Candyman: Day Of The Dead (1999)

 

Wow, this movie was a total turkey and it's a shame because this series could've had a lot of potential. I think the concept of the main characters being descendants of Candyman is a neat idea, it's just the execution is really terrible. I was trying to figure out where this movie went wrong and why it was released on straight-to-video in the first place. For instance, the budget is significantly lower than the previous two movies and it...shows. What makes this even more strange is that it premiered on Cinemax, a network mostly known for its softcore porn. Speaking of which, this is the only Candyman movie to have explicit nudity and it's kind of jarring. To be quite honest with you, most of it was pretty unnecessary. When it comes to the plot, it's nothing more than a later-rinse-repeat of the first and second movies. Oh, I guess this is the part where I talk about the paper-thin plot.

Do you remember that line in Scream where Sidney jokes about how horror movies starts off with a buxom blonde who gets killed in the first five minutes? Well, that's exactly how Day of the Dead starts. How trite.

Just after the opening credits, it turns out to be a dream and the buxom blonde is our main lead. Okay, I'll give you a hint. Remember the little girl from the end of the movie? Annie Tarrant's daughter? Yes, you got it. This is Caroline McKeever, the last living family member of Candyman's bloodline.

Now living as an art gallery owner in Los Angeles, Caroline is the shareholder of  Candyman's paintings which she plans to showcase at an upcoming art exhibit. During the art exhibit, the guests is much more fascinated by the killings of Candyman than his paintings. Caroline is quick to defend her great-great-great-great grandfather's honor and debunks the urban legend by saying his name five times in the mirror....and you know what happens. Yadda, Yadda, Yadda, people die around Caroline. Yada, Yada, Yada, she gets framed for the murders. Yadda, Yadda, Yadda, Caroline has her final confrontation with Candyman, and you know the drill. I wish I could tell the story in much detail but I really don't see the point. 

Though there are at least two subplots in the movie. First, there is the mystery surrounding *spoilers* Annie's supposed suicide. You see, after the events of Farewell to the Flesh, Annie has since suffered from early dementia. So Caroline was her mother's main caretaker from then on. But suddenly, she finds Annie in the bathtub with her throat slit, thinking all this time it was a suicide but in fact, it was Candyman who did the deed. This means that this wasn't really a mystery at all. It was obvious from the start that there was no need to stretch out this subplot.

But then there's another stupid subplot about a mysterious gang who steals Candyman's paintings. And again, this goes nowhere. There are at least three plots going on in this movie and nothing can keep me invested. Anywho, let's get on with the cast, shall we?

Okay, let's get the elephant out of the room. Donna D'Errico is not a great actress. I've even seen her on episodes of Baywatch and all she does on that show is just stand there and look pretty like she's posing for the camera or something. Nothing against her or anything, I just don't get why the filmmakers cast her as the lead. Alright, here's where I make comparisons from the first movie to the third one here. First, you have Virginia Madsen who really sold it with her performance, then you have Kelly Rowan who also did a decent job. Donna, on the other hand....basically acts like the stereotypical hysterical woman in a horror film. All she does is SCREAM. Scream. Scream. Scream. I mean there's nothing wrong with that, per se, but there is no nuance to this character. She could be interesting if the script would let her, however, Donna D'Errico is given nothing to do. I can see that she tries but her acting just comes off really weak. Sadly, Caroline as a character isn't that compelling to me.

Okay, now it's time to streamline through the rest of the characters. Trust me, It'll be quick.

We have David played by Jsu Garcia. Even though David is no more than a love interest for Caroline, I thought Jsu Garica was one of the better actors with the exception of Tony Todd. Not only is he incredibly handsome, but he's also impeccably charismatic, which makes his performance come off more natural and organic.

Even if the movie is trash, Tony Todd still rocks as Candyman. He could've easily been a wise-cracking joker like most slasher villains at this time, but Mr. Todd really kept the mystique of Candyman and has been consistent throughout. Besides this being the worst Candyman sequel, Tony Todd is the best part of it.

We actually have two sets of good cops and two sets of bad cops in this movie.

There's Jamal played by Ernie Hudson Jr. (yes, that's Ernie Hudson's son) alongside his female partner Jamie, who holds the moral ground and is rather fed up with their obnoxious co-workers. 

Then we have bad cop Sam Craft, played by Wade Williams, and his partner L.V. Sam is a blatant caricature of a racist cop. Sure, this was a way to bring back the social commentary of the first movie, but it's done in the worst way and the writing of the character is just pure cringe. He's nothing more than a parody of Detective Levesque from the second movie. 

Okay, I'm just gonna power on through here but the rest of the characters are just...there with not much screentime. 

We have cocky art dealer Miguel and his main squeeze Lena...

Who gets killed off as soon as they're introduced.

Then there's Caroline's roommate and aspiring actress Tamara who declares Candyman isn't real but unfortunately for her...

Candyman pays her a visit.

Next, we have Detective L.V., who's part of the bad cop duo.

He rightfully gets a hook shoved down his throat.

There are more characters to come but it involves the supposed plot twist. So let's just get to the ending, shall we?

So it turns out that this group of street goths, who pride themselves as Candyman enthusiasts,  stole the paintings. And I gotta tell you, these are one of the worst actors in the movie. HANDS DOWN. Good lord, I get the feeling that this was intentional on the filmmaker's part. Are they supposed to be over-the-top? Ugh, freakin' awful! 

So while they hold Caroline captive, the street goths conjures up Candyman and, of course, he brutally murders them one by one. 

Now Caroline faces off with Candyman while this time, instead of saving a missing child, she has to save a missing adult in the form of David. 

In order to vanquish Candyman, Caroline has to destroy his most valuable painting: His portrait. Even though there's a bunch of bees filing around, she gets to it fairly easily. 

And just like that, as soon as the painting is destroyed, Candyman bursts into flames. Poof! Gone! No more! he's easily defeated. What a cheap move! Oh but that's not where the movie ends.

Out of nowhere, Detective Craft goes a little nutty, attempting to kill Caroline and David but, in the nick of time, Jamal comes in and shoots him in the back of the head. That's when Caroline has to break the Candyman curse once and for all by pinning the murders on Detective Craft (again, rightfully so, as we soon find out that he'd always had psychotic breaks, which in my opinion, is very dangerous for the police department to keep this lunatic on their team).

So all is well, Caroline, David, and his daughter have a little picnic at the park and they all live happily ever after... Barf!

You may notice I didn't put much energy into this review and there's a reason why. There could've been ways for this sequel to not end up the way it did. I mean this is a Candyman sequel of all things! Okay, Okay, Okay. Let me explain myself. You see the first movie had a sort of sophistication to it. I even consider the second movie to be sophisticated as well. But this sequel has an overall cheap feel to it. Nothing feels natural. The acting, the writing, the directing. It's like it sucked out all of the intelligence that the first movie had. I mean at least the second movie tried! I don't know, this is probably one of the worst horror sequels ever. Hands down! Some might look at it as a fun b-movie or whatever but that's not what I want in a Candyman movie. Candyman is more than that, dammit. It's a concept with substance and the filmmakers should've respected that. At least, Nia DaCosta understood this and thankfully she came to save the day with the fourth sequel, initially ignoring this mess of a movie.

My last word: If you're curious, sure. But I say skip it, it's a waste of your time.