sign in
register
Watch
Amazon Prime Video Apple TV Google Play Movies
+5
The Descent: Part 2
Amazon Prime Video Apple TV Google Play Movies
+5
JustWatch
Remove ads

The Descent: Part 2

2009
Suspense/Thriller
Adventure
1h 34m
Distraught, confused, and half-wild with fear, Sarah Carter emerges alone from the Appalachian cave system where she encountered unspeakable terrors. Unable to plausibly explain to the authorities what happened, Sarah is forced back to the subterranean depths to help locate her five missing companions. As the rescue party drives deeper into uncharted caverns, nightmarish visions of the recent past begin to haunt Sarah and she starts to realize the full horror and futility of the mission. (imdb)
Directed by:
Jon Harris Jon Harris
Written by:
James Watkins James Watkins J Blakeson J Blakeson James McCarthy
+2 more
Starring:
Nora-Jane Noone Nora-Jane Noone Shauna Macdonald Shauna Macdonald Natalie Jackson Mendoza Natalie Jackson Mendoza Saskia Mulder Saskia Mulder MyAnna Buring MyAnna Buring Gavan O\ Gavan O'Herlihy Douglas Hodge Douglas Hodge Krysten Cummings Krysten Cummings Josh Dallas Josh Dallas Anna Skellern Anna Skellern Michael J. Reynolds Alex Reid Alex Reid
More
Franchise:
The Descent
Genres:
Suspense/Thriller, Adventure, Horror
Country:
UK
Languages:
English, French
imdb More information at IMDb
See title update history
Suggest an edit
Show Less
Your probable score
?

The Descent: Part 2

2009
Suspense/Thriller
Adventure
1h 34m
Your probable score
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer
Avg Percentile 29.26% from 624 total ratings
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer

