criterionforum.org

Happy Death Day 2U trailer (Spoilers for Happy Death Day)

Happy Death Day was a surprisingly fun horror comedy, in large part because of the dynamic work of star Jessica Rothe. I'm surprised by how fun this new trailer looks given how limited the initial premise was.

Professor Wagstaff wrote: Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:01 pm Happy Death Day 2U

Happy Death Day was a surprisingly fun horror comedy, in large part because of the dynamic work of star Jessica Rothe. I'm surprised by how fun this new trailer looks given how limited the initial premise was.

Completely agree. I was surprised how entertaining the first one was. Definitely giving this one a watch.

I immensely enjoyed and highly recommend both installments of Happy Death Day. Each film takes a reference point so inescapably obvious that they get lampshaded by name in their respect parts (Groundhog Day and Back to the Future Part 2), but I actually think the conceit of the first one surpasses the inspiration… though perhaps my years in the trenches of slasher movies would lead me to say that, since this is one of the precious few examples of the genre that has some good ideas. Beyond the life lessons learned aspect of the plot, on a basic level this movie gives us a fresh slasher variation: instead of many victims dying over the course of the movie, we get one victim dying over and over in new ways! Thus our protagonist must solve her own murder before it happens, and unlike in Groundhog Day, there's a worrying debt of physical trauma the protag carries over from day to day to indicate that she doesn't have unlimited chances to get it right... Not unlike the similar on paper Triangle (a better film, but one with different aims) and Groundhog Day, it’s obvious that the proceedings here are symbolic representations of therapy: making mistakes, learning what’s wrong, trying things out, and arriving on a solution that addresses the past and leaves you better equipped for the future. But the first film pushes this a bit further with its one truly great idea in the finale when

Spoiler

We get the ideal happy ending, with the protagonist doing everything right, and all is wrapped up in a satisfying bow… and nothing’s changed. Has that thing-- the pursuit of what we thought we knew about ourselves and the agony of discovering the thing we thought would solve everything in fact has not and will not and we’ve still got work to do-- ever been more cleverly relayed in any film? There’s something unexpectedly poignant about the “satisfying” ending not being the canon ending of the film— and that’s life. How rare it is that everything is as perfect as we planned/hoped/strived for. Sometimes you got to go with what works, even if that means forgoing the ideal and just kicking someone out a window (hopefully more metaphorically for us than here!).

Real talk: Moments like this are why I watch movies and love movies. I ask every film to tell me something new or tell me something I already knew in a new way. This does both. And it’s also wildly entertaining besides, with Jessica Rothe, who’s on-screen virtually every second of the film, giving a should-be star making perf (hey, it landed her another hit in… the sequel to this!) and helping sand the edges of some of the rougher/dopier beats by sheer will.

Happy Death Day 2U l does what every good sequel should do: recognize it’s completely unnecessary (especially for a movie like the original where there is no conceivable need for plot continuation) and just fuck with everything from the first. The film wisely, wisely, WISELY recognizes that it can’t return to the slasher movie mode of the first and settles into being a broad sci-fi comedy reconfiguration. Like Back to the Future Part 2, the film possesses an almost unnerving specificity in its myriad repurposings of every strand of the first film, big or small (I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a sequel so exhaustively catalog every last actor and location from the first film). And since it has no claims to be anything but an extended pisstake, the film is by design and by fate destined to not be as good as the first. But the low-stakes nature does not inhibit the film from sharing the most important virtue of its predecessor: it is deeply entertaining. The first film had a wicked sense of humor, but there are lots more laughs this time, especially in this one’s return bite of the first film's death montage apple:

Spoiler

Here replacing the parade of Rothe’s Tree dying at the hands of the killer with her offing herself in increasingly silly and over the top ways in a gloriously tasteless suicide-for-laffs sequence that makes me wonder how in the world this series could ever top itself in figuring out a way to configure another twist on this kind of montage when not if a third entry comes into inevitable fruition-- though I suspect Rothe and company won't be wearing cowboy hats!

I disagree with that. The 2nd installment felt both like, in the end, mostly a re-hash but also a failed attempt at extending the pool of people subject to the time loop, only to end up with a pointless scientific framing to explain the whole schtick, but also with a disjoint movie that can't seem to choose to really go with its new main characters or not.
Rothe is still a blast, but pacing quickly becomes an issue, mostly because the convolutions of the movie gives it an aspect much too loose to work. The 1st installment worked because it was quite lean and tight. This sequel isn't anything like that at all, and it just doesn't work that well.

I liked both installments too as very entertaining projects that could be called spoofs if they weren’t so smart, taking themselves seriously enough to be both satires and sincere genre entries.

