of memes, it’s a true treasure trove. 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x