Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween

When I was a kid, I was afraid to go anywhere near the horror genre. The only times I ever felt like trying it out was when I would see a Goosebumps novel peeking out of a shelf in the school library. I always loved the covers, marveling as their bold colors painted pictures of snarling creatures, evil ventriloquist dummies, and even just menacing hands coming out from the darkness. While I admired them more than read them, I grew to appreciate the series because it was a nice stepping stone for those who wanted horror yet were too afraid to jump into Stephen King or H.P. Lovecraft. R.L. Stine cornered the market on kid-friendly horror so well that they’re still considered iconic to the current generation of kids.

That became clear when the 2015 film starring Jack Black as the iconic author became a hit. It paved the way for a possible film series that could dive into all the classics to the point where they could probably make entire films out of just one novel. Sadly, it doesn’t seem like they’re interested in doing that. Instead, “Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween” feels like a retread of the first film without the charm, the fun characters, or any genuine horror. It sets a precedent that Sony Pictures’ idea of the franchise might be narrower and lazier than the source material deserves.

This definitely shows in the story’s narrative. The film follows three teenagers: best friends Sonny and Sam (Jeremy Ray Taylor and Caleel Harris) and Sonny’s older sister Sarah (Madison Iseman). While the boys are tasked with cleaning junk out of an abandoned house, they find a secret compartment in the fireplace that reveals a locked book with no title. When they unlock the book, they make the mistake of releasing one of R.L. Stine’s most devious creations: Slappy. Slappy plans to create chaos on Halloween night and it’s up to the kids to find him and stop him. Looking back, the story definitely has the skeleton of a quintessential Goosebumps story (cool monsters, parents who don’t believe the kids, protagonists with kid problems, silly dialogue, etc.). Unfortunately though, the story takes a dive from there as it really feels like it’s lazily piggybacking off of what made the first one so fun, reusing monsters and even plot points to the point where it was a bit distracting.

It might’ve been less distracting if there were better characters. While I like the cast (and totally understand doing a different cast rather than having the main characters from the previous film reprise their roles), they’re not given much to do. Every character feels like a sidestep away from being a character on the 90’s television series which is never a compliment. It’s a shame because most of the main cast has done better projects, especially in the horror genre (For example, Taylor was Ben in last year’s hit “It” while Harris had a recurring role in Hulu’s “Castle Rock” series). There is really only one character with an arc and it’s still incredibly weak. This results in a paper-thin ensemble that does the bare minimum to keep the stakes somewhat interesting, making even the first film’s characters (who were good but nothing to write home about) look like the best characters in any Goosebumps property.

However, despite all that, what really had me bummed was the fact that the film wasn’t even trying to be scary or creepy for kids. Now look: I know the Goosebumps novels stop being scary to most kids by the time they’re in middle school or they see their first scary movie. That being said though, I remember being freaked out by those books as a kid, even by some of the television episodes like “The Haunted Mask” or “The Werewolf of Fever Swamp.” Even Slappy used to be considered scary to kids! Now though, watching the sequel, it feels pretty obvious that Sony Pictures just wants to make Goosebumps films with lame kids jokes, too many monsters, and lighting that wouldn’t even creep out a baby. When I see more kids kinda bored with a Goosebumps film than somewhat scared, I can’t help but feel like there is some potential being squandered.

Thankfully though, it’s not all mediocre. While there are too many monsters at times, one of the aspects of the film I actually liked were the creatures themselves. The CGI was noticeably worse than the first film (an example is definitely the evil gummy bears) but other than that, I really appreciated the mix of practical effects and computer-generated ones. It felt like a classic 80’s monster film to see people walking around in some cool looking monster suits, like the headless horseman with fire coming out of his neck or the monster that looked like a cross between Marvel’s Scorpion and “The Creature from the Black Lagoon.” The CGI monsters even had some cool designs with the standouts being a giant balloon spider that felt and acted realistically and witches that were more than just your average pointy hats with green, wrinkled faces. Overall, I feel like the film shines the most when the monsters come out to play, taking some of the screen time off of Slappy (who really has too much in this one) in order to get some good creature moments with the protagonists/the unsuspecting townsfolk.

In the end, despite most of my review being negative, I don’t hate this movie. It’s a mediocre movie that will keep kids entertained enough for a little over ninety minutes. That being said though, I think it says a lot when I didn’t feel like my theater was into the movie. In fact, the family I sat next to (surprisingly enough, it was a crowded theater) had a mother who kept looking at her bright phone next to me and a son who looked like he’d rather sleep and talk about whatever came to mind than watch the movie. In most theater-watching occasions, I’d be annoyed to the point where I’d say something because I’m trying to focus on the film. However, for “Goosebumps 2: Haunted Halloween,” I really couldn’t care less as it was sometimes more exciting than the film itself. If that doesn’t tell you enough about this mediocre Goosebumps sequel, I don’t know what does.