- might want to skip this one

Pros: There's some "jumpy" moments. Expect a twist. S. Macdonald is still her bad ass self. Cons: Expectations where high. It lives in the shadow of its predecessor. The new characters aren't that likable. Blah, blah, blah opinions.

A decent cheap-scare movie that suffers in being a direct sequel its predecessor. Tries and fails to capture the tension and claustrophobia of the first while recycling most of the shock moments to the extent that anyone whose seen the first will know exactly when something bad is about to happen. The screenplay is horribly contrived at times; why did they drag a malnourished amnesiac out of hospital on a rescue mission? Watchable but forgettable. Stick to the first one.

A lesson to all aspiring film writers and directors: This is how you destroy the memory of a good horror film by producing an unnecessary and horrible sequel. Words cannot describe just how offended you will be watching this movie if you liked The Descent at all.

Good neck biting, ridiculous ending.

Good Movie

Znacznie gorsza nie czesc pierwsza.

Made for a quick buck

Not without merit, quite well done in places, but essentially the exact same movie again, except gorier, more predictable and sentimental, and with a "twist" ending that makes me want to see the inevitable Descent 3 even less than an exact repeat of the original ending would have done.

Ah yes, take an injured crazed woman, heavily sedated, out of a hospital bed, and take her hunting for monsters...recipe for disaster if you ask me! If you can accept the completely crazy premise, it is not a bad follow up, with some good shocks, but the cheesy "Carrie"/"Sigourney Weaver" type action heroine poses gets a bit repetitive. This film does not follow on the from the European ending, but that is a fairly minor point. What really sucks is the ending, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Does work some of the previous films elements into the story well, but you will probably be more satisfied if you just stick to watching only the first film.

Unnecessary and nonsensical

Not as good as the original; reuses a lot of the same scares, and not as suspenseful. It's kinda cool that this one picks up right where the original left off, and incorporates things like corpses from the first into it. Still, bringing a traumatized amnesiac back into the caves that nearly drove her crazy with a tiny rescue party is a pretty dumb idea. Suffers from a terrible ending that makes no sense. Also, I'm pretty sure blood in this movie is magnetically attracted to people's mouths.

Can't hold a candle - or in this case: flashlight - to the original, which, by the way, is one of the best horror movies in the last ten years, if you ask me. It does, however, offer decent fan service. A few good jump scares, a few predictable ones and a bunch of annoying characters getting their comeuppance. Just about worth the time even if it is severely lacking the tension, unpredictability and immense sense of claustrophobic dread that make the first one unforgettable.

This had bad idea written all over it from the very beginning and despite a few nice moments it's just plain bad.

this is how you screw up a good idea. You don't have to make a sequel after a succesful movie!

Nothing new and too many easy scares... But the gore is fun!

It's the same stuff as in the first movie, except crappier. You can guess all the scares because they are not only predictable, but also have been used in the first movie already. Also, why the hell would they drag an amnesiac from the hospital with them? Just... no.

It is a 'part 2' in the original sense of the word. It takes off straight where the first one finished; and even integrates some scary events of the previous movie into this one in quite an original way. It's not a masterpiece but quite enjoyable if you liked the first one.

i liked it

More gore and claustrophobia, the setup is a stretch based on the previous movie but you can forgive it. The ending again brings you to the apex of events.

the definition of redundant

Has some funny moments but it's so terribly predictable! Awww

That picture is worth a thousand words. I loved to outguess every scary moment the film had to offer, seconds before it happened. P.S. rodent WIN

A mediocre sequel of one of the most thrilling horror flicks. Watchable, but nothing more.

While not as good as the first its certainly an impressive sequel that fans of the first should be pleased with. We finally find out what happens to Sarah and her friends and we are also introduced to Ellen, played by Krysten Cummings, a new bad-ass chick with a pick ;) Great to see both Sarah and Juno back, and the 'crawlers' too of course. Starts off a little disjointed but comes together very well in the end with a shocking finale. Overall I loved it and here's hoping for a third perhaps?

One of those sequels which never should have gone on the floor. The tension building atmosphere of the first is turned upside down in the sequel in the favor of cheap, unimaginative thrills. Couple that with bad acting, a horrendous screenplay, and tired execution. The Descent Part 2 ultimately results into an exercise in boredom.

Obviously pointless sequel with jump scares every 10 minutes once they reach the caves. The audience knows about the monsters at this point so any tension and fear of the unknown is lost. The amnesiac protagonist in the first "Sarah" is coerced into returning by a sheriff that looks like he was a stock character from an 80's horror flick. They all inexplicably decide it's a good idea to travel back into a dangerous cave where people disappeared. There's also an ending that's eye rolling silly.

This is a mean-spirited film with a bare-bones plot. In fact, lots of bones, buckets of blood, death a-plenty. It's it, folks: nothing more to it than that.

You could happily of just watched the first and not this one. While the scares are more predictable, still has its moments, decent watch.

A horrible, formulaic, ill-conceived mess: the Descent: Part 2 is a shameless cash-in on the original. But where the first descent was memorable and suspenseful, the sequel makes every effort to to be derivative and pointlessly gory. The characters have no personality (I didn't remember any names), serve no purpose and die meaninglessly to fill gore quotas. A sequel made by people who thought that the boring bat monsters were all that was good about the original.

I love the first one..this one tries the same formula..build up the suspense...then go into the cave...while those moments are well enough...its when they get into the cave the movie starts to kinda suck...the monsters feel cheap this time and some of the kills were so horrible...the ending was cheap...and the suprizes did not even matter because it was a cheap cash in

Good second part of a 3 PART SERIES. Hey idiots, it's not a sequel, it was always planed as a three act set. Considering how good this act was, how MUCH BETTER THAN PART 1 this was, I can't wait for part three to be released. Funny that no matter where you look; the people who give this the lowest scores all agree that such TRASH FILMS as District 9, Fight Club , Monty Python, were, what a joke, actually enjoyable?!!!?