The films are very funny, and in ways that may mistakenly blind viewers to their intelligence in knowing their limitations, an acceptance of which allows the filmmakers’ attention to stretch their limits within the established confines of the genre to maximize originality. Domino highlighted the first film’s script inverting the slasher genre’s structure in deaths as unique, but smaller moments are equally as subverting, like our heroine utilizing an opportunity to get herself arrested as a saving grace instead of as a normal ‘Murphy’s law’ roadblock preventing safe haven.

domino harvey wrote: Sat Sep 14, 2019 6:37 am it’s obvious that the proceedings here are symbolic representations of therapy: making mistakes, learning what’s wrong, trying things out, and arriving on a solution that addresses the past and leaves you better equipped for the future. But the first film pushes this a bit further with its one truly great idea in the finale when

Spoiler

We get the ideal happy ending, with the protagonist doing everything right, and all is wrapped up in a satisfying bow… and nothing’s changed. Has that thing-- the pursuit of what we thought we knew about ourselves and the agony of discovering the thing we thought would solve everything in fact has not and will not and we’ve still got work to do-- ever been more cleverly relayed in any film? There’s something unexpectedly poignant about the “satisfying” ending not being the canon ending of the film— and that’s life. How rare it is that everything is as perfect as we planned/hoped/strived for. Sometimes you got to go with what works, even if that means forgoing the ideal and just kicking someone out a window (hopefully more metaphorically for us than here!).

The allegory to therapy is a good one, especially in the subtle ways, such as how the repetition initially weighs on our protagonist before she hits a stride and the trauma seems to stop, and then the inevitable reversion back to the draining grind elicited by the emergence of new areas she discovers need work that were previously unseen. The analogy of the human being as an onion peeling back layers of awareness fits here in metaphor and in narrative design. The ending was great for many reasons, along with domino’s spoilerbox

Spoiler

my partner commended the film for the sneakily poignant focus on female relationship dynamics, as well as the climactic fight between two women, another tweak in a genre with typically dominating male- or ‘supposed’ male behind a mask- killers overpowering women. By robbing her of a mask and turning the climax into a stereotypical ‘catfight,’ the film reaches for high and low brow levels of self awareness simultaneously giving in to silly archetypes and upending the expectations of these archetypes.

I also loved the sequel’s audacity to stray as far as it does from the first film’s plotline in scope. By using the self-reflexivity of the original, this runs that attitude on speed, at times venturing quite meta but not relying on any one note, instead opting to throw what seems like every idea from the writer’s room at the wall to see what sticks. This film has the creative team to land quite a lot of what it tries because of its confidence with the genre beats and remaining humble with stakes of investment. The sequel is a lighter genre-blurring romp that also manages to insert more actually intense ‘horror’ setpieces, and oddly dramatic moments regardless of its silly, absurdist comedic gags and apparent AWOL status from any conventional conceptualization. I actually liked the second one much more, not despite but because of its flexibility and loose playfulness with cinematic storytelling. I hope they make another, perhaps this time as a twisted dream noir musical.

Sadly, even though the sequel domestically returned quadruple what it cost, from what I understand Blumhouse doesn’t want to pony up for a third even though the director has an idea that’s apparently far weirder than the sequel (which is a bold claim!). Fringe actually did a noir musical episode— it was also pretty weird, as you could imagine. Great thoughts as always!

That's such a shame considering this is the most interesting horror franchise to come about in recent memory. It's so rare to see this level of confidence in creativity within the 'mainstream' side of the genre, and anything "far weirder" than 2U already has my ticket bought. Maybe we'll get lucky and this'll develop a cult following on disc that'll change Blum's mind.

What I appreciated about HDD2 was pretty much the reason a lot of people didn't like it...that it pushed the concept into a more pretzel-logic sci-fi/comedy direction than the simplistic "slasher version of Groundhog Day" template of the original. How unique... a sequel that reinvented itself effectively into an entirely different genre without erasing that what enjoyable about the original, much like how James Cameron's Aliens was much more of a rock 'em, sock 'em action/adventure movie, as opposed to Ridley Scott's chillier "haunted house movie in space" Alien. It's also more emotionally effective, with Tree's journey giving the film a dramatic spine the original -- glibly enjoyable as it was -- lacked. I would have loved to see a third one just to see what Christopher Landon would have done with the idea, and to enjoy the fetching presence of Jessica Rothe again. I hope it happens.

domino harvey wrote: Mon Sep 23, 2019 5:41 am Sadly, even though the sequel domestically returned quadruple what it cost, from what I understand Blumhouse doesn’t want to pony up for a third even though the director has an idea that’s apparently far weirder than the sequel (which is a bold claim!).

In no way is this a confirmation, but Blum was interviewed last month and said not only is a third film possible but he’s actively working on making it happen

Landon reveals some details about the third film, Happy Death Day To Us Potential spoiler in link and below for third film:

Spoiler

Interesting but no doubt inevitable that it will be set on a different day, since as Landon mentions, there was a ticking clock with the second one to be able to exhaustively recreate every moment of the first film

Rothe did some early prep for her role here in this Onion video from almost a decade ago

I didn't think it was possible to love her more, but that's amazing and makes me wish she did more straight comedy. She was in one other Onion video as the same character, but it's not as good

I guess we know why she landed the lead in the new Valley Girl reboot

What is JRo doing starring in the otherwise anonymous looking romdram that IMDb ads are pushing hard today? Could it possibly be worth watching?

therewillbeblus wrote: Sun Jun 06, 2021 9:30 pm Landon heavily hints good news on third installment forthcoming

Or not

therewillbeblus wrote: Tue Jan 17, 2023 5:45 pm

therewillbeblus wrote: Sun Jun 06, 2021 9:30 pm Landon heavily hints good news on third installment forthcoming

Or not

all this back and forth and super confusing. Both movies raked it in relative to their budgets so why not just give carte blanche and round it out? seems like a real no brainer unless Blum and Landon are just not getting along for some reason