Why??????????????

I totally agree! A disappointing sequel to say the least. When first viewing Demons 2, I remember being upset with how it explained the end events of the first film. The first Demons ended with the Demon plauge spreading and the world on the brink of armageddon. Demons 2 begins with some cheesy explaination on "how the human race beat the demon onslaught." I was not impressed on how it explained it and it seemed to rush through it in order to get to the new story. After that we get introduced to the bratty teenager at her birthday party. She gets possessed by a demon through her TV set(?) and spreads the contaigon to other members in an apartment complex. Lamerbto Bava's stylish direction is back and so are the special effects, but the script just has too many holes and looses ends and the film seems to be editied by some knife weilding maniac. Sure it entertains to an agree, but it is a solid step down from the first film and it had the opportunity to be just as good or even better.

The Demon Armageddon ending to the first film was better left exactly where it was born - the first film. It was a mistake to assume a sequel could have (or should have) continued on with that idea. The original film was kind of entertaining, though VERY over the top(!!!), and the sequel thankfully wasn't as loosely chaotic. So basing a sequel on a plot having to do with the entire world or half of it being taken over / infected by demons... would have been incredibly difficult (I should imagine) for Bava or Argento to realize / envision. I loved what the sequel did, toning down the original film, and sort of starting it all over again. I've watched Demons 2 at least twice so far and I don't remember anywhere in the beginning the film trying to "explain away" the original, though I remember the events of the original were vaguely referenced to in dialogue. Besides, if you really want to see a great film about a demon-like contamination / plague taking over the world, after the point of first infection - may I enthusiastically recommend the excellent 28 Days Later.


"Carol, one word of advice: send Cindy to a special school"

I can't really see a sequel about the family riding their jeep around blasting demons. That would be kinda corny. One of the great parts of the first movie was that there was a sense of panic. Panic is something that's not used THAT much in modern horror films. Seemingly, nowadays, we have to many wannabe badass heroes and heroines in horror movies that tone down the sense of panic. Panic is wonderful. People in fear, frantic, not knowing where they are running just as long as they are running. Something like that would be lessened to an affect if the sequel was totally about hunting down demons, or some major "demon war" with the military vs the demons. I think the whole, "the demon threat was kept in containment" was nice actually to give enough time for some OTHER demon threat to arise, and have that sense of panic return.

I think it would be a budget issue to have it set in a city.

The Narrative on the "movie within a movie" and the inscriptions indicate an armageddon.

Also another reason is it might have copied the "Zombie Genre" to much if it showed an infected world (Though the They Got the idea from the Vampires in 1954 Novel "I am legend" and its first movie version "Last man on Earth" in 1964)

Hey even "Day of the Dead", which showed an more or less entire infected world had to still be set in an Army Bunker, only the opening seen showing a desolate, zombie filled Florida city street strays outside of that.