Ratings & Reviews

(624)
Compact view
clear
Compact view
Show
Sort
crankycranky
Rated 09 Mar 2010
52
31st
Has some funny moments but it's so terribly predictable! Awww
Rated 09 Mar 2010
cinemaasiaCinema_Asia
Rated 26 Jul 2010
45
7th
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.
Rated 26 Jul 2010
kojilessKojiless
Rated 21 Jun 2014
44
48th
Bodily Humours Splashing Across Spelunkers' Faces: The Movie. Not surprisingly, it made me want to go into the future and tell my grandson thank you for bringing food to my room all these years so I would never have to go outside and ruin the nice lack-of-pigment thing I have going.
Rated 21 Jun 2014
panzerwolfpanzerwolf
Rated 04 Apr 2010
15
3rd
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.
Rated 04 Apr 2010
fredericg54frederic_g54
Rated 14 Mar 2010
3
9th
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
Rated 14 Mar 2010
kmcneilKMcNeil
Rated 19 Mar 2010
3
24th
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.
Rated 19 Mar 2010
jschlanskyJSchlansky
Rated 09 Aug 2017
30
11th
It's like they had an itemized list of things the first film did well and systematically did each of those things poorly.
Rated 09 Aug 2017
joeroxyjoeroxy
Rated 16 Nov 2010
60
27th
Good neck biting, ridiculous ending.
Rated 16 Nov 2010
skiewulfyskiewulfy
Rated 12 May 2010
20
5th
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.
Rated 12 May 2010
td888td888
Rated 07 Mar 2010
40
28th
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.
Rated 07 Mar 2010
tsvetetsvete
Rated 07 Jan 2011
81
18th
1
Rated 07 Jan 2011
maxalkvitMax_Alkvit
Rated 27 Jun 2020
35
10th
#An unnecessary sequel where nothing made any sense. The characters served no purpose and died meaninglessly, in fact the whole movie was just annoying. Meaningless decisions taken by the characters so that the drama could continue. It felt like this was just another 'wrong turn' installment where a group of idiots do stuffs which they shouldn't.
Rated 27 Jun 2020
damildamil
Rated 04 Dec 2015
40
13th
First of all, the existence of this movie destroys the end of the first one. The plot is very contrived, though they do manage to tie it to the first film nicely a couple of times. The new characters are lame, and most of their dialogue is, too. There is some pretty bad green screen effects in the movie, and surprisingly, some sub-par practical effects, also. Oh, and I really didn't like the ending. Still, there are one or two decent scenes, so it's not a total loss, overall.
Rated 04 Dec 2015
matthew_parkinsonMatthew Parkinson
Rated 09 Aug 2012
50
47th
Is The Descent: Part 2 scary? Only if you found the jump scares and general atmosphere of the first film scary. But apart from that (which I'll admit is by far the most important part), the rest is kind of a mess. The story is convoluted and is a disservice to the original, the characters all fade into the background, with one being indistinguishable from the others, and the ending is absolutely awful. But, if you really want to see Sarah's story continue, it'll be worth your time to watch.
Rated 09 Aug 2012
icybrianIcyBrian
Rated 26 Apr 2011
59
17th
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.
Rated 26 Apr 2011
spokowapSpokoWap
Rated 18 Dec 2010
55
23rd
Znacznie gorsza nie czesc pierwsza.
Rated 18 Dec 2010
hellboy76hellboy76
Rated 21 Mar 2011
62
30th
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.
Rated 21 Mar 2011
petrostserPetrosTser
Rated 06 Jan 2023
50
23rd
For the most part it's a perfectly watchable horror flick that manages to elicit scares and create tension with its claustrophobic setting. However, it not only inevitably lacks the original's novelty factor, it also replaces it with sheer complacency: jump scares are overused, the dialogues are stilted, major plot points are inconsistent with the first film, act three drags, the climax is anticipated from the start, and the final reveal is pointless, inexplicable and somehow still predictable.
Rated 06 Jan 2023
scurryscurry
Rated 08 Apr 2012
30
15th
Aliens: Spelunking Edition
Rated 08 Apr 2012
desertpunkDesertPunk
Rated 09 Dec 2012
50
16th
Dropping your leading lady into a vat of mutant feces is usually not a good activity to do in a sequel.
Rated 09 Dec 2012
tripleshTripleSH
Rated 14 Feb 2011
11
6th
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.
Rated 14 Feb 2011
cowmanCowman
Rated 23 Apr 2010
50
13th
Nothing new and too many easy scares... But the gore is fun!
Rated 23 Apr 2010
gatoquentegatoquente
Rated 04 Sep 2020
87
28th
Not as good as its prequel though, yet manageable. It's the setting (always, on my part) that took away most of the horror coz it looks more of a studio-turned-into-a-cave scene. The intro of a black policewoman was a fresh welcome, but her final fate I didn't like, especially that an unknown old man suddenly crept into the screen and simply ended her and the film, closing with a cold towel. MY SCORING: 99-96=Great; 95-90=Very good; 89-85=Good; 84-80=So-so; 79-70=Boring; Below 70=Forget it
Rated 04 Sep 2020
skelebonesSkeleBones
Rated 20 Jul 2018
88
59th
Better than its predecessor, but still flawed.
Rated 20 Jul 2018
mojojojoMojo_Jojo
Rated 02 Nov 2012
15
6th
Half boring remake, half unnecessary epilogue.
Rated 02 Nov 2012
qthealmightyQtheAlmighty
Rated 09 Dec 2012
65
31st
That pit effect was so obvious and bad that I can't come up with a good comparative metaphor.
Rated 09 Dec 2012
magazzmagazz
Rated 07 Mar 2010
76
53rd
i liked it
Rated 07 Mar 2010
omgfridgeomgfridge
Rated 20 Aug 2010
6
53rd
You could happily of just watched the first and not this one. While the scares are more predictable, still has its moments, decent watch.
