Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

ActuallyGlimmer The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Brooklynn There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

videorama-759-859391 Here's an ambitious film who's first half, has so much going for it, but falls into stupidity and predicability in the other. It does have an intriguing serial killer/supernatural thriller theme, and our killer is in full view, but his contraption of death is stupid, bringing back moments of Jame's Wood's severed hand in Videodrome. Madsen is a really good actress, and her performance here is very good, as a budding criminal psychology student whose much older husband, is of course, a lecturer on the subject, and doing a much younger, hotter student. Even the stupid, predictable cliched ending, tries to desperately redeem it's faults. The candyman is a mythical figure in he projects, where all the brothers truly believe in his existence, where campfire stories have been told around the city. Madsen, poking her nose in many places it's not wanted, trespassing on the candyman's territory, the tall black dude (Tony Todd) retaliates, setting Madsen, up for his new murders, where of course, blame and evidence, weighs heavily on her, other than the mythical evil figure, which is basically the movie's second half. It's as if the movie short sheets itself, and suffers badly. This was so a disappointment, where the murders show over exploited and grisly and crime scenes. Though not a badly made film. Sad, as in Madsen's twist too, that is quite effective.

one-nine-eighty A review post 10 years since watching... Wow, I remember getting this on VHS rental from the local shop, I watched it with a friend from school (I was totally underage for the 18 certificate). This reporter woman is looking into urban myths, she comes across the legend of "Candyman". She does some journo digging with family of victims and other high society socialites she happens to be in circles with. She learns about him and the more she learns the more obsessed she becomes, she learns how to summon the supernatural killer and starts going more nuts, she happens to be around people being killed off and becomes suspect number 1. The film follows her trying to get "Candyman" and the victims past, present and future. This was a psychological horror with mystery and suspense which I was too young to be watching, it had plenty of gore too which my mum wouldn't have been happy with either. Despite all that I loved the film and it had an effect on me throughout life to becoming an adult. If presented with the opportunity I'll randomly jump behind friends and summon Candyman to see if it scares them or just makes then think I'm a dick. Since watching the film I've seen the "Candyman" actor in loads of other stuff (Tony Todd, Final Destination, Wishmaster, The Crow, The Rock, and various TV programmes) but I can't recall seeing any of the other bland 90's horror actors in much else. Despite that, in this film the cast do their job perfectly and don't interfere with the film. I remember this being a loud film, the music really complimented the pace and suspense. As a child I'd have given this film an 8 or a 9 because I loved gory horror films, but having rewatched this as an adult with a wider appreciation of film, and when compared to other films it'd have give this a 7. For the time this was a cult classic but it hasn't really stood the test of time and rivalry and not many people will remember it or choose to dig it out of a film library. Feel free to enjoy it, I've watched it lately and it offered a nice bit of nostalgia and fun. Enjoy.

bowmanblue 'Candyman' has the 'honour' of being the first '18 certificate' film I ever saw at the cinema (when I was fifteen, incidentally). I was excited about the whole naughtiness about my experience, yet left pretty disappointed, even falling asleep midway through. Now, over twenty years later, I rewatch Candyman through adult's eyes. And I'm glad I did.Yes, it's probably not the sort of film you should watch when you're a fifteen year old who doesn't really appreciate cinema in general and just wants to watch wall-to-wall explosions and monsters sucking people's brains out through straws. I seem to remember appreciating the odd moment of gore in the film, but it wasn't enough for me then and I never thought of it as a 'horror.' However, it is pretty horrific, just in a different way. It's about a woman who's researching urban legends for her university. She hears of one about a hook-handed ghost called 'Candyman' who appears and kills you if you say his name in the mirror five times. And, yes, it does turn out to be a little more than just an urban legend. The more she discovers and the more she starts to believe, the worse things get for her – not just because she's found out that evil psychotic spirits are real, but she's increasingly classed as mad by those around her, leading to a complete collapse in her personal life.The psychological collapse is one aspect of the horror, but, like so many horror films, it's the baddie we all come to see. Tony Todd gives us his best performance ever (one which has cemented his place in horror villain history) as the titular spook and he is indeed creepy. He steals the scene every time and all, despite the lead actress' best efforts, is what people really want to see.It's also worth noting the general bleak atmosphere created in this world by simple shot composition with the camera picking up on the world around the characters in time with Phillip Glass' haunting soundtrack.Basically, if you're a fifteen year old who just wants 'lowest common denominator horror' (which I did at the time and occasionally still do) then there are plenty of films out there to fill that need. This one makes you think a little more and dig a little deeper, plus is damn good to boot. See it when you're in the mood to think and squeal at the same time. That scene with the bees is scarier than all the CGI insects Nicholas Cage has pretended to swallow in his life.

kvnseconds913 I remember this movie creating quite a "buzz" when I was younger. I decided to give it a watch, since I haven't seen a decent horror movie in a while. It has a good start with an interesting background story to an urban lore. The middle of the movie slows down a little bit, but leads to a relatively interesting and exciting end. It definitely has it's share of moments that'll make you jump, but they are mostly based off of cheaper gimmicks such as sudden loud noises that coincide with a quick scene change or appearance. It probably won't keep you up at night, but it is worth a watch, even 23 years after it's release date. For entertainment value I'd say it still holds up. If I were younger, I'm sure I'd be freaked out and tempted to dare a friend to try giving Candyman a call ourselves.