SunnyHello Nice effects though.

Lightdeossk Captivating movie !

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Leofwine_draca I should note at the outset of this review that I haven't seen the first film in the series, not that it matters much. FEAR OF CLOWNS 2 is another stupid horror flick about a killer who goes around murdering people while dressed as a clown. It's every bit as bad as one of those interminable CAMP BLOOD sequels. The only difference is that this film has an urban rather than woodland setting. It's just one of those amateur productions with no redeeming features.

djangozelf-12351 Honestly...I did not like the first one either.But it sometimes happens sequels are better than the original and thats why I decided to watch this one. While the first had some cheap scares and some good chase scenes, this one has non of that.The movie is to long and all that time is wasted on romantic development which easily fills half the film.Few years back I searched quite some time for a good "clown horror" movie.Until this day "stitches" with Ross Noble is the best one according to me and a sequel for this would be a welcome one.Only "Stitches" and "it" bring high quality to this horror sub genre.Point is, there is something better.Both the "fear of clowns" films and "clownstrophobia" are about the worst you can get in this sub genre."Clown" released in 2014,I think?,showed great promise but was numbed down to much probably to reach a bigger audience,so that was really a shame. Keeping my hopes up for a "stitches" trilogy.Go Noble!

ykymrfalcon First of all, this movie is a million times better than the original Fear of Clowns. I don't know if this was the intension, but it's also freaking hilarious. I was cracking up almost the whole time. It's pretty cool that it's a local film (Maryland/Eastern Shore) too. But the acting is improved, the story is improved, the interest is improved (in the first FOC, I only really liked it during the last part of the movie because it takes place in a movie theater that I go to all the time). There is a bit of suspense, but like almost all horror movies, the point of the whole thing is pretty much not there. However, movies like this are also meant to entertain, and this movie did that very well. That's why I give it a 7/10. It's satisfactory. I am glad Kevin Kangas had more money to put into the second installment. Maybe if he makes a third FOC, he'll have an even bigger budget and be able to make a much better movie that even all the Kevin Kangas haters can enjoy.

rembrandt36 I have never understood those that say Kangas' movies suck. He shows growth with every movie he has done, and with his third film he has gotten the brass ring. Kangas does movies I WANT to see - horror with some intelligence behind them. I caught this premiering in Baltimore and have to say that he really outdid himself with FOC2. The stand out in my mind - performance-wise - was Frank Lama as Peters. He was really convincing this time out. Jacky Reres and Mark Lassise really shined as well, and for a low budget horror movie, the story, thrills, special effects, and production values were superb. David Mun was excellent as the director of photography. Anyone that wants to see a GOOD horror movie should rent or buy this once it comes out. You will not be disappointed.