Rated 20 Aug 2010
waybosewaybose
Rated 14 Aug 2012
78
24th
Only because it occurs DIRECTLY after the first, which I heart.
Rated 14 Aug 2012
nutcrackrnutcrackr
Rated 07 Mar 2010
74
52nd
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.
Rated 07 Mar 2010
timon88Timon88
Rated 31 Aug 2015
10
2nd
AWFUL. For a flick to be scary, SOMETHING in it needs to somehow realistic. Nothing--from the story line to the overpopulation of Brits in Appalachia to the "crawlers", which look like the spawn of Gollum + an Orc or two--is remotely plausible. The "jump scares" quickly became funny (one assumes this was not the intended effect), and there's even a sludge-pool bout of ladies' mud-wrestling (why are there SO many more women than men in this, anyway?)--a clue to its intended audience, perhaps.
Rated 31 Aug 2015
xaddictxaddict
Rated 27 Jan 2013
70
58th
Not as good as part 1, but better than a lot of other horror movies' first part and a hell of a lot better than most second parts.
Rated 27 Jan 2013
yawkcorbyawkcorb
Rated 10 Apr 2011
50
12th
Unnecessary and nonsensical
Rated 10 Apr 2011
mitealcmitealc
Rated 24 Jul 2010
45
12th
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.
Rated 24 Jul 2010
thegreyfoxthegreyfox
Rated 27 Mar 2011
55
25th
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.
Rated 27 Mar 2011
gideonGideon
Rated 30 Oct 2011
1
16th
Made for a quick buck
Rated 30 Oct 2011
billythekydbillythekyd
Rated 05 Sep 2010
65
11th
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.
Rated 05 Sep 2010
lostinlodoslostinlodos
Rated 17 Jun 2010
77
55th
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?!!!?
Rated 17 Jun 2010
foxyrussianFoxyRussian
Rated 16 Jun 2013
26
10th
This movie doesn't need to exists. Seriously can someone explain the ending to me? I don't want a part 3 to happen....
Rated 16 Jun 2013
lumpnboylumpnboy
Rated 22 Apr 2014
40
35th
Not sure why all the hate for this versus the first, as if the difference in quality is so obviously vast, this being straight-forward opportunism where dirty profit-desire means contempt for the original. In fact, while it lacked the all-women cast, it at least tried to continue the ambiguous personal development and relations between the survivors, of the original protagonist in particular. Not sure if people are talking this down too much, or the original up too much, or both...maybe both...
Rated 22 Apr 2014
jamesdepaolojamesdepaolo
Rated 30 Jun 2010
60
32nd
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
Rated 30 Jun 2010
misterlizardmisterlizard
Rated 14 Feb 2011
60
61st
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.
Rated 14 Feb 2011
samaelSamael
Rated 12 Apr 2010
0
0th
this is how you screw up a good idea. You don't have to make a sequel after a succesful movie!
Rated 12 Apr 2010
joseywalesjoseywales
Rated 03 Oct 2013
58
30th
Standard horror movie fare: stupid characters, laughable ending, predictable jump scares. Doesn't tread any new ground but it has its moments.
Rated 03 Oct 2013
dst7175dst7175
Rated 27 Feb 2012
22
14th
No where near as good as the first one.
Rated 27 Feb 2012
nathandarkoNathanDarko
Rated 15 Mar 2010
60
21st
A mediocre sequel of one of the most thrilling horror flicks. Watchable, but nothing more.
Rated 15 Mar 2010
guy_piranhaguy piranha
Rated 11 Nov 2023
30
6th
A prime example of "nobody wants to be there", which still nobody really managed. At least it never pretends to be anything more than a mindless cash grab.
Rated 11 Nov 2023
vandelay1Vandelay1
Rated 19 Dec 2010
66
70th
Good Movie
Rated 19 Dec 2010
lennyneroLennyNero
Rated 17 Apr 2010
25
14th
This had bad idea written all over it from the very beginning and despite a few nice moments it's just plain bad.
Rated 17 Apr 2010
mistersplicemistersplice
Rated 17 Jan 2011
40
14th
- might want to skip this one
Rated 17 Jan 2011
leemarvinsleemarvins
Rated 23 Feb 2021
12
5th
This movie was so stupid.
Rated 23 Feb 2021
nyctalopeNyctalope
Rated 12 Mar 2018
45
7th
Laughably bad film, and a completely unnecessary sequel. In short, they made a complete copy of the original movie, but with even worse characters, and a scene where they roll around in a pit full of poop. Why did they make this? Why?
Rated 12 Mar 2018
bofbof
Rated 16 Nov 2011
40
14th
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.
Rated 16 Nov 2011
spookymaskSpookyMask
Rated 03 Jan 2021
60
34th
It almost makes Part 1 less good. Almost.
Rated 03 Jan 2021
rihreyrihrey
Rated 23 Oct 2020
15
6th
painfully bad and oh god that ending is one of the worst I've ever seen for real... AND WHY DID THEY JUST COMPLETELY IGNORE POOR GREG?
Rated 23 Oct 2020

Collections

(12)
Compact view
Show
Sort
kubricksucks
Moderated by kubricksucks
Last updated on with Sound of Freedom
td888
Moderated by td888
Last updated on with MaXXXine
tonythepony
Moderated by TonythePony
Last updated on with Deep Freeze
mattburgess
Moderated by mattburgess
Last updated on with The Flu
bizarreeye
Moderated by bizarre_eye
Last updated on with Deviation
ag0stomesmer
Moderated by Ag0stoMesmer
Last updated on with Don't Breathe 2
livelove
Moderated by livelove
Last updated on with Silo
Last updated on with Locked Up
deutscher
Moderated by Deutscher
Last updated on with Boiling Point
hakkanarejo
Moderated by hakkanarejo
Last updated on with Blade Runner
schmidiator
Moderated by Schmidiator
Last updated on with The Forbidden Girl
delollio
Moderated by delollio
Last updated on with Talk to Me
Showing 1 - 12 of 12 results

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...

Trailer

Loading ...