The Candyman arrives in New Orleans and sets his sights on a young woman whose family was ruined by the immortal killer years before.The Candyman arrives in New Orleans and sets his sights on a young woman whose family was ruined by the immortal killer years before.The Candyman arrives in New Orleans and sets his sights on a young woman whose family was ruined by the immortal killer years before.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Russell Buchanan
- Kingfisher
- (voice)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh is actually a good sequel to the successful original. This one goes more in-depth than the original as we find out how Candyman came about and we see how he was killed. The plot is somewhat similar to the original. Candyman has moved from the slums of Chicago to the streets of New Orleans, during Mardi Gras. A schoolteacher named Annie Tarrant, whose father was murdered "Candyman-style" a few years earlier, does not believe in Candyman and says his name 5 times into a mirror to prove to her students he doesn't exist. Wrong move Annie. Soon after she does this a series of brutal murders occur while Candyman seduces her to "Be with him". Lots of bees and blood in this good sequel!
Ok, before I begin I'd like to clear up a little squabble. This sequel to the early 90s original is called Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh. NOT Candyman 2. Anyone who disagrees with this statement might as well have said the aforementioned killer's name a certain number of times. The film, obviously, loses any sense of the originality that made the first in the series so breathtaking, but so what? People who claim sequels of this kind are ALWAYS bad should not watch them, because they never will be as good as their originals. This outing sees the hook-handed serial killer return for another gut-wrenching, blood-soaked dose of supernatural shenanigans, with the emphasis on BLOOD. Because there's lots of it, which is not a bad thing, cos we'd die without blood. If that makes sense. Final verdict: watch if you're a fan, don't if you hate sequels. Oh, by the way, i liked it. But that's maybe just me.
Schoolteacher Annie Tarrant travels to New Orleans, to investigate her father's death, foolishly she summons The Candyman, and faces an almost impossible challenge to stay alive.
Farewell to the Flesh is actually a pretty decent follow up to the original, classic horror. I'm surprised to read a few comments where people say they prefer it to the original, no way on Earth, some elements are better, but the overall package just isn't in the same league.
The best thing about this film, and where it scores over the original, the storyline, it's actually a great story, we've got the origins of The Candyman himself, and a good backstory for Annie, our central character.
Tony Todd, what can you say, he's just got something, when he's on screen, you watch, he just has a natural charisma, mix that in with the dark elements of the character, it's winning mix.
Unfortunately, it looks a little cheaply made, and some of the scares are lacking, neither are enough to stop this from being a rather enjoyable sequel, just don't bother with the third.
6/10.
Farewell to the Flesh is actually a pretty decent follow up to the original, classic horror. I'm surprised to read a few comments where people say they prefer it to the original, no way on Earth, some elements are better, but the overall package just isn't in the same league.
The best thing about this film, and where it scores over the original, the storyline, it's actually a great story, we've got the origins of The Candyman himself, and a good backstory for Annie, our central character.
Tony Todd, what can you say, he's just got something, when he's on screen, you watch, he just has a natural charisma, mix that in with the dark elements of the character, it's winning mix.
Unfortunately, it looks a little cheaply made, and some of the scares are lacking, neither are enough to stop this from being a rather enjoyable sequel, just don't bother with the third.
6/10.
They had to do it. They had to make a sequel to one of the greatest horror movies of the 90s. But it's always sad to see how much difference in quality there has to be. I have to say, as far as sequels of slasher movies go, this ain't that bad. It has good production values. But of course the great acting performances of the original are gone except for Tony Todd's, who is almost equally as good as he was in the original. But also gone are the great editing and photography, the gritty realistic feel of the original, the eerie and moody score of Philip Glass. Candyman just continues ripping people up with motives that are standard in slasher movies. The bees are involved more in the gory scenes, but are still underused.
Not half as good as the first movie. I haven't seen the third nor am i interested in doing so.
Not half as good as the first movie. I haven't seen the third nor am i interested in doing so.
I think the original Candyman is a very good horror film and builds upon the mythos of such urban legends as "Bloody Mary" and so on and so forth. It didn't feature the best acting in the world but it was suitable and the atmosphere was very scary.
The sequel, "Candyman II: Farewell to the Flesh," is as most horror sequels typically are -- inferior and less scary. It's like "Halloween II," "Friday the 13th Part II" and "Psycho II": not as good as the original! Yet for what it is, "Candyman II" is quite entertaining, and still manages to remain rather atmospheric. The film takes place in New Orleans around the Mardi Gras and it's got some good scary segments. Some aren't so scary but are fun to watch. We know what's going to happen but it's still entertaining.
No this isn't expertly made but it isn't mind-numbingly bad as some of the genre are. Basically it's loads of blood but it also retains its creepy cinematography and the direction is better than expected.
Overall this kept me entertained, which is all I expected in the first place.
The sequel, "Candyman II: Farewell to the Flesh," is as most horror sequels typically are -- inferior and less scary. It's like "Halloween II," "Friday the 13th Part II" and "Psycho II": not as good as the original! Yet for what it is, "Candyman II" is quite entertaining, and still manages to remain rather atmospheric. The film takes place in New Orleans around the Mardi Gras and it's got some good scary segments. Some aren't so scary but are fun to watch. We know what's going to happen but it's still entertaining.
No this isn't expertly made but it isn't mind-numbingly bad as some of the genre are. Basically it's loads of blood but it also retains its creepy cinematography and the direction is better than expected.
Overall this kept me entertained, which is all I expected in the first place.
Did you know
- TriviaBernard Rose originally conceived a sequel to his 1992 hit Candyman (1992) as not featuring the eponymous character at all but instead continuing to explore the nature of urban horror myths. This was quickly scotched when the producers figured that audiences would show up because they wanted to see Candyman eviscerate his victims.
- GoofsAs Annie's brother falls down the steps, he is obviously replaced by a stuntman with long hair.
- How long is Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Candyman 2: Farewell to the Flesh
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $6,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $13,940,383
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $6,046,825
- Mar 19, 1995
- Gross worldwide
- $13,941,216
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content